r
m j.
mm
HIS WONDERFUL CAMPAIGN OF
THE STATE.
r
GREETED BY THOUSANDS.
SPEAKS IN THE OPEN WHERE
ALL CAN HEAR.
f
His Speech at Wymore on Monday
a Masterly Plea For Our Country's
Good, with Ways and Means Out
lined SpurlousChatterof Repub
lican Politicians Exposed by the
Searchlight of Reasoning.
Bryan's campaigning In Nebaska has
been Blmply wonderful. The people
everywhere were "watching and wait
ing" for him. They flocked to hear him
by the thousands. Delegations came by
wagon trains sometimes as many as
three hundred teams In a single proces
sion. No opera house, hall or other en
closures could accommodate the people.
The meetings had to be held out on the
broad acres. The people had to be
j- measured by the acre. It was all the
game, whether sunshine or rain, the peo
J pie came. The refusal to ran special
trains even upon guarantees simply
made It harder to get to him, but they
got there Just the same. The reports In
dustriously circulated that Bryan was
111 and could not fill his appointments
only made the people more determined
than ever to go and see for themselves.
Mr. Bryan spoke at West Tolnt, Nor
folk, North Platte, Lexington, Kearney,
Minden, Wilcox, Iloldrege, Arapahoe,
McCook, Trenton and Wymore.
The account of one of these meetings
is an account of all of them. The same
enthusiasm, the same surging throngs,
the same yeomanry, the same determi
nation, the same loyal American citizens
and Nebraska ns greeted him at every
point All along the route crowds gath
ered and cheered even the train train
as It passed by.
Of course the people respect, admire,
yea. they love Bryan, but after all It is
because he is the great American, their
tribune, and represents their ideas of
good government Wherever Mr. Bry
an was there was where It looked as If
a presidential campaign was at white
heat
BRYAN'S WYMORE SPEECH.
The arguments In support of bimetal
lism are unanswerable. I desire to sug
gest a few propositions which our oppo
nents will not attempt to meet or even
refer to. First The bimetallic system
' has been more universally commended
than any other policy ever adopted by
" & government of the United States.
JT Blmetaijtam' was Innnrurtttml in m
Vnd continued until 1S73. During all
i that experience of eighty-one years no
' political party in national convention
ever demanded Its abandonment. What
other policy has proven so acceptable?
Whenever we have a high tariff there Is
always some party denouncing It; when
we have a low tariff there Is generally
some party denouncing it, but we had bi
metallism for more than three-quarters
of a century, during which time no par
ty arose to question its advantage to the
people. Will the republican newspapers
answer this argument In favor of bi
metallism? Second proposition The gold stand
ard was adopted In 1873 without any
party asking for It; It was adopted with
out the American people having dis
cussed the subject; It was adopted with
out the legislators knowing what was
being done, and many be'teve that the
change was effected fraudulently. In re
cent years the advocates of the gold
standard have declared that no bill
could pass through congress without Its
contents being known. Events have
recently overthrown this ccntentlon. If
any republican says It is Impossible to
Insert any provision in a bill without the
knowledge of congress, ask him who
concealed section 22 in the Dingley bill.
The Dingley bill passed the house and
senate, and after It had passed both
bodies was signed by the president, and
yet the question, "Who wrote section
22?" will go down to history along with
that other famous interrogatory, "Who
struck Billy Patterson?"
Third The gold 'standard was In ex
istence In the United States for twenty
three years before any political party
dared to defend it. Do you know of
any other policy that the United States
ever endured for twenty-three years
with no party bold enough to defend It?
In 1892 the republican party adopted a
platform which contained these words,
"X'The American people from tradition
rnd Interest favor bimetallism." Thus
1A will be seen that the republican party
repudiated the gold str.ndard after nine
teen years of experience under It. The
democratic party In that year said, "We
hold to the use of gold and sliver as the
standard money of the country and to
the coinage of both gold and sliver
without discrimination against either
metal or charge for mintage."
Thus it will be seen that the demo
cratic party declared In favor of the
double standard of gold and silver after
nineteen years' experience with the gold
standard. The qualifying words con
tained In the republican and democratic
platforms did not lessen the force In
favor of the declaration In favor of bi
metallism, but merely related to the
means of securing it. The populist plat
form of 1892 not only declared for bi
metallism, but named the ratio of 16 to
1. In 1892 not a single national party
pledged Itself to gold monometallism.
Will the republican newspapers explain
why nineteen years of experience failed
to prove the gold standard a blessing?
