Cross of Gold
William Jennings Bryan
[A speech delivered 8 July, 1896]
Introduction*
No doubt this is the most famous and the most effective speech
ever delivered at a national party convention. The Democrats
were debating the monetary plank in their platform. When young
Bryan`s turn came to speak, a newspaperman scribbled a note on
an envelope: "This is a great opportunity," to which
Bryan wrote in reply: "You will not be disappointed."
The speech, embodying now familiar phrases from Bryan`s earlier
utterances on the money question, was delivered magnificently. "When
I finished my speech," Bryan recalled, "I went to my
seat in a silence that was really painful. When I neared my
seat, somebody near me raised a shout, and the next thing I was
picked up and bedlam broke loose." For an hour the shouting
delegates marched about the hall. Even gold standard men were
caught up by the excitement. The next day Bryan was chosen to be
the Democratic nominee.
Bryan was one of the greatest and most controversial
politicians of his day. Three times he would be nominated by the
Democratic Party to be its candidate for the presidency, and
three times he would lose. He was a thoroughgoing progressive
who also supported prohibition and late in his life fought
against the teaching of evolution in schools. In foreign policy
terms he was a strict anti-imperialist and believed the United
States should neither acquire colonies nor interfere overly in
the internal affairs of other states. He would later serve as
Woodrow Wilson`s Secretary of State but eventually resigned when
he believed that Wilson`s policies would get the United States
involved in World War I.
*
This introduction is reprinted
from the American History from Revolution to Reconstruction
project at the University of Groningen.
|
I would be presumptuous, indeed, to present myself against the
distinguished gentlemen to whom you have listened if this were a mere
measuring of abilities; but this is not a contest between persons. The
humblest citizen in all the land, when clad in the armor of a
righteous cause, is stronger than all the hosts of error. I come to
speak to you in defense of a cause as holy as the cause of liberty-the
cause of humanity.
When this debate is concluded, a motion will be made to lay upon the
table the resolution offered in commendation of the Administration,
and also, the resolution offered in condemnation of the
Administration. We object to bringing this question down to the level
of persons. The individual is but an atom; he is born, he acts, he
dies; but principles are eternal; and this has been a contest over a
principle.
Never before in the history of this country has there been witnessed
such a contest as that through which we have just passed. Never before
in the history of American politics has a great issue been fought out
as this issue has been, by the voters of a great party. On the fourth
of March 1895, a few Democrats, most of them members of Congress,
issued an address to the Democrats of the nation, asserting that the
money question was the paramount issue of the hour; declaring that a
majority of the Democratic party had the right to control the action
of the party on this paramount issue; and concluding with the request
that the believers in the free coinage of silver in the Democratic
party should organize, take charge of, and control the policy of the
Democratic party. Three months later, at Memphis, an organization was
perfected, and the silver Democrats went forth openly and courageously
proclaiming their belief, and declaring that, if successful, they
would crystallize into a platform the declaration which they had made.
Then began the struggle. With a zeal approaching the zeal which
inspired the Crusaders who followed Peter the Hermit, our silver
Democrats went forth from victory unto victory until they are now
assembled, not to discuss, not to debate, but to enter up the
judgement already rendered by the plain people of this country. In
this contest brother has been arrayed against brother, father against
son. The warmest ties of love, acquaintance, and association have been
disregarded; old leaders have been cast aside when they have refused
to give expression to the sentiments of those whom they would lead,
and new leaders have sprung up to give direction to this cause of
truth. Thus has the contest been waged, and we have assembled here
under as binding and solemn instructions as were ever imposed upon
representatives of the people.
We do not come as individuals. As individuals we might have been glad
to compliment the gentleman from New York [Senator Hill], but
we know that the people for whom we speak would never be willing to
put him in a position where he could thwart the will of the Democratic
party. I say it was not a question of persons; it was a question of
principle, and it is not with gladness, my friends, that we find
ourselves brought into conflict with those who are now arrayed on the
other side. . When you [turning to the gold delegates] come
before us and tell us that we are about to disturb your business
interests, we reply that you have disturbed our business interests by
your course. We say to you that you have made the definition of a
business man too limited in its application. The man who is employed
for wages is as much a business man as his employer; the attorney in a
country town is as much a business man as the corporation counsel in a
great metropolis; the merchant at the cross-roads store is as much a
business man as the merchant of New York; the farmer who goes forth in
the morning and toils all day, who begins in the spring and toils all
summer, and who by the application of brain and muscle to the natural
resources of the country creates wealth, is as much a business man as
the man who goes upon the Board of Trade and bets upon the price of
grain; the miners who go down a thousand feet into the earth, or climb
two thousand feet upon the cliffs, and bring forth from their hiding
places the precious metals to be poured into the channels of trade are
as much business men as the few financial magnates who, in a back
room, corner the money of the world. We come to speak of this broader
class of business men.
Ah, my friends, we say not one word against those who live upon the
Atlantic Coast, but the hardy pioneers who have braved all the dangers
of the wilderness, who have made the desert to blossom as the rose,
the pioneers away out there [pointing to the West] who rear their
children near to Nature's heart, where they can mingle their voices
with the voices of the birds-out there where they have erected
schoolhouses for the education of their young, churches where they
praise their Creator, and cemeteries where rest the ashes of their
dead-these people, we say, are as deserving of the consideration of
our party as any people in this country. It is for these that we
speak. We do not come as aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest;
we are fighting in the defense of our homes, our families, and
posterity. We have petitioned, and our petitions have been scorned; we
have entreated, and our entreaties have been disregarded; we have
begged, and they have mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer;
we entreat no more; we petition no more. We defy them!
The gentleman from Wisconsin [Vilas] has said that he fears a
Robespierre. My friends, in this land of the free you need not fear
that a tyrant will spring up from among the people. What we need is an
Andrew Jackson to stand, as Jackson stood, against the encroachments
of organized wealth.
They tell us that this platform was made to catch votes. We reply to
them that changing conditions make new issues; that the principles
upon which Democracy rests are as everlasting as the hills, but that
they must be applied to new conditions as they arise. Conditions have
arisen, and we are here to meet those conditions. They tell us that
the income tax ought not to be brought in here; that it is a new idea.
They criticize us for our criticism of the Supreme Court of the United
States. My friends, we have not criticized; we have simply called
attention to what you already know. If you want criticisms read the
dissenting opinions of the court. There you will find criticisms. They
say that we passed an unconstitutional law; we deny it. The income tax
was not unconstitutional when it was passed; it was not
unconstitutional when it went before the Supreme Court for the first
time; it did not become unconstitutional until one of the judges
changed his mind, and we cannot be expected to know when a judge will
change his mind. The income tax is just. It simply intends to put the
burdens of government justly upon the backs of the people. I am in
favor of an income tax. When I find a man who is not willing to bear
his share of the burdens of the government which protects him, I find
a man who is unworthy to enjoy the blessings of a government like
ours.
|