Transcripts For CSPAN3 The Contenders William Jennings Bryan

Times of William Jennings brian, the threetime president ial nominee from nebraska. What better way to introduce you to the man than hearing from him. Its commonly referred to as the cross of gold speech which led to his first run for the white house at the age of 36. We do not come as aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest. Were fighting in defense of our homes, our families and prosperity. We have petitions and our petitions have been scorned. We have been treated and disregarded. We have begged and they have mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer. We entreat no more. We defy them. We go forth confident that we shall win. Were coming to you from his home and office in the state capital of lincoln, nebraska. Its referred to as fairview. William Jennings Bryan and his wife moved here. Were coming to you from the first floor of his parlor. His study is below us. He did much of his writing and entertaining here in this house. We want to welcome our two guests. Michael kazin is a professor from georgetown university. Thank you for being with us. Michael, let me begin with you. To set up this speech, the man that delivered it, the setting in chicago and the impact it had on delegates. The country was very divided. There was a Great Depression on. The democrats were split really down the middle. The incumbent president Glover Cleveland was very unpopular as president s are during Great Depressions. Bryan comes into this convention as a dark horse candidate for the presidency. But everyone knows hes a wonderful orator. Hes defending the cause of free silver which meant inflating the money supply, helping people in trouble economically. And he gives this speech which people go wild when they hear it. Partly because he had a wonderful voice. The tape that you played was actually recorded in 1923. Not 1896. The technology didnt exist yet to record a speech live in 1896. At 36, he was robust, he was rigorous, he had an amazing voice that could be heard without amplification by 10,000 people at a time. He really had set this up so that he would give a speech at a time in the convention where he knew the majority of delegates were for him, but at the same time no really rivaling speech had been given yet for the silver cause at that time. So he had found his moment and he used it to great effect. Were going to hear more from the cross of gold speech and his words recorded in 1923. But here is a race in which he was challenging William Mckinley. He was relatively unknown. Served two terms in the house of representatives from here in nebraska. Ran for the senate. Won the popular vote but lost because the Republican Legislature here in nebraska gave it to the republican candidate. So thats right. There was a tough time in american politics. There had been a major strike, a Railroad Strike in 1894 that tore the country apart and revealed to americans just how maybe unstable the economy was and how deep this depression might become. And William Jennings bryan ran as a democrat and populist for the United States senate and he ran against a railroad attorney. He gained a lot of National Attention with this Senate Campaign in 1894. I would liken it to the Lincoln Douglas debates. It gave him great visibility across the nation. He emerged as a National Figure at that time. And the country was desperate for leadership. All of the parties were divided. The republicans were divided. The populists were on the scene. The republicans had won the president ial contest in nebraska in 1892. But the second place votegetter was the populous. And the democrats, cleveland, was far behind. So the Democratic Party was in deep trouble in this part of the midwest. William Jennings Bryan one of 14 president ial candidates who lost the election but changed american politics. Were in lincoln, nebraska. Heres more. The words of William Jennings bryan from his james cross of gold speech. They tell us that the great cities are in favor of the Gold Standard. We reply that the great cities rest on our fertile prairies, burn down your cities and leave our farms and your cities will spring up again as if by magic. But destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city of the country. We cannot which line the battle is fought. If they say it is good, but that we cannot have it in our blood, the nations help us. We reply instead of having a Gold Standard because england has, we will restore bimedalism. If they dare to come out in the open fields and say the Gold Standard is a good thing, we will fight them to the utter most. Supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests, we will answer the demand for a Gold Standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the labor, this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold. Michael, how long was the speech in 1896 and why was it referred to as a cross of gold . It was about 45 minutes long. And cross of gold was a powerful metaphor for most citizens were christian. Those who wanted to keep the country on the Gold Standard wanted to keep debtors in debt, restrict the supply money. For bryan and many people who supported him, this was a way of keeping americans who are poorer, poorer, americans in debt, it was a way of keeping the british economy the supreme economy of the world. So it sounds like a very technical issues but it was an issue of haves against the have notes. To crucify mankind on a cross of gold would be connected to pilate crucifying christ. But they thought that the American Economy was being run for the interest of those who already had property or those who already had money, those who already had banks and big industries. And so theres a kind of class divide in american politics at that time. Now, you know, we have a lot of anger about the economy. But the anger is not focused on money in the same way it was then. Every dollar people had in their pockets could be redeemed for a dollar in the federal treasury. First with gold, and silver as well. Which would have meant that a lot more dollars could have been minted and coined because there was more silver in the circulation than there was gold. It was a call for cheaper money, lower Interest Rates, and greater Economic Opportunity for a Small Business person, a small farmer and for a worker who wanted to be a Small Business person or a farmer. In your book, you talk about his charisma and what he meant at that time. He became a celebrity. He was receiving his many as 2,000 letters a day in the 1896 campaign. You also write about him campaigning for the office as opposed to mckinley who had the front porch campaign. Mckinley had a lot of money, there were no restrictions whatsoever on Campaign Donations back in 1896. Bryan because he was running as the candidate of Small Farmers and workers, couldnt get that kind of money. He had to go out and campaign for himself. He