In 1896 the democratic party, the popu
list party and the national silver party
joined In demanding the Immediate res
toration of free and unlimited coinage
of gold and 3llver at the present legal
ratio of 16 to 1, without waiting for the
aid or consent of any other nation. Six
millions and a half of voters more
than ever supported one proposition be
fore In the history of the country sup
ported this condemnation of the gold
standard and the demand for bimetal
lism; but you will say that the repub
lican party polled more votes than all
three of the parties named. Yea, we
admit that the election returns showed
more than seven million voters support
ing the republican platform, but what
was the platform. xn piauorm pieugea
the republican party to aid In over
throwing- the gold standard and In sub.
stitullng tn double standard by Inter
national agreement. Mr. McKinley, Ir
lil letter of acceptance, renewed thll
pledge, and slated that It would be Ml
duty if eircted to carry It out. Can
pledge to get rid of the gold standard In
considered an Indorsement of It? Th
republican parly simply Insisted thai
the United Stales muat maintain th
gold standard until the leading commer
cial nations of the world joii in aban
donlng It. Unless the republic-ana re
pudiate th pledge to aid in restoring
bimetallism by International agreement
they cannot count the election of last
year a victory for gold monometallism.
VV e denounced the gold standard lasl
year and pointed out the evils that II
had brought to the American people
The president, by recommending the ap
pointment of a commission, admitted
that our denunciation was well ground
ed. Congress appropriated $.ou,0oo to
pay the expenses of the commission
while it labors to persuade the nations
of Europe to help us let go of the gold
standard. Jf any republican says that
the gold standard ia a good thing, ask
him why our commission is now abroad
trying to get rid of It? If you want to
know the strength of the gold standard
sentiment, examine the vote cast by the
only party which ever adopted a na
tional platform in favor of the gold
standard. The bolting democrats went
Into the campaign fighting for the gold
standard, and if each citizen supported
the platform which expressed his opln
ion, then 132,000 people less than one
per cent of our voters believe that the
gold standard is a good thing. But even
the bolting democrats were not con
vinced tiy experience. When they were
members of the Chicago convention they
joined in the minority report, In which
they expressed the fear that independ
ent free coinage by the United Statej
would retard or entirely prevent the
establishment of international bimetal
lism, to which the efforts of the gov
ernment should be steadily directed." It
seems that they were in favor of Inter
national bimetallism at Chicago and did
not come out openly for the gold stand
ard until two months later, when they
met at Indianapolis. Were they honest
ly In favor of international bimetallism
at Chicago, or were they trying to prac
tice a fraud upon the convention? II
they were honest at Chicago, they were
converted to gold monometallism be
tween the Chicago convention and the
Indianapolis convention. At any rate
they made a fight for the gold standard
and succeeded in carrying one precinct
in the United states a precinct In west
ern Kansas, with only six votes in the
precinct, and the gold democrats only
polled three out of the six; Mr. McKin
ley received two and I received one.
We have charged that the gold stand,
ard always fought behind a mask. The
claim that the last election resulted In
a victory for the gold standard is a con
fession of our charge, because the vic
tory of last year was only won under
the pretense of an attempt to secure In
ternational bimetallism, but the presi
dent Is now carrying out the attempt
and the taxpayers are meeting the ex
pense of the commission.
We have also asserted that the oppo
sition to bimetallism comes from the
capitalistic classes. It is true In this
country. The money changers, the
bankers, the boards of trade and the
chambers of commerce have been the
nucleus about which the supporters of
the gold standard clustered. Within
three years the German Reichstag de
clared in favor of international bimetal
lism, and this, too, after Germany had
had the gold standard for more than
twenty years, but Immediately the Ber
lin chamber of commerce declared that
the gold standard was all right, ami
thus far the Berlin chamber of com
merce has had more Influence than the
Itelehjitag.
I have a dispatch published In the pa
pers of the United States of July 25. 1
read it to you to show you the direction
from which opposition to bimetallism
comes. Since the republicans hv de
clared our Inability to legislate for our
selves upon the financial question, they
will certainly be Interested in any news
from Ixmdon, to which they are now
looking for relief from the sufferings Im
posed upon this country by the gold
standard. The dispatch Is dated Lon
don, July 24, and reads as follows: "A
definite answer Is expected from the
British government within the next few
days to the proposition of the United
States and France for a bimetallic con
ference. The United Slates commission
ers are confident that the invitation will
be accepted, but the movement meets
with the solid opposition of British cap
italists, who argue that the British
financial system is satisfactory and that
the government should not be called
upon to assist other governments thai
may be In distress."
