A History Lesson

Back in 1896, the Democrats nominated William Jennings Bryan for president. Bryan was a 36 year-old congressman from Nebraska, and his ringing "cross of gold" speech at the Democratic convention stampeded the delegates. Horrified Republicans and conservative Democrats rallied around the GOP nominee, congressman William McKinley, who won the election handily.

So determined were the Republicans and their allies among the Democrats to defeat Bryan that they spent what at the time were unprecedented amounts of money to promote their man and disparage Bryan. It is said  workers across much of the country were told on election eve not to come back to work on Wednesday  if Bryan won on Tuesday. The employers said they would have to shut down to prepare for a government takeover if Bryan was elected.

Why were they so opposed to Bryan when they had managed to get through eight years with another Democrat in the White House - Grover Cleveland? Well, whenever I tried to explain why to my history students I could see eyes begin to get glassy and people started looking out the windows.

Bryan was on record calling for the government to coin silver free of charge at a ratio of 16:1 to gold. Well, that doesn't sound so very radical to modern ears, more incomprehensible than anything else. Why would that cause a ruckus?

The answer is that the debate was really about the money supply. The conservatives who insisted that our country stay on the gold standard were actually arguing for tight money - tight credit -  and a low or non-existent rate of inflation. By contrast, the Bryan Democrats wanted loose money - easy credit -  and a higher rate of inflation, or at least no deflation of the currency.

In truth, the national money supply was not expanding as fast as the population and the supply of goods and services. That in turn meant that money gradually became scarcer, and goods, services, and wages, paid less and less.

Falling wages are especially burdensome to people who are in debt. In 1896, that included most farmers who had mortgages, and wage-earners without special skills who were making subsistence money or less. By contrast, lenders were doing well, charging interest on loans that would be repaid with dollars that were increasing in value.

McKinley carried the business people of the country and the skilled laborers of the northeast. In fact, he won everything north of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi. Bryan won the rest of the country. That northeastern quadrant was enough, however, to send McKinley to the White House and Bryan back to the prairie.

I'm bringing all this up for two reasons. First of all, the election of 1896 was one of the more important ones in American history. The nomination of Bryan put progressives in charge of the Democratic party, where they have remained to this day, with only a few short breaks. It defined the Democrats as the "easy money, easy credit" party. (In the musical "Hello Dolly" there is a line that goes, "Money is like manure. It's not worth a thing unless you spread it around, encouraging young things to grow." That could be the mantra of the Democrats.)

The Republicans also had a progressive ascendancy in the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, but by and large they have been the conservative party for the last century.

The other thing that made me think of 1896 was the hysteria associated with the election that year. Republicans predicted calamity if Bryan was elected. The government would take over everything, freedom would be eclipsed, and poverty would ensue. Perhaps, the more things change. . . .

(By the way, a future Democratic president, Franklin Roosevelt, participated in rallies for McKinley in 1896.)