wasnt going to be able to depend upon a large machine to do that for him. He was a wonderful speaker. He loved to speak. For him, this was a positive thing. So he made necessity into a virtue. He traveled 18,000 miles on passenger trains. Didnt have his own jet the way candidates do now. And he spoke as many as 6,000 times during the campaign. For him, this was an opportunity to become known and also it was the only chance he had, he thought, to really reach americans directly. Hes also the first campaigner to use the railroad in this way and to Campaign Across the country. Steven douglas had done something similar in the crisis of the nation trying to take a Campaign Swing through the south and through parts of the north but for the most part after 1860, american president ial candidates sat on their front porch and other people campaigned for them. And bryan went out there and campaigned at every whistle stop town in illinois, ohio, virginia, and pennsylvania, new york, and traveled all over america bringing his campaign to the people. As always we want to hear from you here on cspan. 7370001 in the eastern time zones. We are in lincoln, nebraska. William Jennings Bryan and his wife moved here in 1902. Thomas, lets take a step back. He ran for the house of representatives, served two terms and he was born in se let me salem, illinois. He was born in 1860 to a world that was being transformed. The railroad growth, the civil war that followed. He was too young to serve in the civil war and thats something that actually he came back to again and again in his public life. He had not served in the military and so many men in politics in his period of political activity had served in the military. So he did not have that opportunity as a young man. Instead he read for the bar, went in to practice as a lawyer in lincoln, nebraska, in the 1880s. He started his own law firm, a partnership, and he practiced basic law in an urban growing urban environment in the prairie and thats when he became active in politics. If i could just add, at the time and many ways still, go to law school was a good training to go into politics. And he always wanted to go into politics. His father was a judge in illinois. A close associate of Steven Douglass and his father helped write the Illinois State constitution in the late 1850s. Really politics was in his blood, i think. And he never he never thought of doing anything else but politics in a serious way. He became a lawyer because he wanted to get involved in politics. He moved here because he thought there would be an opportunity for a young man to rise in politics in the state. Let me go back to the way he was able to capture the nomination of the country. Three times and he lost all three times. Henry clay received the before the whig party, the nomination. But a little bit different 100 years ago. A lot more voters, a lot more media, more money involved, this was really unlike clay who had a fairly small country in his population, this was a modern campaign all three of them in a sense, the clays campaigns were not. As you write in your book, 14 million americans voted in that election in 1896 and about 75 to 80 of eligible almost 80 . Cast their ballots. Women too, couple. Women voted in colorado. But, yes, 80 that was actually thats the highest percentage of eligible voters in the election, you know, from then to the present. We have never had that High Percentage of voters since then. If you could touch on his senate bid in 1894. Sure. He started out campaigning to get both the populist and the democratic nomination. Both the populists was an Insurgent Movement in american politics, rapidly rising. They had secured the house in nebraska and the irony of his 1894 Senate Campaign is that the republicans win the legislature and the democrats the democratic candidate actually wins the governorship. So bryan campaigns its interesting, there were two debates. One in lincoln and one in sooma. 7,000 people turned out for the debate in lincoln and 15,000 people turned out for the debate in omaha. This was a great event to come to this Political Campaign and be part of it for the public. Bryan started out talking largely in the campaign about the income tax. This was an important issue, the democrats had passed the first income tax since the civil war in 1894. And bryan had been part of that. It was a 2 flat tax on everyone making more than 4,000 a year. On the rich. And he started his debate with john thursen on that issue and went to the Union Pacific railroad and its monopoly power. And the silver issue was down on the list in 1894. It was not as significant as it would become in 1896. 1895, the Supreme Court rules that income tax was unconstitutional. Its pretty radical thing to do for the highest court in the land. So that helped to enflame things on bryans side in the 1896 campaign. If you could fast forward, in 1913, the signing of the 17th amendment which stated what . Yeah, that the direct election of senators, you know brian is of course expecting to get elected. And hoping to get elected. The republican majority elects john thursten. Bryan runs for president and gets the nomination and the man he ran against in nebraska is the Republican Committee chair for mckinley. Youve spent time in his home. Were going to look at his study in a moment. But does this home reflect William Jennings bryan . Many ways. Its a great home. It was at the time. It was considered a mansion and as youll see, its well furnished. He made a lot of money speaking. In that sense it was a prize. It was a prize for his career. But he worked here with his wife very closely in fact. Youll see a double desk they worked on together. Thats the important thing too i think to mention about him is that he and his wife were partners in his career which is often true of political wives now. But we dont think that much in the late 19th century of that being true. But it certainly was. Were in the study of the William Jennings bryan and his wife. Thanks very much for sharing your time with us on the contenders series. Thank you for having me. How did he use this home and how often was he in that study writing . Well, he would have used the study probably daily when he was in lincoln. The study was the heart of the home as he said. Im going to have you walk in, if you would, and show us what the desk looked like and also some of the artifact that is are on top of the desk. This is the partners desk that he and his wife shared. They would exchange conversation, compose writings and letters and help formulate some of the positions he wanted to take for the day. On the top of the desk, a copy of the commoner. What was that and why was that significant in his life and i know hes signed the copy that is directly in front of you . I think it could best be stated in a quote from the First Edition of the commoner, which i have right here. It says the commoner will be to satisfy if by