I call your attention to the fact that
the opposition to International bimetal
lism comes from British capitalists.
Does this not support our charge? 1
call attention also to the fact that the
British capitalists consider our govern
ment In distress. What will the republic
ans think of th!s?A republican president
had been In ollice over four months, and
yet the British capitalists thought out
government in distress.
But let me read further: "The only ar
gument which weighs with them (the
British capitalists) in favor of a confer
ence, is the fear that unless interna
tional action is taken for the coinage ol
sliver, the free silver party will succeed
In the United States, and bring orl a
financial panic In which the British In
vestments would suffer." I call atten
tion to the fact that the only argument
which weighs with British capitalists Is
the fear that unless international action
Is taken for the coinage of silver, the
free sliver party will succeed In the
United States. If we want to secure the
co-ooeratlon of the British capitalists,
we must appeal not to their love of the I
American people nor to their pity, but
to their fear. Then again, you will no
tice that when they speak of being
afraid of a panic, they are concerned
about British Investments and not
American interests.
The last sentence of the dispatch Is
still more Interesting. It reads, "It 1h
understood that this argument (the
probability of a free silver victory) has
been advanced by one of the commis
sioners who has been most active In
endeavoring to enlist the support of the
Rothschilds and other big financiers."
This sentence evidently refers to Mr.
Wolcott, who was active in securing
the appointment of the commission. Can
It be that Mr. Wolcott Is trying to scare
the British capitalists? What right ha
the republican party to scare British
capitalists? British capitalists have
succeeded In scaring the republican par
ty, but the republican platform didn't
promise that the republican party would
scare the British capitalists. It will be
noticed that Mr, Wolcott went directly
to Uothsehild and other big financier!
Instead of going to small financiers. In
this h showed good business sense. It
would have been a loss of time to go to
the small financiers. When Mr, Wolcott
secures the aid of the big financiers, he
will at the same lime secure the support
of the little financiers, who every morn
ing pay their devotions to the big finan
ciers, and say: "Give us this day our
dally opinion." But Mr. Wolcott haa
abandoned the republican platform.
That was an Infamous platform, be
cause It deliberately proposed to surren
der to Kuropeaan nations the power to
determine our financial system. It de
clared In favor of getting rid of the gold
standard and then asserted our Impo.
tente to rid ourselves of It and pro-
t!lm4 It McMtsry for us to endur
the (olil ataiiilard until other nation
should dTlde to take pity upon us. 1
Is a significant fact that Mr. Woleol
abandoned the republican position and
began to threaten the British capital
1st. To carry out the republican plat
form. Mr. Wolcott would have bem
compelled to make a speech about at
follows: Financiers of Kurope: Th
American people have tried the gold
standard for twenty-three ysars and
are tired of It. It was fastened upon
them without their asking for It, and
they are now laboring to rid themselvef
of It. They know that you have gained
In rising dollars what they have lost
In falling prices, and I come at their re
quest to ask you to Join In the restora
tion of bimetallism so that you cannol
rob them any more. But in order to be
entirely candid with you, I feel it my
duty to say that while the American
people realize that you have been profit
lng at their expense, they are willing tc
stand by you and maintain the gold
standard forever if you refuse to join
them in putting an end to your unjust
advantage and to their undeserved suf
fering.
Of course Mr. Wolcott has too much
sense to make such a speech as I have
suggested, and yet that speech would
carry out the Idea contained In the re.
publican platform. Instead of saying to
the financiers that the American people
will continue the gold standard indefl
nitely, Mr. Wolcott, it now seems, Is
pointing out the probability of a free
silver victory in order to Bcare England
Into sending delegates to the conference.
Now, I am in favor of helping Mr. Wol
cott.
I was proud of the manner in which
the silver forces bowed to the will of the
majority. We did not know Juj t where
the majority came from, but we bowed
to it. I am not only in favor of accept
lng defeat gracefully, but I am In favor
of helping the administration to carry
out any good policy which it may recom
mend. The administration is now try
lng to get rid of the gold standard. I
am in hearty sympathy with the offort.
Bimetallism will be a good thing for our
people, no matter what party brings it
and since we cannot try independent bi
metallism before 1900, I am in 'favor of
helping the republicans to secure inter
national bimetallism in the meantime
if it is possible to do so. I am going to
take it for granted that the republicans
who supported Mr. McKinley last fall
are willing to aid the commission in se
curing International bimetallism, and I
am going to propose a plan by which
they can render the assistance. Accord
lng to the dispatch which I read to you,
the only argument that has any weight
with the British capitalist is the fear of
a free coinage victory. Now let us make
that fear as strong as possible. Let all
the republicans who desire international
bimetallism vote with us. so that the
majority will be overwhelming In favor
of free silver. The news will be cabled
to London. Mr. Wolcott will carry the
news to the big financiers, and say, "I
told you so, I told you so. The silver
sentiment Is growing in the United
States, and the free silver party will win
sure ir you don t hurry up and send
delegates to an international confer
ence." Is this not a reasonable plan?
