The Conservative *
The parade of the
IT IS THE MONEY.
fact that the lend
ers of fusion in Nebraska have , by the
efforts of Coin Harvey , emissary of sil
ver mine and bullion owners , raised
fourteen thousand five hundred and
thirty five dollars and seventy-five
cents from the idolaters of 16 to 1 in the
state of Nebraska for the purpose of
purging the ballot boxes of plutocracy ,
shows what real religions reform means.
Bryan , Allen , Holoomb and their
cohorts hate "tho money power" when
used to defeat their ambitions. But
they acknowledge , adore and utilize the
money power when it can be secured
and exerted for their exaltation "It is
the money and not the honor , " thpy
seem to think , which will attract voters
to their support. Do they reason from
introspection ? Is such reasoning founded
on the fact that their pure and unselfish
leader sought his first office in Nebraska
with the avowal that ho wanted it for
the money and not for the honor ?
There are many
UNIMPEACHABLE
EVIDENCE. varieties o f evi-
deuce. Record
evidence is of the highest and most
effective character.
THE CONSERVATIVE publishes the com
pacted and f pitomized record of a farmer
near Nebraska City who for forty years
has been pointing out with a plow the
way to make a fortune from the responsively -
'HI ' sively fertile soil which hereabouts
blesses the husbandman.
Mr. John Roddy is known and re
spected as one of the pioneer plowmen
of Otoe county. Read his experiences
in thin issue of THE CONSERVATIVE.
R ad his success in the real estate
records at the court house which show
how soon intelligent industry can moss
out of farming under the gold stand
ard a most magnificent estate.
Which testimony will the thoughtful
man accept and believe ? That given by
John Roddy which shows how prosper
ity may be evoked from the soil by the
plow , or that of such men as Bill Allen ,
Bill Bryan and Bill Dr'ch whose vapor-
iugH are to the effect that farming has
not paid , can not pay and never will
pay under the gold standard in Nebraska
or anywhere else ?
During the campaign
PARTY
DISCIPLINE. paign of 1806 the
free silver zealots
who had managed and dominated the
Chicago convention , which nominated
Bryan and Sowall , were strident and
vehement in denouncing as bolters , mis
creants and traitors all men who had
formerly maintained the principles of
Jachsonian democracy but then refused
to recognize Bryanarchy , its fictions ,
vagaries and candidates.
The gold standard democrats were de
nounced as rebels against party dts
cipline , rebels against regularity of
nominations. And did not the same
men who howled for party discipline
and lauded regularity proceed , after the
national convention adjourned , to with
draw democratic electors in several
states who had been regularly nomi
nated , in the state democratic conven
tions , and place on the ticket in their
stead the names of populists ?
Was it regularity and strict observance
of party discipline to take down demo
cratic nominees and put up in their
places populist nominees ?
A leadership of democracy which
makes all irregularities that favor its
designs and ambitions regular and all
adherence to principles treachery is not
a safe nor an honest leadership. A
leadership which , in Nebraska , with
draws regularly nominated democrats
from a congressional race to help secure
the election of a populist as in the case
of Harrison and Neville is not calcu
lated to build up a democracy.
What sort of democratic candidate for
the presidency is the man who deliber
ately downs a democratic candidate for
congress in order to exalt a populist ,
who , for his own success as a leader of
democracy , is willing to defeat demo
crats and recognize only populists ? Did
Americans ever before witness the candi
date of a national parry seeking the
presidency tlirough the dissolution of
that party in.states and its sacrificial
disintegration in counties ? Is this
leadership , which has brought down a
majority of thirty-four thousand against
republicans in Nebraska seven years
ago to less than three thousand in 1898 ,
a glittering success in the defense of
principles or does it smack and smell of
only personal profits ?
On 627 of
i. , . „ . _ page . , _ . , "
"TheFirst Battle"
a book published as "a story of the
campaign of 18)6" ! ) by W. J. Bryan-
may be found the following deductions
from the election of McKtuley :
"The election indicates that the people
desire to experiment with the gold
standard for four years more. If at the
end of four years they desire to continue
the experiment , they can do so ; if , how
ever , they then desire to make a change ,
they have a right to make it. "
The gold standard "experiment"
seems to have been satisfactory if one
may believe the reports of clearing
houses and b'auks , the statistics of agri
culture , the published prices for the
products of industry and the enormous
and unprecedented exports from , the
United States to Europe.
Nevertheless the American people
have Colonel Bryan's consent to change
the single for a double standard. "They
have a right to makn it they can do
sol" Will the American people avail
themselves of the permission thus kind
ly granted and give up the gold
standard ?
WASHINGTON AN
ANTI1MPEKIALIST.J ° hl1
August 1 , 1786 ,
George Washington said :
'I am told that even respectable
characters speak of a mouarchial form
of government without horror. From
thinking proceeds speaking ; thence to
acting is often but a single step. But
how irrevocable and tremendous ! "What
a triumph for our enemies ! What a
triumph for the advocates of despotism
to find that we are incapable of govern
ing ourselves , and that systems founded
on the basis of equal liberty are merely
ideal and fallacies ? Would to God that
wise measures may be taken in time to
avert the consequences we have but too
much reason to apprehend. "
President McKinley should read
Washington more and hear jingoism
less !
INTOLERABLE. , At the. .
ference in Chicago
Colonel Bryan eloquently proclaimed
that :
"Monopoly in private hands is inde
fensible from any standpoint and in
tolerable. I do not divide monopolies.
There can be no good monopoly in pri
vate hands until the Almighty sends us
angels to preside over us. "
And yet everybody knows that there
are "monopolies in private hands"
placed there by God himself. "Blind
Tom , " the phenomenal piano player ,
had a monopoly which was innate. No
other untaught negro or white person
could rompete with him in reproducing
intricate and difficult symphonies from
memory. Blind Tom , a poorand almost
witless African , at sixteeen years of age ,
had a complete , perfect and entrenched
monopoly in music of a particular kind ,
which was in such demand that for an
evening five hundred to twenty-five
hundred dollars was paid for its re
hearsal.
God gave this monopoly to Blind Tom
and whether Colonel Bryan thinks it
"intolerable" or otherwise , God needs
110 defense from Bryanarchy.
There is a certain magnetic manner
and power of oratory which "in private
hands" has become a natural monopoly
and whether "the Almighty sends us
angels to preside over us" or not , now
bids fair to perpetuate itself as long as
16 to 1 and the free coinage of silver are
watch-words in American politics.
PLUCK. . Tfh8 /ho is
just and firm to
his purpose will not be shaken from his
fixed resolutions , either by the mis
directing ardor of his fellow citizens or
by the threats of imperialism. Moral
courage is required if a man would serve
his countrymen effectively. To think
well and act with courage is the best ser
vice one can give his country.