identity to the common people, it proves its right to be the name which it has been chosen. Youve studied the man, his home, his life. What do you find interesting about William Jennings bryan and how its reflected in his home here . The home can really tell us a lot about the lifestyles of mr. And mrs. Bryan and their family. I think one of the most important stories that came out of the restoration of this house was the role of his wife and the interpretation of her life which is best represented in this office. The two sat directly across from each other and worked on everything, basically, correct. They certainly did. Brian mentioned had said that his wife was a beloved wife and help mate. How much of the material there is original . Very few of the pieces of original bryan furnishings survive. These furnishings have been collected to represent what was originally in the room based on very fine 1908 photographs of these spaces. But if he was seated in that chair, would he feel comfortable, would it feel like his study at the turn of the century . It would be very much like his study at the turn of the century. Even the cluttered desk and the open box. Were going to check in with you throughout the program. Thank you for opening up this home to cspan cameras. James is joining us from West Virginia as we welcome your calls and participation in this, the third of our series, looking at the life and political career of William Jennings bryan. Go ahead, james. Caller i would like for you to talk a bit about thomas mast. Thomas mast was a great cartoonist responsible for among other things the most popular image we have of santa claus in this country. He was a german immigrant. He greatcreated the images of t democratic donkey and the republican elephant. By the time he ran, what politically besides those images mast is known for these very effective images of the corrupt boss in new york city and his images of boss tweed looking like a seedy devil you might say, helped to bring tweed down. He was a democratic candidate at the time, important prosecutor in the new york city, samuel tilden, a democratic nominee for president and was able to bring down the tweed ring. We know about the hayes tilden dispute. Caller thank you, my question originates from the american president series during the Grover Cleveland episode. The historian was asked what cleveland thought of William Jennings bryan and he said that Grover Cleveland hated William Jennings bryan and then he was cut off and he wasnt able to finish. I was curious what did he hate him for and if in fact is that true . Thank you. You want to take it . Ill start, michael, and you can follow up. He didnt like Grover Cleveland was a hardmoney, democratic president. He didnt bryans position on the silver issue. He didnt like the income tax that bryan has championed in the house and helped pass. But it was the silver issue and breaking with the cleveland administrations repeal of the sherman silver purchase act that most got the ire of William Jennings<\/a> brian, the threetime president ial nominee from nebraska. What better way to introduce you to the man than hearing from him. Its commonly referred to as the cross of gold speech which led to his first run for the white house at the age of 36. We do not come as aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest. Were fighting in defense of our homes, our families and prosperity. We have petitions and our petitions have been scorned. We have been treated and disregarded. We have begged and they have mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer. We entreat no more. We defy them. We go forth confident that we shall win. Were coming to you from his home and office in the state capital of lincoln, nebraska. Its referred to as fairview. William Jennings Bryan<\/a> and his wife moved here. Were coming to you from the first floor of his parlor. His study is below us. He did much of his writing and entertaining here in this house. We want to welcome our two guests. Michael kazin is a professor from georgetown university. Thank you for being with us. Michael, let me begin with you. To set up this speech, the man that delivered it, the setting in chicago and the impact it had on delegates. The country was very divided. There was a Great Depression<\/a> on. The democrats were split really down the middle. The incumbent president Glover Cleveland<\/a> was very unpopular as president s are during Great Depression<\/a>s. Bryan comes into this convention as a dark horse candidate for the presidency. But everyone knows hes a wonderful orator. Hes defending the cause of free silver which meant inflating the money supply, helping people in trouble economically. And he gives this speech which people go wild when they hear it. Partly because he had a wonderful voice. The tape that you played was actually recorded in 1923. Not 1896. The technology didnt exist yet to record a speech live in 1896. At 36, he was robust, he was rigorous, he had an amazing voice that could be heard without amplification by 10,000 people at a time. He really had set this up so that he would give a speech at a time in the convention where he knew the majority of delegates were for him, but at the same time no really rivaling speech had been given yet for the silver cause at that time. So he had found his moment and he used it to great effect. Were going to hear more from the cross of gold speech and his words recorded in 1923. But here is a race in which he was challenging William Mckinley<\/a>. He was relatively unknown. Served two terms in the house of representatives from here in nebraska. Ran for the senate. Won the popular vote but lost because the Republican Legislature<\/a> here in nebraska gave it to the republican candidate. So thats right. There was a tough time in american politics. There had been a major strike, a Railroad Strike<\/a> in 1894 that tore the country apart and revealed to americans just how maybe unstable the economy was and how deep this depression might become. And William Jennings<\/a> bryan ran as a democrat and populist for the United States<\/a> senate and he ran against a railroad attorney. He gained a lot of National Attention<\/a> with this Senate Campaign<\/a> in 1894. I would liken it to the Lincoln Douglas<\/a> debates. It gave him great visibility across the nation. He emerged as a National Figure<\/a> at that time. And the country was desperate for leadership. All of the parties were divided. The republicans were divided. The populists were on the scene. The republicans had won the president ial contest in nebraska in 1892. But the second place votegetter was the populous. And the democrats, cleveland, was far behind. So the Democratic Party<\/a> was in deep trouble in this part of the midwest. William Jennings Bryan<\/a> one of 14 president ial candidates who lost the election but changed american politics. Were in lincoln, nebraska. Heres more. The words of