Suppose Nebraska goes republican, the
news will be cabled to London unless
the republicans get out an injunction to
prohibit the spread of news and when
Mr. Wolcott tries to scare the big finan
ciers tgain, they will be prepared for
hlrn. They will point to the fact that
Nebraska is an agricultural state. They
will point to the fact that the farmers
of Nebraska turned down a free silver
candidate and elected a gold standard
Candida Just to show their opposition
to silver. It the republicans of Ne
braska want International bimetallasm,
they must help us back Mr. Wolcott in
his attempt to scare the British capital
ists. The moment the fear of a free sli
ver victory disappears, that moment the
only argument which has Influence with
the British capitalists will be gone.
But let me read another dispatch.
have here a dispatch from London dated
Sept. 22. It tells of a meeting of the
bankers of London called to protest
against me action or the governor of th
Bank of England. It seems that Mr.
Hugh Smith, the governor, announced
that the bank, in order to aid interna
tional bimetallism, would keep one-
fifth of Its reserves in silver. This was
a very slight concession. In fact, the
conditions attached to It made it of lit
tle importance, and yet, the bankers
met and entered an unanimous protest
against even this slight concession. The
dispatch says that there was a large
attendance or representatives of "pow
erful Interests." Why is it that the
financiers, though few in number, are
described as a "powerful Interest?" The
majority of the people In Nebraska ere
engaged In farming, and yet, the farm
ers of Nebraska are never described as
a "powerful interest" The railroads of
Nebraska are a powerful Interest, and
ths financier of the state constitute a
powerful interest, but why are the farm
ers not powerful? Simply because the
railroads and financiers make a busi
ness out of politics, while the farmers
too often, vo'e the party ticket regard
less of the platform or the policies In
volved. The dispatch also contains these sig
nificant words: "The bankers who were
present at today's meeting were pledged
to secrecy in regard to the proceedings."
Republicans, what do you think of that?
You elected a president pledged to inter
national bimetallism. The commission
appointed by him has visited France
and found France willing to Join In an
International agreement, it next vis
ited Germany, and found Germany In
clined to wait on England, and now, for
more than two months It has been wait
ing for England's decision. When at
last a slight concession seemed In sight,
the bankers of London Joined In an
unanimous protest and pledged them
selves to secrecy. Republicans, are you
willing to allow the bankers of London
to meet In secret and determine the
conditions which are to surround your
children and your children's children?
What republican can be so blinded by
party prejudice as not to see the danger
of allowing foreign influence to deter
mine American policies?
But let me read a still later dispatch
from London. On S-pt 23 a dispatch
came across the ocean containing an In
terview from a high official who was a
participant In the negotiations between
the United State bimetallic commis
sioners and the British cabinet He is
quoted as saying to a Representative of
the Associated Press: "I fear the bank
ers will frighten the government into
receding from their stand for bimetal
lism." Think of it, a high official Is
afraid that the bankers will frighten the
English government. They must have
a government over there a good deal
like ours, because ours has been fright
ened by the bankers several times. The
high official continued: "They have for
gotten that Parliament unanimously re
solved measures to secure a stable par
of exchange between gold and silver
and that Sir Michael Hicks-Beach,
chancellor of the exchequer, pledged
himself to do all In his power to carry
the resolution Into effect." No, the
bankers have not forgotten the action
of parliament, but what difference does
It make what Parliament did or what
the chancellor of the exchequer pledged
If the bankers are able to frighten the
government? Did not the banker of
the United States meet at Indianapolis
soon after the election and demand the
permanent maintenance of the gold
standard after ninety-nine per cent of
the people had voted against the gold
stariflHrd and In favor of the doubU
lai-dard?
But the high official calls attention U
arioth. r important fact. He says "Tin
KriKllfh public have forgotten also thai
ten of t lie fourteen members of tin
agricultural commission signed a report
re 'oiiiiik ndlng bimetallism as a palli
ative for the agricultural depression Id
England." So it seems that in gold
standard England an agricultural corn
mifslon, by a vote of ten to four, rec-omm.-nd.-d
bimetallism for the relief ol
the English farmer. If an agricultural
commission can recommend bimetallism
for the benefit of the English farmer,
cannot the American farmer vote for
bimetallism for his own benefit?
