CHAPTER XIX.
THE GREAT CAMPAIGN OF 1896.
Long before the National Convention of 1896 was held, the issues which were to be paramount in the campaign had begun to crystallize. Throughout the country there was a wail of distress growing out of the depression of 1893, and the people were thinking, thinking, as to the cause of the trouble which oppressed them. No nation was ever better equipped to intelligently discuss matters pertaining to its welfare than the United States at that period. Theorists had conceived numerous remedies for the economic depression, and right or wrong, had found many adherents.
The Republican National Convention had declared for the first time in the history of the party in favor of establishing the financial system of the country on a gold basis. Protection to American interests, which had long been a cherished principle of the party, also had its place in the platform. The Democrats, on the other hand, adopted a platform demanding the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, and a tariff for revenue only.
As before stated, however, the issues had already been firmly fixed in the public mind. The advocates of the free coinage of silver had been preaching their doctrines for months, and as their arguments were easily comprehended, the masses took to them with avidity. The cry was that the Republicans intended to destroy silver except as a subsidiary coin, and make gold the basic money of the country. It was asserted that there was not gold enough in the world to provide a currency for the wants of trade, hence the volume of money would be contracted, if the policy of the Republicans prevailed. Prices of commodities, already extremely low, would fall lower, because there would be less money for the people to purchase them with, hence the distress would grow apace.
These arguments had been disseminated in a small book the writer of which pretended to hold a “financial school,” and to expound for the benefit of the people, and for the benefit of capitalists especially, the true gospel of finance. Millions of copies of this book had been sold, and people throughout the length and breadth of the land were familiar with its arguments. Those of opposite beliefs had not been asleep during this period. They had formulated arguments in contradiction, and four or five books had been written and printed to offset the influence of the silver campaign document.
The Democrats nominated William Jennings Bryan, of Nebraska, as their standard bearer. Mr. Bryan was an ex-member of Congress, and prior to the Convention had not been regarded as a prominent candidate for the Presidency. He was young, and there were wheel-horses in the party to be rewarded. “Silver Dick,” as the Hon. Richard P. Bland, of Missouri, was called, because of his long defence of silver in the House of Representatives as a money metal, was one of the most formidable candidates, and Governor Horace Boies, who had succeeded in winning the Republican State of Iowa for the Democrats, also had a large following. Mr. Bryan came to the Convention as a delegate, a pronounced champion of the silver theory, and a representative of the producing classes of the country. He had already achieved fame as an orator, and during the Convention he took the platform and made a most brilliant speech in favor of the free coinage of silver. The address so electrified the Convention that delegation after delegation voted for Mr. Bryan when the balloting began, and before the roll call was finished it was seen that he was nominated.
Neither the Republican nor the Democratic party committed itself to the money question without a serious fight within its own ranks. When the Republicans declared against silver, an influential section of the delegates, led by United States Senator Henry M. Teller, of Colorado, bolted the Convention, and were, perforce, compelled to support Mr. Bryan as a Presidential candidate. A faction of the Democratic party, led by Senator Hill, of New York, refused absolutely to subscribe to the silver doctrine enumerated by their party, and as a result the Gold Democrats nominated a ticket for President, headed by United States Senator Palmer, of Illinois, and S. B. Buckner, of Kentucky. Mr. Bryan was also the candidate of the Populistic party.
Following the nomination of Mr. Bryan began a campaign the like of which has perhaps never been seen in any country. It was full of spectacular features, and there was more eloquence to the square inch than had ever been known before. Everybody turned speech-maker, and few places were regarded as too sacred, and few moments as improper, in which to discuss the momentous questions. On the streets, in railway cars, on steamboats, in hotels, stores, factories, and at the family board the great question was threshed out. The excitement was intense. On both sides the people believed a crisis had arrived. The Republicans declared the election of Mr. Bryan meant repudiation of obligations, ruin and national dishonor. The Democrats retorted that there could be no repudiation in sticking to the money of the Constitution and the argument was so apparently conclusive that the Republicans became alarmed. It was found that the silver belief was fully grounded—the people of the great West seemed impressed with the idea that more money would make times better, and more money could easily be coined. The Government had practically ceased under the Cleveland Administration to purchase silver bullion. The mines of Colorado, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana, and other sections, could produce the metal in abundance, and for the Government to coin it into money would produce the supply of money necessary to relieve the stringency.