William Jennings<\/a> bryan from his james cross of gold speech. They tell us that the great cities are in favor of the Gold Standard<\/a>. We reply that the great cities rest on our fertile prairies, burn down your cities and leave our farms and your cities will spring up again as if by magic. But destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city of the country. We cannot which line the battle is fought. If they say it is good, but that we cannot have it in our blood, the nations help us. We reply instead of having a Gold Standard<\/a> because england has, we will restore bimedalism. If they dare to come out in the open fields and say the Gold Standard<\/a> is a good thing, we will fight them to the utter most. Supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests, we will answer the demand for a Gold Standard<\/a> by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the labor, this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold. Michael, how long was the speech in 1896 and why was it referred to as a cross of gold . It was about 45 minutes long. And cross of gold was a powerful metaphor for most citizens were christian. Those who wanted to keep the country on the Gold Standard<\/a> wanted to keep debtors in debt, restrict the supply money. For bryan and many people who supported him, this was a way of keeping americans who are poorer, poorer, americans in debt, it was a way of keeping the british economy the supreme economy of the world. So it sounds like a very technical issues but it was an issue of haves against the have notes. To crucify mankind on a cross of gold would be connected to pilate crucifying christ. But they thought that the American Economy<\/a> was being run for the interest of those who already had property or those who already had money, those who already had banks and big industries. And so theres a kind of class divide in american politics at that time. Now, you know, we have a lot of anger about the economy. But the anger is not focused on money in the same way it was then. Every dollar people had in their pockets could be redeemed for a dollar in the federal treasury. First with gold, and silver as well. Which would have meant that a lot more dollars could have been minted and coined because there was more silver in the circulation than there was gold. It was a call for cheaper money, lower Interest Rates<\/a>, and greater Economic Opportunity<\/a> for a Small Business<\/a> person, a small farmer and for a worker who wanted to be a Small Business<\/a> person or a farmer. In your book, you talk about his charisma and what he meant at that time. He became a celebrity. He was receiving his many as 2,000 letters a day in the 1896 campaign. You also write about him campaigning for the office as opposed to mckinley who had the front porch campaign. Mckinley had a lot of money, there were no restrictions whatsoever on Campaign Donations<\/a> back in 1896. Bryan because he was running as the candidate of Small Farmers<\/a> and workers, couldnt get that kind of money. He had to go out and campaign for himself. He wasnt going to be able to depend upon a large machine to do that for him. He was a wonderful speaker. He loved to speak. For him, this was a positive thing. So he made necessity into a virtue. He traveled 18,000 miles on passenger trains. Didnt have his own jet the way candidates do now. And he spoke as many as 6,000 times during the campaign. For him, this was an opportunity to become known and also it was the only chance he had, he thought, to really reach americans directly. Hes also the first campaigner to use the railroad in this way and to Campaign Across<\/a> the country. Steven douglas had done something similar in the crisis of the nation trying to take a Campaign Swing<\/a> through the south and through parts of the north but for the most part after 1860, american president ial candidates sat on their front porch and other people campaigned for them. And bryan went out there and campaigned at every whistle stop town in illinois, ohio, virginia, and pennsylvania, new york, and traveled all over america bringing his campaign to the people. As always we want to hear from you here on cspan. 7370001 in the eastern time zones. We are in lincoln, nebraska. William Jennings Bryan<\/a> and his wife moved here in 1902. Thomas, lets take a step back. He ran for the house of representatives, served two terms and he was born in se let me salem, illinois. He was born in 1860 to a world that was being transformed. The railroad growth, the civil war that followed. He was too young to serve in the civil war and thats something that actually he came back to again and again in his public life. He had not served in the military and so many men in politics in his period of political activity had served in the military. So he did not have that opportunity as a young man. Instead he read for the bar, went in to practice as a lawyer in lincoln, nebraska, in the 1880s. He started his own law firm, a partnership, and he practiced basic law in an urban growing urban environment in the prairie and thats when he became active in politics. If i could just add, at the time and many ways still, go to law school was a good training to go into politics. And he always wanted to go into politics. His father was a judge in illinois. A close associate of Steven Douglass<\/a> and his father helped write the Illinois State<\/a> constitution in the late 1850s. Really politics was in his blood, i think. And he never he never thought of doing anything else but politics in a serious way. He became a lawyer because he wanted to get involved in politics. He moved here because he thought there would be an opportunity for a young man to rise in politics in the state. Let me go back to the way he was able to capture the nomination of the country. Three times and he lost all three times. Henry clay received the before the whig party, the nomination. But a little bit different 100 years ago. A lot more voters, a lot more media, more money involved, this was really unlike clay who had a fairly small country in his population, this was a modern campaign all three of them in a sense, the clays campaigns were not. As you write in your book, 14 million americans voted in that election in 1896 and about 75 to 80 of eligible almost 80 . Cast their ballots. Women too, couple. Women voted in colorado. But, yes, 80 that was actually thats the highest percentage of eligible voters in the election, you know, from then to the present. We have never had that High Percentage<\/a> of voters since then. If you could touch on his senate bid in 1894. Sure. He started out campaigning to get both the populist and the democratic nomination. Both the populists was an Insurgent Movement<\/a> in american politics, rapidly rising. They had secured the house in nebraska and the irony of his 1894 Senate Campaign<\/a> is that the republicans win the legislature and the democrats the democratic candidate actually wins the governorship. So bryan campaigns its interesting, there were two debates. One in lincoln and one in sooma. 