The quotations which I have made
from these recent press dispatches sug
gest a question for the republican pa
pers to answer. Let them explain why
It is that the gold standard has never
been endorsed by the producers ol
wealth In any nation that has had It
Will they gay that the producers ol
wealth do not know what Is good foi
them, or will they say that only the
wishes of the capitalistic classes are to
be com-idered? The dispatches from
which 1 have read support our conten
tion that the contest over the money
question is tne battle royal between the
money power and the common people.
Upon which side do the people of Ne
braska stand in such a contest?
Let me suggest a few more arguments
which our opponents do not attempt to
answer. The Chicago platform con
tained a plank in favor of arbitration aa
a means of settling the differences be
tween employers engaged In interstate
commerce and their employes. Luring
the campaign our speakers called fre
quent attention to the importance of ar
bitration as a means of settling diffl-cul-ties
between labor and capital. The sen
timent in favor of arbitration is grow
ing, the recent coal strike having given
impetus to it. Will the republican pa
pers deny that our arbitration plank is
stronger today than it was last fall?
The Chicago platform also contained
a plank condemning government by in
junction. Events have been vindicating
the wisdom of that plank. Many did
not then realize the danger which lurks
in the attempt to substitute trial of
criminal cases before a Judge for a trial
before a Jury, but the shooting of the
Pennsylvania miners while they were
marching peacably along the highway
has added hundreds of thousands to the
opponents of government by injunction.
Will the republican newspapers deny
that our plank against government by
injunction ia stronger now than it was
last fail?
We denounced the trusts last year.
Will the republican papers deny that
public sentiment against the trusts lfl
increasing every day? Nearly all of the
trusts had a hand in the making of the
Dingley bill, and they are now prepar
ing to reap their reward. The follow
lng dispatch shows that even in Ohio
the wire nail trust is closing factories
and throwing men out of employment in
order to control the supply. Let me read
the item: "Findlay, O., Sept. 11. The
Salem Wire Nail company today closed
down its factories at this place and
Salem for a period of two years.
"The proprietors announce that they
have accepted a proposition from the
other nail manufacturers of the country
to close these works. It is understood
the consideration is $100,000 a year. The
mills at Newcastle, Pa., have entered
Into the same agreement.
"This enables the other factories to
control the output. Nearly 400 men
are thrown out of employment here."
Will the republican papers care to de
fend the trusts, or will they admit that
the democratic position on that subject
Is correct?
Let me call your attention to another
vindication. We insisted last fall that
the people needed more money, but the
republicans replied that it was confi
dence, not money, that the people need
ed. Well, the confidence argument has
been exploded. We were told that con
fidence would be restored as soon as
republican success was announced.
There was a little boom, and all the re
publican papers rejoiced over restored
confidence, and the people waited for
the promised prosperity. The boom
lasted about a month long enough for
the peopie to spend the money which
the republicans put In circulation on
election day, and then times got hard
again. More national banks failed dur
ing the first six months after the resto
ration of confidence than failed during
the corresponding period of the preced
ing year; more business houses failed
within six months after the restoration
of confidence than failed for the corre
sponding period of the year before. In
fact, things got worse and worse and
worse and worse until times became so
hard that many concluded that I must
have been elected. I received a letter
from a friend in Texas congratulating
me upon my election, and proved it by
logic which no republican can dispute.
He said: "Did not the republicans say
that if you were elected the banks
would fail and the business houses
would go into bankruptcy, and haven't
they?" Bead what the republicans said
would happen If 1 was elected, and then
read what did happen for the next six
months after the election, and how can
any one doubt that I was president of
the United States?
The first ray of hope which the repub
licans saw came from Klondike. Men
who had been silent for months began
to talk. The discovery of gold In the
British possessions was the first evi
dence that the republicans were fulfill
ing campaign pledges. But what right
has a gold republican to rejoice over
the discovery of more gold? The gold
republicans told us last fall that there
was enough gold In the world and money
enough In this country. If so, the new
discoveries are a misfortune. If we
have enough now, any more will be too
much. The very Joy manifested by re
publicans over the new gold discoveries
proved that we were right in saying that
more money would result in more hap
piness. We want more gold and sliver.
We are not afraid of a flood either by
the discoveries of new gold or from the
coining of the silver already discovered.
