In that campaign, the whole money question was dwarfed to the discussion of “Free Silver.” The great issue of Constitutional, scientific Bi-metallism was shunted on to the spur track of Free Silver. In that campaign he lost the East and the North, irrevocably. Instead of making a strong, broad, easily understood plea for a restoration of the financial system of Jefferson, of Madison, of Monroe, of Jackson, of Benton, of Calhoun, he selected that detail of the money question which was of the least consequence, which was the most difficult to explain to the ordinary voter, and which,—on account of the selfish interests of the Silver Kings—lent itself most favorably to Republican assault.

This error was Bryan’s own folly, for the Greenbacker and the Populist had already demonstrated the advantage of treating the question in the broad, fundamental way. To this day, Mr. Bryan pays the penalty. To the business world, of every section of the Union, he is known as the “Free Silver” crank, and the business world is dead against him.

In 1900, the Spanish war had temporarily engulfed economic questions. Bryan was astute enough to feel this; consequently, he discovered a new Paramount Issue. It was Imperialism. But Bryan was not the man to derive any benefit from it, for the simple reason that he was as much responsible for it as the Republicans themselves. Tired of camp life at Tampa, Mr. Bryan hurried to Washington City, exerted his personal influence with certain Democratic Senators, and prevailed upon Senator Clay and others to vote with the Republicans to ratify the Treaty of Paris.

As our Imperialism grows out of this Treaty, Mr. Bryan’s political dishonesty in raising such an issue against the Republicans was so glaring that they had very much less trouble in defeating him in 1900 than they had had in 1896.

Then came the ugly affair of the Bennett will; of Bryan’s acceptance of gifts of money aggregating $12,000; of his efforts to secure, secretly, a legacy of $50,000; of his astonishing lack of delicacy in drawing up, in his home, a will for a doting old man who was Bryan’s guest; of his mercenary persistence in his struggle against Bennett’s widow; of his claim for a large fee as Executor of a will which he had drawn and which the courts had set aside.

Then came the revelation that while appearing to the public as the devoted, unselfish, patriotic champion of Free Silver, he had been in the pay of the Silvre Kings all the time. Then we could understand why he had narrowed the money question to that pitiful detail. Millionaire Silver Mine-owners, like Marcus Daly and William A. Clark, didn’t care a rap about Constitutional money. What they wanted was the personal profit to be gained by them in carrying fifty cents’ worth of the white metal to the U. S. Mints and having it turned into a dollar. Free Silver meant millions of dollars to these Silver Kings. Therefore they paid Bryan big prices to make speeches for Free Silver. And the Peerless orator stuck to his text. And when the Silver Kings discontinued the pay, Mr. Bryan discontinued the speeches.

Afterwards came the campaign against Parker’s nomination in 1904. Pretty much everything that could be said to prove that such a nomination would be a base betrayal of the Jeffersonian element of the Democratic party, Bryan said. In Chicago, notably, he hired a hall, collected the faithful around him, made an impassioned speech setting forth the shame of such a Ryan-Belmont candidacy as that of Parker, and said that a Democrat ought to be ready and willing to die rather than submit to such a surrender of principle as would be involved in the nomination of Parker.

Similar heroic declarations Mr. Bryan made against the Clevelandites, the Wall Street element of his party, the undemocratic advocates of the British gold standard which had chained the world to London. In his book, in his paper, in his speeches,—particularly at Birmingham,—he vowed that he would never support a gold standard candidate and that he would quit the Democrats if the party adopted a gold standard platform.

Is thy servant a dog that he should do this thing?” That was the tone of Bryan’s indignant reply whenever he was asked whether he would follow his party if it deserted its principles.

Alas! The heroics sounded well—but where was the hero?