7,000 people turned out for the debate in lincoln and 15,000 people turned out for the debate in omaha. This was a great event to come to this Political Campaign<\/a> and be part of it for the public. Bryan started out talking largely in the campaign about the income tax. This was an important issue, the democrats had passed the first income tax since the civil war in 1894. And bryan had been part of that. It was a 2 flat tax on everyone making more than 4,000 a year. On the rich. And he started his debate with john thursen on that issue and went to the Union Pacific<\/a> railroad and its monopoly power. And the silver issue was down on the list in 1894. It was not as significant as it would become in 1896. 1895, the Supreme Court<\/a> rules that income tax was unconstitutional. Its pretty radical thing to do for the highest court in the land. So that helped to enflame things on bryans side in the 1896 campaign. If you could fast forward, in 1913, the signing of the 17th amendment which stated what . Yeah, that the direct election of senators, you know brian is of course expecting to get elected. And hoping to get elected. The republican majority elects john thursten. Bryan runs for president and gets the nomination and the man he ran against in nebraska is the Republican Committee<\/a> chair for mckinley. Youve spent time in his home. Were going to look at his study in a moment. But does this home reflect William Jennings<\/a> bryan . Many ways. Its a great home. It was at the time. It was considered a mansion and as youll see, its well furnished. He made a lot of money speaking. In that sense it was a prize. It was a prize for his career. But he worked here with his wife very closely in fact. Youll see a double desk they worked on together. Thats the important thing too i think to mention about him is that he and his wife were partners in his career which is often true of political wives now. But we dont think that much in the late 19th century of that being true. But it certainly was. Were in the study of the William Jennings<\/a> bryan and his wife. Thanks very much for sharing your time with us on the contenders series. Thank you for having me. How did he use this home and how often was he in that study writing . Well, he would have used the study probably daily when he was in lincoln. The study was the heart of the home as he said. Im going to have you walk in, if you would, and show us what the desk looked like and also some of the artifact that is are on top of the desk. This is the partners desk that he and his wife shared. They would exchange conversation, compose writings and letters and help formulate some of the positions he wanted to take for the day. On the top of the desk, a copy of the commoner. What was that and why was that significant in his life and i know hes signed the copy that is directly in front of you . I think it could best be stated in a quote from the First Edition<\/a> of the commoner, which i have right here. It says the commoner will be to satisfy if by identity to the common people, it proves its right to be the name which it has been chosen. Youve studied the man, his home, his life. What do you find interesting about William Jennings<\/a> bryan and how its reflected in his home here . The home can really tell us a lot about the lifestyles of mr. And mrs. Bryan and their family. I think one of the most important stories that came out of the restoration of this house was the role of his wife and the interpretation of her life which is best represented in this office. The two sat directly across from each other and worked on everything, basically, correct. They certainly did. Brian mentioned had said that his wife was a beloved wife and help mate. How much of the material there is original . Very few of the pieces of original bryan furnishings survive. These furnishings have been collected to represent what was originally in the room based on very fine 1908 photographs of these spaces. But if he was seated in that chair, would he feel comfortable, would it feel like his study at the turn of the century . It would be very much like his study at the turn of the century. Even the cluttered desk and the open box. Were going to check in with you throughout the program. Thank you for opening up this home to cspan cameras. James is joining us from West Virginia<\/a> as we welcome your calls and participation in this, the third of our series, looking at the life and political career of William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Go ahead, james. Caller i would like for you to talk a bit about thomas mast. Thomas mast was a great cartoonist responsible for among other things the most popular image we have of santa claus in this country. He was a german immigrant. He greatcreated the images of t democratic donkey and the republican elephant. By the time he ran, what politically besides those images mast is known for these very effective images of the corrupt boss in new york city and his images of boss tweed looking like a seedy devil you might say, helped to bring tweed down. He was a democratic candidate at the time, important prosecutor in the new york city, samuel tilden, a democratic nominee for president and was able to bring down the tweed ring. We know about the hayes tilden dispute. Caller thank you, my question originates from the american president series during the Grover Cleveland<\/a> episode. The historian was asked what cleveland thought of William Jennings<\/a> bryan and he said that Grover Cleveland<\/a> hated William Jennings<\/a> bryan and then he was cut off and he wasnt able to finish. I was curious what did he hate him for and if in fact is that true . Thank you. You want to take it . Ill start, michael, and you can follow up. He didnt like Grover Cleveland<\/a> was a hardmoney, democratic president. He didnt bryans position on the silver issue. He didnt like the income tax that bryan has championed in the house and helped pass. But it was the silver issue and breaking with the cleveland administrations repeal of the sherman silver purchase act that most got the ire of Grover Cleveland<\/a>. Cleveland was representative of the old Democratic Party<\/a>, Democratic Party<\/a> of commercial interests from the east and especially in new york where cleveland was from. He was from buffalo. People who believed Thomas Jefferson<\/a> and Andrew Jackson<\/a> that the government should not really do very much in the economy. During the depression, Grover Cleveland<\/a> said that the people should support the government but the government should not support the people. This is different from what bryan believed. He was a liberal. He was a democratic liberal. He wanted to redress the balance between Corporate Power<\/a> and the power of workers and Small Farmers<\/a> and so