The second thing to gratify the repub
licans was the rise in wheat, and nere
again they are contradicting their ar
guments of last yeur. When we Insisted
that a rise In prices would be beneficial,
our opponents talked about the beauties
of a dollar which would buy more than
a dollar ever bought before. The repub
licans cannot hold both positions. If
they want an appreciating dollar, they
cannot expect rising prices; the one
Is the opposition of the other, and yet,
strange as It may seem, the republicans
are not only rejoicing over high prices
but are claiming the credit for high
prices In agricultural products due to a
crop failure abroad, while they neglect
to claim credit for the high price of
lugar and oiher matiufactured articles
raised for the benefit of trusts and com
binations. When I compare the argu
ments made by the republicans this
year with the arguments made by them
last year; when I see them rejoicing over
the discovery of more gold and remem
ber that they contended last year that
we had money enough; when I hear
them pnlslng high prices and remem
ber that last year they praised dear
dollars, I am reminded of a man who
was traveling In the mountains, and
who complained that the path was so
crooked that he often met himself com
ing back. 1 ask you, are the republicans
not meeting themselves coming back?
They would admit It, but they are so
ashamed of what they said last fall that
they refuse to recognize themselves
hen tl.ey nwet hemslves. Ws havi
had a hard time bringing the republic
ans up to our position, but they art
coming gradually. Until recently the)
denied that anything wu wrong, but
last yeur they admitted that something
had to be don. They recognized thai
the patient was a-k. but they mistook
the disease and bfan treating for ar
overloaded stomach, when as a mattel
of fact the patient wag hungry. Now
they have reached a point vrhere they
admit that low prices were bad. Nexl
year everybody will be in favor of dol
lar wheat. We will promise to keej
wheat up by increasing the volume ol
money through free coinage, and the
republicans will pledge themselves tc
keep up the price by continuing the fam
ine in India,
Somt one connected with the agricul
tural department has been claiming a
rise in the price of a number of agricul
tural products. This is a very danger
ous argument for a republican to make.
Last year when we advocated bimetal
lism as a means of raising prices, the
republicans insisted that a general rise
in prices would result in the cheapening
of the dollar, and we were told that tc
pay debts In a dollar of less purchasing
power than the dollar borrowed, wat
equivalent to repudiation. Now the re
publicans are boasting that the dollar
will not buy so much as it did last year
It is not bad enough to have six millions
and a half of voters accused of repudia
tion without having seven millions more
try to break Into our company and
share the odium? There is a marked
difference, however, between the repub
lican plan of raising prices and the plar,
proposed by the advocates of bimetal
lism. Republicans want to raise the
price of a few things by law and thee
claim credit for a rise due to causes
over which they have no control, while
bimetalliBts! desire to raise the level ol
prices by making silver a competitoi
with gold as a standard money. Foi
instance, if a high tariff enables the
sugar trust to raise the price of 6Ugar,
those who use sugar will suffer unless
they have a corresponding increase in
income. I noticed In a recent commer
cial report that woolen goods have gon?
up ten to fifteen per cent, while raw
cotton has gone down about eighteen
per cent within the last few weeks. It
will be hard to convince the cotton
grower that lower cotton and highet
clothes bring him prosperity. Take my
own case for instance. I have five acres
near Lincoln which I was reserving foi
a dumping ground for silver, but when
the election went against us I put it in
corn. I find that corn was worth 41
cents in Chicago in December, 181)4, when
Mr. Cleveland was president and we
had a Wilson bill in force, while wheat
was worth only about fifty-five cents
at that time. Now wheat has gone up
to over ninety, and December corn, un
der a republican president and with a
Dingley bill in operation, Is only worth
a little more than thirty cents in Chi
cago. With corn worth less and flout
higher than in December, 1894, how can
we corn growers share in republican
prosperity? If Mr. Hanna had told me
of his intention to bring on the famine
in India, I would have put my whole
farm in wheat, but probably I have no
right to expact any inside information
under this administration
Let me call attention to another vin
dication of our arguments of last fall.
The republicans have been denying that
the price of silver could be raised by
legislation. They used to recognize the
force of law when they made laws, but
now they are quite sure that law is im
potent to affect the price of silver. When
the Sherman law was enacted in '90,
Secretary Rusk pointed to the effect of
the law in raising the price of silver,
and also called attention to the fact
that wheat and other agricultural pro
ducts advanced with silver. He pointed
out that we were in competition with
silver using countries, and that the gold
price of wheat fell in Liverpool as the
gold price of silver fell. This year the
extraordinary famine in India has pre
vented the export of wheat from India
and at the same time lessened the de
mand for silver In India. Thus wheat
and silver have been separated by a
cause perfectly apparent.
