The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1902-09-12
SUGGESTIONS FOR DEMOCRATS
Some Things Tint May BE, Overlooked
or Not Known by Campaign
RecommenGers.

RecOmmenGers.
The democratic managers have an |
nounced that they will have a speaking
campaign of the old-fashioned kind
in due season. Doubtless the orators
are now practicing their pieces, we'll
aware that they must be more circum-
spect than usual. If the leaders are
prudent they will have the speakers
before them for rehearsal. If they
talk along the line of the state plat
| form no allusion can be made to the
record and purposes of the democratic
party the past six years. If they ig-
more the state platform and accept the
statement of Secretary Edwards, of
the democratic congressional commit
tee. the faithful will be edited by al
lusions to the Kansas City platform
faith. He is hopelessly stupid demo-
cratic orator who does not now realize
that there are two wings to the demo-
cratic party, or, more correctly. two
democratic parties. which are as far
apart as the poles. The Cleveland
Hill democracy is the most distinctive
Wall-street political organization the
country affords, while the Bryan
| democracy descibes all of the heresies
of populism, says the indianapolis
Journal.
1t will be said that none of these diff
ferences which divide the party need
be discussed in the campaign. That
is, the democratic party has come to
place where it is not polite to dis
cuss that portion of its past that is
not older than any voting democrat.
In other words, the speaker must not
talk of democratic principles since the
days of Andrew Jackson, unless the
risk of controversy as to what con-
stitutes democratic principles shall
be assumed by the orator. Still, a
party which declares that its tradi-
tions are as old as the constitution
cannot go before an audience and be
silent as to that long record. Neither
can an orator trace these principles
down to the administration of Martin
Van Buren, and stop there with the OBJ
servation that the democratic record
from 1910 to 1868 is of no consequence,
and that since 1892 the democratic par
ty has had two sets of principles which
have the same affinity for each other
that cats and dogs have in state of ma
ture. The half-sensible democratic
orator must realize that he must say
something of the record of the demo-
cratic party since 1882; he must know
that many democrats now desire to
know whether the democracy of Cleve-
land or Bryan is to dominate in the
future. No man will be a convert to
democracy unless he knows to which
of these two wide-apart factions and
views he VIII be consigned.
In view of these weighty embarrass-
ments, the Journal offers two or three
suggestions that may simplify the
situation. First, when the democratic
orator faces his democratic audience
/ let him begin with the statement that
the democratic party is now divided
between two sets of ideas. Let him
| say: 81 wish to suit my audience, and
to that end | have two speeches. one
fitted to the Bryan platform and the
5 other to the Cleveland platform.
5 propose to advocate the platform
: which the majority of this audience
4 favors. To determine the majority.
: 1 will take vote. Those who desire
, the Bryan brand. please rise" Hav-
ing counted the democrats who would
, continue to hail Bryan as 1.-The peer
5 less leader" and his platform as the
\ genuine democracy. let him call upon
: those who prefer the Cleveland brand
j. of democratic principles. Having as
1 certained which faction is the larger,
: let him advocate the principles it pre-
: fers. lii the event that the two fac
e tions are so equally divided that he is
in doubt as to which is the larger,
f let him make both speeches. 1t may
n be a trife tedious. unless one faction.
1 following the example of both Mr..
e Cleveland and Mr.. Bryan. applies cpl
thets to each other This would give
( interest to a meeting that otherwise
: would be still-still as a Hill demo-
: crat in 1896. If the orator fears to put
: the vote. as suggested, he can say that
s ''iust now there is doubt as to wheth-
=. er the principles of David B. Hill or
: those of William j. Bryan are the genu-
e inc ones; therefore. until the ques-
e ton shall be decided, | will proceed
= upon the theory that the democratic
party has no principles" The adop-
ton of either of these suggestions
if previously announced, will bring out
large audiences where otherwise the
= meetings would be small, and general
ly will give the feature of gayety tc
what otherwise, on the democrat side
will be mournful campaign.