and also cleveland has broken this Railroad Strike<\/a>, the pullman strike, with federal troops. And the attorney general at the time was actually a railroad attorney at the same time as he was breaking the strike by railroad workers. So for bryan, cleveland was in the 1890s, at least, representative of all he didnt like about his party and all he didnt like about american politics. In order to get a better sense of the man, i want to use michaels words. He said we lack politicians today filled with the convictions and blessed with charisma who are willing to lead a charge against forces that is mightier than a century ago. Bryan was a champion of those who needed help. He was a man of great conviction and one of the things that he was trying to do that was most difficult was to take on the economic powerful class that had emerged in american politics and American Economy<\/a> in a way that didnt look like class welfare. That was hard for bryan to do, to do it sincerely, to speak to the people without tearing down but instead attempting to build up and that was a very hard case to make. And he did it beautifully, but it was a very difficult attempt to try and reveal the inadequacies of American Society<\/a> at the time without looking like someone who is tearing down the american ideals. Those are your words. Are there parallels to somebody today in american politics that would resemble a William Jennings<\/a> bryan . Im not sure. There are people who want to be William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Sarah palin in some ways tried to be. Angry populists. They believe that a small greedy elite is after the majority of americans. But, you know, bryan was representative of a movement, i think, an antimonopoly movement, a movement of people that believed that Corporate America<\/a> was taking the country in a revolutionary direction and we have for better or worse i think come to grips with or made our peace with big business and we cant imagine a society in which big business is not there. That was not true for bryan. I think just where we are here in fairview, we looked at the desk that he worked with mary bryan side by side. Most businesses were like that in america in the 1870s and 1860s and 1850s. They were partnerships. They were small partnerships, small firms. And that period before 1896 was a period of enormous industrial growth, huge corporations emerging in American Society<\/a>. The Pennsylvania Railroad<\/a> employed more people than the United States<\/a> post office. So these were corporations with enormous resources, enormous wealth and enormous power. And most people had experienced a very different america, one of a small partnerships, and that change was arresting and bryan was speaking to that massive transition in American Society<\/a> and life. We talk about money and the politics since the early campaigning in this country. I want you to listen to the 1900 campaign in which William Jennings<\/a> bryan talked about the issue of transparency, knowing who is contributing to whom, here are the words of William Jennings<\/a> bryan from his second of three campaigns for the white house. An election is a public affair. It is held for the benefit of the public and is the means through which the people select their officials and give direction as to the policies to be adopted. There is no sound reason for secrecy in regard to campaign metho methods and publicity will prove an influence in politics. The incentive of publicity has grown with businesses. They may better decide whether either party has obligated itself to the great corporations as to make it impossible for it to protect the rights of the people. From the 1908 campaign with William Howard<\/a> taft. Has anything changed a century later . It sounds like citizens united, doesnt it . Obviously people with a lot of money want the government to do things they want the government to do. People with little money do too, but theres a lot of influence you have if you have a lot of money. And bryan was in favor of Public Financing<\/a> of elections. He didnt want private individuals to give any money to elections. But he realized that wasnt going to fly at the time. His idea at the time was publicize the donations that people give. Lets make sure everyone knows its above board. For example, 1896, john d. Rockefeller just wrote a check for 250,000 and gave it to mark hannah and that was not known until after the election was over. He wanted that to at least been known. 1907 the first Serious Campaign<\/a> law had been passed. Individuals could give as much money as they wanted to. So the connection between influence and money is still something we argue about all the time and fight about all the time and the court has ruled on it. But its an issue which has not died. Welcome is joining us from detroit, good evening, please go ahead. Caller good evening, gentlemen. I just caught the program and i wanted to understand, William Jennings<\/a> bryan, was he a supporter of the gold and Silver Standard<\/a> in currency in america . He wanted the money supply based on both gold and silver which at the time would have meant that more dollars would have been would have been put in circulation. There would have been more money out there, prices would have gone up, but that meant that people who produce cropping would have seen their prices that they were able to get for their crops o go up and Interest Rates<\/a> gone down. It sounds arcane, it sounds exotic to us today. But the best way to think about it, i think, is that brian wanted cheaper money, more money in peoples pockets and Interest Rates<\/a> to go down so people could borrow more easily. He gets the nomination and renominated in 1900. What happened in 1904. The democrats decided to go with a less exciting candidate, a more conservative candidate who they thought could appeal to a more traditional electorate. They nominated aldan parker from new york. A very gray candidate, i think its fair to say. A man who did not go around the country giving speeches. But who was more like Grover Cleveland<\/a> in many ways. He had some of bryans politics, but none of bryans charisma and appeal to ordinary americans. And he got killed in a landslide. And the party comes back to William Jennings<\/a> bryan in 1908, why . Well, michael, the party is in great need of a leader. And its a party that is divided by region. Its had a great deal of difficulty uniting around a candidate and making its voice heard in the National Election<\/a> and bryan is that voice. You had three republicans, welcome mckinley, teddy roosevelt, and then welcome howard taft elected in 1908. Lets go back to something that was rather revolutionary. Set up the debate that took place and how that occurred technically speaking in 1980. There wasnt a debate the way we have debates now. But 1908 in which both candidates recorded speeches on wax cylinders. You can hear renditions of