In addition to the crop conditions in
India, it must be remembered that Japan
and Peru have recently joined in the
crusade against silver, and thus legis
lation has had its effect. The price of
silver is regulated by the law of supply
and demand. If the demand for it is
lessened, either from accidental condi
tions or by legislation, the effect is a
fall in price. Anything which increases
the demand, increases the price. I no
tice that silver rose nearly eight cents
between September 1 and September 30,
and the press dispatches stated that the
rise was due to purchases of silver for
India and to rumors in London that In
dia was buying silver for coinage. If
the rumor that India is buying selver
for coinage can raise the price af Amer
ican silver nearly eight cents in twenty
days, how much greater the effect if
free coinage was restored in the United
States and seventy millions of people
permitted to use silver In competition
with gold. We contend that free and
unlimited coinage of silver in the United
States would create such a demand for
silver that the price of silver would be
raised to $1.29 per ounce measured by
gold, and the use of silver as a com
petitor with gold would lessen the de
mand for gold and thus raise the level
of prices. Can the republican newspa
pers admit the rise in silver due to a
mere rumor of purchases by India and
yet deny that free coinagae in the Unit
ed States would raise the price of sil
ver. The moment that the republicans
admit that the effect of free coinage
would be to raise the price of silver,, the
only difference of opinion Is upon the
amount of the rise. The advocates of
free coinage contend that the bullion
price would be raised to the mint price
and the silver dollar made as good as
the gold dollar, whether melted or
coined here or anywhere else in the
world. Our opponents are not able to
fix the point to which silver would rise,
but merely Insist that we are helpless
to restore sliver and must wait for re
lief from other nations.
The democrats, populists and silver
republicans Joined together last year to
secure the restoratalon of bimetallism.
If they were wise to join their forces last
year, they are wise to continue the co
operation this year, because the fight is
not yet won. But there Is an additional
reason for Joining our forces.
The populist party has always op
posed the retirement of the greenbacks.
The democrats and silver republicans
are opposed to retiring the greenbacks.
It Is evident that the republican party
Is now planning to Tetire greenbacks. A
republican victory In Nebraska will en.
courage the republican senator and
members from Nebraska to vote for the
retirement of the greenbacks. The de
feat of the republican party will warn
the republican senators and members
of the congress that the people of Ne
braska are opposed to the retirement of
the greenbacks. Silver was demone
tized by stealth and we have been fight
ing for twenty years to restore It.
stealthy attempt is now being made
to transfer from the government to the
banking Institutions the sovereign right
to Issue money. The republican party
did not demand the retirement of the
greenbacks last fall. On the contrary,
Mr. McKinley stated in his letter of ac
ceptance that the republican party
would keep in circulation all the sliver
and paper moneys now Included In the
currency of the country. Yet, In spite of
this pledge the president has recom
mended the appointment of a commis
sion to reform tha currency m art
dently Intends to support tha Indian.
oils conference In Its effort l re tin" the
greenbacks. Will the populists, demo
crats and sliver republicans allow thero
serves to be deceived Into aiding is)
the movement? Is It true that
the populists, democrats and sil
ver republicans d o not agree
upon all questions. They united last fall
Ui secure an American financial system
fur the American people. They were
unsuccessful, but the fight has been re
newed. Jt Is the part of wisdom for
these thrte parties to fight the common
enemy rather than fight each other.
When we have rescued our nafion from
the money changers and saved the
greenbacks from destruction, It will be
time enough to quarrel over our differ
ences. By acting together we have redeemed
Nebraska from republican rule. By
acting together we elected Senator Al
len, the best senator Nebraska ever had.
By acting together we elected Governor
Holcomb, the best governor Nebraska
ever had. By acting together we elected
a treasurer who uses the state-money
to pay state debts instead of loaning it
to favorite banks. By acting together
we elected an attorney general who Is
protecting the interests of the people.
By acting together we have elected an
honest set of state officials and four
members of congress. There is every
reason why we should continue to act
together in this campaign and elect a
supreme judge who will not be tempted
to relieve republican officials from theli
just responsibilities. There is every rea
son why we should stand together and
elect our whole ticket To defeat our
ticket would be to take a backward step
on national questions and to declars
that the republican state administra
tion was more satisfactory than tha
present administration. Let every pop
ulist, democrat and free silver repub
lican go to the polls early and mak
the majority as large as possible.
ABOUT 700,000 DOLLARS.
Saved to Nebraska By a Change In
Administration.