Such arguments appealed to those who felt the pinch of poverty, and the Republicans found it necessary to send their best and most eloquent speakers into the field, in order to counteract the influence of the silver advocates. Printing presses throughout the land were set to work to print pamphlets and tracts exploded the Democratic doctrine, and great discs of base metal were cast to show how much silver at the prevailing price would have to go into a dollar, to make it the equivalent of a gold dollar. The bullion value of the silver in a dollar was at that time about 50 cents, and the object lesson had its effect upon certain minds.
As indicative of the arguments used by the leading orators during the campaign, the following examples are given:
Congressman Joseph C. Sibley, of Pennsylvania, one of the prominent Eastern men who supported the doctrine of free coinage of silver, said in one of his speeches:
“Silver is the only stable standard of values maintaining at all times its parity with every article of production except gold. The ounce of silver, degraded by infamous legislation from its normal mintage value of 1.2929 an ounce to about 60 cents, has kept its parity with the ton of pig iron, the pound of nails, and all the products of our iron mills. The ounce of silver has maintained its parity with the barrel of petroleum, with granite blocks, with kiln-burnt bricks. With lumber growing scarcer year by year it still keeps its parity. It is at parity with the ton of coal; with the mower, reaper, thresher, the grain drill, the hoe, and the spade. Silver at 1.2929 and beef at 7 cents per pound in the farmer’s field has kept its parity, and the ounce of silver at 60 cents buys to-day beef at 2 cents per pound on foot. The pound of cotton and the ounce of silver have never lost their level. No surer has the sun indicated on the dial the hour of the day than has the ounce of silver shown the value of the pound of cotton. As surely as the moon has given high tide or low tide, just so surely has the ounce of silver given the high and low tide prices of wheat. The ounce of silver has maintained its parity with your railway dividends, with the earnings in your shops and factories, in all departments of effort.
“If parity with gold is demanded, and the Secretary of the Treasury construes the law to mean whenever demanded to pay gold, then let us maintain the parity by reducing the number of grains in the gold dollar from 23.22 grains pure gold to 15 grains, or to such number of grains as will keep it at parity. While we may wrong by so doing the creditor class, through the increased value of the products of human industry, we much remember that for every one creditor there are a thousand debtors; and we should remember that the aim of the Government is the greatest good to the greatest number, and also the minimum amount of evil. But no such drastic measure is necessary. Parity may be maintained and every declaration of governmental policy fully met by accepting for all dues, public and private, including duties upon imports, silver and paper issues of the Nation of every description whatsoever.
“In all the gold-standard nations destitution and misery prevail. With great standing armies in Europe outbreaks are not of frequent occurrence, and yet one rarely peruses his paper without reading of these outbreaks. In Nebraska and Kansas, the land of wheat and corn, we read of starving households; even in Ohio appeals are sent out for the relief of thousands of starving miners, and yet men have the temerity to tell us that the evils arise from overproduction.
“Men tell us that there is an overproduction of silver, and that its price had diminished in comparison with gold because of its great relative increase. Such statements are not only misleading, but absolutely false. Figures show that in 1600 we produced 27 tons of silver to 1 ton of gold; in 1700, 34 tons of silver to 1 ton of gold; in 1800, 32 tons of silver to 1 ton of gold; in 1848, 31 tons of silver to 1 ton of gold; while in 1880 the production of silver had declined until we produced 18 tons of silver to 1 ton of gold; and in 1890 but 18 tons of silver to 1 ton of gold; and that, instead of the ratio of coinage being increased above 16 to 1, if relative production of the two metals is to determine the ratio, then the ratio should have been diminished rather than increased, and confirms the fact that merely the denial of mintage upon terms of equality with gold is responsible for all depreciation in the value of silver bullion.