them, perhaps youll play one that the library of congress owns some of these copies. But this was the original short record. They didnt last very long. They went into studios and recorded them. And this was bryan sold these too to campaign supporters. You could hear bryan and taft wo without speaking to you directly. One of the Campaign Buttons<\/a> of William Jennings<\/a> bryan 1908. I have known a good many people who are opposed to foreign missions. Religiously if you chaoose to ue that term. I did not realize the immense importance of foreign missions. The truth is, we have to wake up in this country. Were not all there is in the world. There are lots besides us and there are lots of people besides us that are entitled to our airport and our money and our sacrifice to help them on in the world. Imperialism is the policy of an empire and an empire is a nation composed of different races living under varying forms of government. A republic cannot be an empire. It rests upon the they aat theo. Colonialism has been unfortunate. It has brought loss. Instead of strength it has brought weakness. Instead of glory it has brought humiliation. The words of William Mckinley<\/a> and William Howard<\/a> taft. Did William Jennings<\/a> bryan change as a candidate from his first race in 1896 to his third bid in 1908 and what issues dominated there was a key issue in each of those campaigns. The gold and silver issue and the issue of depression and class divisions. The big issue in 1900 was imperialism. The u. S. Was fighting in the philippines to stop the Independence Movement<\/a> from winning a war against the u. S. Occupation of those islands and that was a big issue in that campaign. 1908, several issues, his slogan was shall the people rule. But taft was perceived as progressive at the time. He had been the secretary of war under federal roosevelt. Federal roosevelt is a progressive president. In many ways, similar to if some of your listeners remember, some of you viewers remember, george w. Bush running the handpicked successor to ronald reagan. He was not a tremendously charismatic figure, but if you like reagan, i guess i can vote for bush. Like roosevelt, well be safe with taft. Thats why he won. So bryan tried to use a lot of the same rhetorical themes. But it wasnt very successful. The country was prosperous again after a sharp recession in 1907. Times are good. Taft was popular because he was the handpicked succession to a popular president , so bryan couldnt get much traction that year. His closest race was 1896. Were joined by marie. Welcome to the conversation. Go ahead, marie. Caller thank you very much. I would like to know how to William Jennings<\/a> bryan come to live in miami, florida . Coral gables. His wife mary contracted very bad arthritis when she lived in this house and really couldnt live in the winter climate of nebraska any longer. Miami was beginning to be a place for older people to go, if they could afford to. And also he had been in the south before. He had a lot of very strong supporters in the south and so they would go to miami and stayed at friends houses in miami before and they decided to move there. And it was a very good move for mary, certainly. You tell a story in the book about how he used to bring people to coral gables, including the pool that is still there today. He became a promoter. In the 1920s after he had given up all hope of becoming president , he began to make money giving speeches for land promotors. This was not one of his more honorable adventures, perhaps. But he needed to make money and he did. Again, just to understand this period, we move into 1912 and a democrat finally wins the white house but its not William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Right. Its Woodrow Wilson<\/a>. The democrats had struggled for some time and bryan had led much of the struggle against the Republican Party<\/a> and really for the votes of working people, i think. And the broad middle class, the republicans were able over that period to coopt. Many of the issues that the populists and democrats had brought forward and developed their agenda as a progressive party. Theodore roosevelt was the master of this. And bryan and the democrats had a very difficult time reaching that broad middle class and convincing voters that they could bring progressive change, not radical change, but progressive change. And wilson was able to do that. He was a professor at princeton, he had been governor of new jersey, he was a very moderate reformer, but a progressive reformer and he was able to succeed where bryan was not. The only reason wilson one was because of Republican Party<\/a> split. Roosevelt tries to arrest the nomination away from taft in 1912, fails to, then goes out and becomes a nominee of this new progressive party. So if the republicans had stayed united, we wouldnt know what would have happened. Its possible that wilson would not have been elected. Michael teaches politics and history at georgetown university, and will thomas is the chair of the History Department<\/a> here at lincoln nebraska at the university of nebraska and josh is joining us from phoenix. Welcome to the program. Caller hi, good evening. Great show. Thank you for your show. I just i wanted to ask something a little different. I wanted to see if the gentlemen could speak to mr. Bryans Foreign Policy<\/a> attitudes and what he thought about, say, the spanish american war or American European<\/a> colonialism and if he ever went abroad. What would the gentlemen think how he would handle, for example, now afghanistan and iraq and the invasion . What was his mind set back then in terms of, you know, how the major colonial powers around the world were going into other countries and controlling them and such and what was his theory about all of that and how did he feel and in general his Foreign Policy<\/a>. Thank you very much. Thanks for the call. He served as our 41st secretary of state so maybe that best reflects his views on Foreign Policy<\/a> . Some ways before that it does. After all, he served in the spanish american war but once the war ended, he opposed the as i said before, the occupation of the philippines and he was an antiimperialist at the time when there was a large antiimperialist constituency in the United States<\/a>. He did travel around the world for a whole year with his family. Financed by William Randall<\/a> i. He went to indonesia controlled by the dutch, india controlled by the british. And he denounced the europe powers who controlled those countries. He was opposed to rich countries dominating and owning poor countries. That doesnt mean he was opposed to all wars. He was opposed to what he thought of as unjust wars. When youre secretary of state, he resigned as secretary of state in 1915 because he thought the United States<\/a> was about to enter world war i after the lusitania, this very large Passenger Ship<\/a> had been torpedoed by a german uboat. The u. S. Did not get into the war at the time. He resigned as secretary of state because he was so opposed to world war i. He thought world war one was an insane war that the United States<\/a> should not be part of. What was his relationship like with Woodrow Wilson<\/a> during the campaign in 1912 . He does come around to supporting wilson at the convention. When he supports wilson in that convention, it helps to put wilson over the top at a time where you needed twothirds of delegate votes to win. It was an oldstyle convention. 