The Batesburg advocate. [volume] (Batesburg, S.C.) 1901-1911, 1903-08-12
HE is A DEMOCRAT.
Bryan Gives Full History of His
Political Career.
WHY HE VOTED FOR WEAVER.
He Has Never Denied His AfiiiatiOu
With the Democratic Party
or Permitted it to lie
Questioned.

Questioned.
The gold democrats, unable to make
4 successful attack upon the princi-
pies for which Mr.. Bryan stood as the
nominee or the party, and which he
now defends, are attempting to ques-
| tiOn his right to membership i'm the
democratic party. Three points are
urged against him. First, he is quoted
as saying at some time (the date is not
| tiXed) prior to 1896, that he was not L
democrat, but Il bimetallist. Second,
that he voted for General Weaver in
1892: and, third, that he advocated
principles which are not democratic.
The first charge is entirely without
| foundation. Mr.. Bryan never at any
time or place denied his political at
| iilation with the democratic party or
permitted it to be questioned. His
parents were democrats before him,
and he counted himself Il democrat In
his youth because his parents were,
and after he was grown, was Il demo
crat because of his belief i'm demo-
cratic principles and policies. He
| made democratic speeches in 1880. he
fore he was old enough to vote, and
| has made democratic speeches in
every campaign since. He has at
tended democratic conventions for
about twenty years and has never been
| a delegate TO Il convention of any other
party. He has favored fusion with the
populiSts in Nebraska for the reason
! that upon the questions Immediately
| before the country the populistS and
,t... l,Af Il
| ing as to questions not reached.
In 1890 Mr.. Bryan was nominated
for congress by democratic conven-
tion and was elected, defeating both
| the republican candidate and the popu-
list candidate. He was renominated
for congress in 1892 and again elected,
defeating this time also populiSt as
well as a republican. In 1894 he was
the nominee of the democratic state
convention for the United States SEN
ate, but was not indorSed by the popu-
list state convention. While he would
probably have received the votes of
pppiil Isl Ine9la bafs; Of tie lsgisla tQre Il
their votes could have elected him,
just rs Senator Allen had received the
democratic votes in the legislature
U"O lCdiS DClulC, tllC
majority in the legislature elected
in S94-th year in which Mr.. Cleye-
lands administration was SO overwhel-
mingly condemned. Nearly all OF the
populiStS voted for member of their
own party.
AT the close of the 53rd congress,
in March, 1895, Mr.. Bryan joined
with Mr.. BlSnd in preparing and cir
culating an appeal To the democratic
believers in bimetallism to organize
and secure control Of the democratic
organization. From that date on to
the meeting of the Chicago convention
he visited all parts OF the country, at
| tending democratic meetings and con
ventionS and giving whatever aSSis-
tance he could to the democratic be-
levers in bimctalism. There was
never any question raised rs iu his
party relations.
In 1894 few democrats left the
democratic state convention and nomi-
mated what they called "a straight
democratic ticket" This ticket re-
ccivcd about five Thousand votes i'm the
state, The bolting organization was
maintained until after the election OF
| 1896. In 1895 the organization Sc
cured for this ticket an unfair advan-
tage by colluSiOn with the republican
| Judges. In 1896 both organizations
sent delegates to Chicago, and the
national committee, by strict gold
and silver vote, gave temporary Gre
dentialS committee of the convention,
however, after full hearing, decided
in favor of the regular delegation,
headed by Mr.. Bryan, and the teSti-
mony before this committee was so
clear and convincing that the minority
did not present report
During all this period it will be seen
that Mr.. Bryan was active in party
work and gave 40 excuse for any one
To doubt his party connections.
Congressman O'Farrall, afterward
| governor Of Virginia, has stated that
Mr.. Bryan in the fall of 1894 intended
TO speak in favor OF the populiSt candi-
| date for governor in Virginia, but was
persuaded not to do SO by Mr.. O'Far-
rail-, then the democratic candidate
for governor. Mr.. O'Farrall may have
been SO informed, but if SO his inform
ant was in error, for Mr.. bryan never
! pidii'h guy o'iNli AiiiliSs llN
criticism, however, comes with poor
grace from Mr.. O'Farrall, for while as
Scrting that he prevented Mr.. Bryan'S
speaking against him when he was a
candidate for governor, he boltcd the
national ticket when Mr.. Bryan was Il
candidate for the presidency. Ger
tainjy his fight againSta a national can
didate nominated by the aid of Nir-
| ginia'S votes was more serious breach
than the failure To support a guberna-
tOrial candidate, even il Mr.. Bryan
had opposed Mr.. O'Farrall, which he
| did not do.
The charge that Mr.. Bryan voted
for Mr.. Weaver has already been cX-
| planned and the facts have been pre-
Sented SO often that one must confess
himself misinformcd II he circulatcS
the charge as an evidence OF Mr.. Bry-
ans abandonment Of the democratic
party.
AS the election OF 1892 approached
it became evident that it was impOSSi-
ble'ror the democrats to carry several
OF the western states, but that it was