“All the silver in the world to-day can be put in a room 66 feet in each dimension, and all the gold can be melted into a cube of 18 or 20 feet. There are to-day less than twenty-five millions of bar silver in all Europe. Mr. St. John, the eminent banker of New York, had stated that there was not over five millions of silver that could be made available to send to our mints. Begin to coin silver to the full capacity of our mints, and we would have to coin it for twenty years before giving to each inhabitant a per capita circulation that France, the most prosperous nation in the world to-day, possesses.
“The struggle to-day is between the debtor and creditor classes. With one-half the world’s money of final account destroyed, the creditor can demand twice as much of the products of your field, your shop, and your enterprise and labor for his dues. In this struggle between debtor and creditor the latter has taken undue advantage and by legislation doubled and trebled the volume of the debt. For example, suppose you had given a note to your neighbor promising to pay, one year after date, 1,500 bushels of wheat. You thresh the grain, measure it into the bin, and notify your creditor that the wheat is at his disposal. He goes to the granary, sacks the wheat, and then brings up your note and states, ‘I have taken 500 bushels, which I have endorsed on your note. I will call on you for the balance when next year’s crop is harvested.’ You say, ‘Why did you not take all the wheat and let me make full payment?’ The note-holder answers, ‘I did take all the wheat, and there were only 500 bushels in the bin instead of 1,500.’
“You fail to understand how that can be possible. You know that you threshed out and measured into that bin 1,500 bushels of wheat. You go to the granary and find that it is true. No wheat is there, but there appears to be an enormous lot of wheat upon those wagons for 500 bushels, and you ask the note-holder, ‘Who measured this wheat? and let me see how you measured it.’ You see something in the form of a measure about as large as a washtub, and you ask him what that is. He tells you that is the half-bushel measure which he measured your wheat; but you reply, ‘My dear sir, that holds more than half a bushel; that measure will hold 6 pecks.’ He answers, ‘Correct, it does hold six pecks, but it now takes 12 pecks to make a bushel, instead of four pecks. Together with other friends who had wheat coming to us we went before the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures and secured the passage of a legislative enactment, that it should require 12 pecks instead of 4 pecks to make a bushel. We have secured this legislation for the proper protection of the holders of wheat obligations, for our own security, and for fear that we should become timid and lose confidence in your ability to pay unless we changed the standard of measure.’ But you reply, ‘Sir, we who have obligations maturing, contracts long standing, have never asked or consented to the enactment of such legislation. Our representatives in Congress never permitted us to understand that any such legislation was pending,’ He replies, ‘Sir, you might have known it had you desired to do so, or had you kept yourself as well posted in legislative affairs as do the holders of obligations calling for products of the soil for payment. We have our representatives in Congress. We reward them for their fidelity to our interests; we punish them for fidelity to yours.’
“This, in my judgment, is not a far-fetched illustration, but depicts the exact condition against which production to-day protests. The debtor’s obligation, true, does not call for wheat in specific terms. It calls for dollars, but by legislation we have made the dollar three times as large in purchasing power or in measuring values as it was before. We talk about gold being the only money of intrinsic value, and attempt to befog and mystify the masses by telling them that it has intrinsic value, when its value is merely the artificial product of legislation.
“Enact a law, to be rigidly enforced, providing that no meat of any kind, whether ‘fish, flesh or fowl,’ except mutton, shall be used for food. What will be the intrinsic value of your beef cattle, of your swine, your poultry, and your fish to-morrow? The mutton-headed monometallists would tell you that the great increase in the value of mutton was because of its intrinsic worth. Let this Nation and the commercial nations of the globe enact a law to-morrow, that neither cotton, nor silk, nor fabric should be used for clothing or covering, forbid the factories of the world to spin or weave aught but wool, and what will be the intrinsic value of cotton or silk thereafter? Wool will be king; its value will be enhanced, but cotton, hemp, and silk will be as valueless as weeds or as gossamer webs.
“With the mints open to free and unlimited coinage of both gold and silver there has never been a moment when silver has not maintained its parity with gold, and a ratio of 16 to 1 commanded a premium of more than 3 per cent over gold. And if, by some fortunate discoveries to-morrow, gold should be found in great quantities sufficient to lessen the income of the annuitant, the bondholding, or the fixed-income class, there would arise a demand for the demonetization of gold and the establishment of the pearl, ruby, or diamond standard of values. Whatever standard can bring to grasping hands and greedy hearts the most of the toil, the sweat, and unrequited efforts of his fellowman, this standard will be demanded by the representatives of greed, and must be resisted by those who represent humanity and Christianity.”