Lincoln, Neb., Oct. 25. Regardless of
party affiliations, it is to the Interest of
every taxpayer in Nebraska to have an
honest, economical administration ol
the business affairs connected with tha
state government. Taxpayers of Ne
braska should bear in mind that they
foot the bills. If their money is lavish
ly spent for the princely entertainment
of friends of the heads of state institu
tions, and to gratify the greed of polit
ical hangers-on, who were numerous
around the state offices under the re
publican regime, taxes are heavier and
taxpayers have in many instances to de
prive themselves of comforts, and even
necessities. The reform forces have ma
terially reduced the running expenses
of every branch of the state government
and of every institution in the state.
They have made the burdens of the tax
payers easier to bear. They have made
humane reforms in the management ol
state institutions which make more tol
erable the condition of the state's un
fortunate wards. They have "stood up
for Nebraska" by being faithful to ths
interests confided in them.
It must be remembered that during
the years 1895-96 only six institutions
were under control of Governor Hol
comb. The other seven institutions
were under the control of the Board o'f
Public Lands and Buildings, all repub
licans. During those two years the sav
ing made at the six institutions manned
by populists and democrats compared
with the most economical years of the
republican regime, viz: 1893-94, was ex
actly $99,524.75, as will be seen by an
examination of the records at the stats
house. During that same period ths
state institutions under the control of
the republican board of state officers
made a net reduction of $6,854.12 In run
ning expenses as compared with the ex
penses during Governor Crounse's term
of office, 1893-94.
Only one entire semi-annual period
has been covered since the advent of
complete reform control, but the report
shows marked reductions in all of ths
state institutions heretofore looked
after by the republican board. The co
operation of the new Board of Purchase
and Supplies with the Governor has also
had an appreciable effect in reducing ex
penses at the institutions manned by
appointees of his excellency.
Governor Holcomb saved the taxpay
ers of Nebraska $200,000 during his first
term by insisting on the practice of
rigid economy and unswerving honesty
by his appointees at half the state in
stitutions. With the assistance of his
fellow state officers during 1897-98, if the
present rate of saving is kept up, and it
will be, it is safe to predict that half a
million dollars will be saved. The ex
travagance, rascality and criminal in
efficiency of republican office holders
have been succeeded by the application
of honest business principles under fu
sion management. Whether republican,
populist, democrat or prohibitionist,
every citizen shares in the benefits of
this practical reform.
As an individual instance of how state
officers, inspired with a desire to con
duct the affairs of the state with pru
dence, economy and practical business
methods, have succeeded, attention is
directed to the reduced expense of main
taining the convicts at the state prison.
When Governor Holcomb assumed the
duties of his office the state was paying
forty cents per day for the maintenance
of each convict incarcerated at the pen
itentiary, in addition to the pittance re
ceived from heartless contractors for
the convicts' hard labor. Despite the
despicable fight made by Commissioner
Russell, backed by Messrs. Piper, Bart
ley and Churchill, the other members of
the board, to defeat the economic meas
ures instituted by Warden Leidigh, the
cost of keeping convicts was reduced
for 1895-96 from 40 to 26 1-5 cents per day.
Under the absolute control of the present
state officers, all having at heart the
interests of the people whom they serve,
the state prison will be finally made
self-supporting. The days of Stout-Mosher-Dorgan
steals at the state
prison are ended and the Institution is
being conducted In the interest of the
taxpayers of Nebraska.
The asylum for chronic Insane, at
Hastings, was the pride of republican
state officers. When the pops got con
trol of It, republicans wept briny tears
and vowed that all sorts of evils to the
Institution would come. But they did
n't The per capita cost for the six
months period covered by each report
has been reduced from $138.57 maximum
to $56.83 minimum. In other words, it
used to cost 76 cents per day to care for
a patient at Hastings asylum, and It
now costs but thirty-one cents.
Similar comparisons could be made
In other state institutions. This la
enough to convince any Intelligent, fair
minded citizen of Nebraska that It Is to
his personal Interest to cast a vote for
the fusion ticket. A vote cast under the
populist, democratic or silver republican
emblem is a vote cast for an honest,
economical, businesslike management of
the state's affairs.
Vote for Sullivan. The supreme bench
needB a man who will give the same at
tention to the cause of the poor man as
to the Interests of the corporation. Such
a man Is John J. Sullivan.
Vote for Kenower and Von Porell. Tha
educational, as well as the financial In
terests of the University of Nebraska,
need the services of these two honest,
conscientious men. They will be tha
guardians of ths peoples' Interests there.
Lit' ' ' '" l'rT' "i "