United States Senator Julius C. Burrows, of Michigan, in replying to free coinage argument, said:
“Coin silver dollars at the ratio of 16 to 1 or 20 to 1 and you have a dollar intrinsically worth less than the gold dollar, and coin such a dollar as that—permit the owners of silver bullion to bring to the mints of the United States, and have manufactured into dollars, a certain number of grains, worth in bullion much less than after they are coined, is a proposition to which I cannot give my assent.
“But it has been stated and repeatedly asserted that the present silver dollar is the ‘dollar of the fathers.’ That statement is not true. It is not the ‘dollars of the fathers,’ and the fathers if living would repudiate such an assumption as a reflection upon their integrity and sagacity. The silver dollar of the fathers was intended to be and was in fact practically equal to the gold dollar in intrinsic value.
“This contest for the free coinage of silver began in 1874, and it has been prosecuted with unceasing vigor ever since. Why? Up to that time the silver dollar was worth more, intrinsically, than the gold dollar, being worth in 1873 $1.03 as compared with gold.
“Up to that time the coinage of silver dollars in this country had been very limited. One would think from the tenor of this discussion that all at once a great outrage had been perpetrated upon silver, that it had been stricken from our monetary system at a blow, by the force of law, when the fact is that from 1793 to 1805, a period of twelve years, we coined but 1,439,517 silver dollars. From 1806 to 1836, a period of thirty years, we did not coin a single silver dollar. From 1836 to 1873, a period of thirty-seven years, we coined only 6,606,321 silver dollars. In eighty years we only coined a total of 8,045,838 silver dollars. So long as silver remained more valuable than gold there was no clamor for the free coinage of silver, but in 1878, when resumption was an assured fact, and the people had decreed that they would keep faith with their creditors and pay their unredeemed promises, then the champions of cheap money turned their attention to silver finding it had declined in value from $1.03 in 1873 to $0.89 in 1878.
“The battle is now renewed under the plea of bimetallism, and the advocates of the free coinage of silver seek to delude the people by asserting that they are in favor of bimetallism while its opponents are not. We have bimetallism to-day.
“The free and unlimited coinage of silver at any of the ratios named will destroy bimetallism and will reduce this country to a single standard, that of silver, and that depreciated, and I am suspicious that for this very reason some gentlemen are anxious for its triumph. The opening of the mints of the United States to the unrestricted minting for individuals of silver into legal dollars at any ratio to gold less than the commercial value of both metals, under the pretense of aiding the cause of bimetallism or for the purpose of establishing or maintaining bimetallism in the United States, is simply playing upon the sentiment and credulity of the American people.
Mr. Bryan toured the country during the campaign, and spoke in all sections of the country. He went into the eastern States, where the opponents of the free silver doctrine were strongest and made numerous speeches, but did the most of his work in the South and West. His fame as an orator drew thousands to hear him, and under the spell of his eloquence millions were brought to believe with him. When the campaign was well under way, and the Republican leaders had in a measure checked the spread of the free silver doctrine, they put forward again the doctrine of a protective tariff, and declared it to be the real issue before the people, and its maintenance necessary to the renewed prosperity of the nation.
During this stirring period the calm equipoise and splendid intellectuality of Governor McKinley stood him in good stead. He kept to his modest home in Canton, Ohio, and there received millions of people who called upon him. They came from all walks in life—manufacturers, business men, professional men, teachers, mechanics and laborers—and to each delegation he made an apt address, always broad-minded, always touching the peculiar concerns of his hearers, and always breathing a high note of patriotism and fidelity to principle. The speeches made by Governor McKinley on the lawn at Canton during the memorable summer of 1896 rank him as one of the most thoroughly informed men of his generation, and as possessing all the elements of highest statecraft.
When election day came, McKinley was triumphant, receiving 7,061,142 votes, against 6,460,677 for Bryan. In the electoral college, Mr. McKinley had 271 votes, and Mr. Bryan, 176.