46 ballots. But they were never really close. Wilson had not supported brian in 1896. Wilson had been a conservative democrat up until 1908 and 1909. And so the two didnt really trust each other. Wilson came to this house at one point, came to fair view and was not impressed by it. He was an intellectual and he was disparaging of bryans intelligence and bryans interest in the world. The two were not close. Bryan became secretary of state in large part because it was a political appointment. At that time, it was not unusual for the leading figure in the party who was not the nominee to be nominated secretary of state by the incoming president. In many ways, wilson expected to be his own secretary of state and one of the reasons that bryan was unhappy as secretary of state was that he didnt get the kind of responsibility he would have wanted. One thing he did do which shows something about his views about war and peace, he put together he convinced various foreign powers to sign peace treaties with one another. These were pretty much symbolic, but he gave each of them a little bronze plow share with the line from isaiah as a symbol of these treaties. In the end, of course, the treaties didnt stop world war i. But for bryan as a good christian showing a humanitarian face to the world was one way of acting in more humanitarian ways. Larry is joining us from delaware. Welcome to the program. Go ahead, please. Caller thank you for listening to me. I do have a religious question about bryans religion. First, let me say that i applaud his efforts to level the Playing Field<\/a> for the common man against big business. Free enterprise defeated coin addition. What impact do you think that bryans fundamental christian religious beliefs have an impact on his Election Results<\/a> . Thanks for the call. We should point out too the bible is open to the book of ezekiel in his desk which is below where were at, were in the parlor at his home. What about the role of religion in his life and his wifes life . He never really separated religion and politics. We think some people more conservative people think you should have a christian government, america is a christian nation. But for bryan, his christianity was applied christianity. He believed if youre a good christian, you want to go out and save the world, you want to go out and help the poor and help workers and level the Playing Field<\/a> as the caller mentioned. So for him, his religion and his politics were not separate. But in some ways this hurt him among some people were not evangelical protestants, which most americans were at the time. Catholics, jews were less enthusiastic about him and he supported prohibition. And was a big supporter of what became the 18th amendment to the constitution. And this was a very divisive issue in American Life<\/a> and he came to prohibition because he wanted to purify the american body of politics. This was a christian issue. And that meant that a lot of people from 1910 on didnt trust him even people who voted for him before because he was a prohibitionist. He did not drink, but he enjoyed eating. Oh, yeah. Sometimes when he was on the campaign trail giving all of these speeches, sometimes he ate as many as six meals a day. And he was known he could devour three chickens at one sitting. This is cspans the contender series. Were looking at 14 candidates for the presidency. All 14 lost but in their own way they shaped american politics and in many cases resonate today with the issues they put forth. Were coming to you from his home in lincoln, nebraska, referred to as fairview. Its part of the Medical Center<\/a> here in the state capital and our phone lines are open. This is an exterior view of what the home looks like and you can see that the bryan lgh Medical Center<\/a>. This home is open to the public. It offers tours for those of you who travel through lincoln, nebraska. Nadine is joining us from palm springs, california. Caller i have a kodak picture in my files. He has a relationship with my family. And my how so . Caller im not a mormon, its just my hobby and i research my family. I have 6,200 names in it and i would like to know about buying the book or speeches or what you have and how much it is and where i send the money. Well, before you get an answer to that question, who is in the photograph and what bryan, at least through your own Family Research<\/a> . Caller as far as i know, hes in a car in this picture. Its like a kodak picture, and hes in the car with its a single looks like a single seater with the top down. And i always thought the other man was the one whose name i cant remember who didnt believe in religion. Clarence darrow. Caller im 94 years old and almost 95. I cant remember his name now. But i have this, and hes in my family. I have 6,200 names ive researched, and, you know, on my computer. I dont say id like to have that one. I research them to make sure theyre my relative. Well, nadine, im going to ask you to stay on the line and were going to try to get your phone number, if theres a way we can, and get you connected with mr. Kazin directly and his book is called a godly hero. But stay on the line. Well get your phone number, and she brings up another part of his life. Dayton, tennessee, the monkey scopes trial and Clarence Darrow<\/a>. I was just going to tell her that we have put all of his speeches from 1896 online on our digital project. If shed like to use her computer to look at those speeches, there are hundreds of them. Every speech he gave in the 1896 president ial campaign is online on the railroads in the making of modern america website that we started here at the university of nebraska, lincoln. All the material from this series is available online, 14 weeks looking at president ial contenders, thecontenders. Cspan. Org is the website. Michael kazin, the scopes trial. In many ways William Jennings<\/a> bryan is known, if hes known at all for americans, is because he was one of the prosecutors in this trial in tennessee in july 1925, which was prosecuting a teacher named john scopes who was teaching the theory of evolution in high school, in dayton, tennessee. You know, whats interesting about this is this issue is still very much alive with us, of course. A large number of americans believe that the bible, you know, the book of genesis is the truth, is what how the earth was formed. Bryan believed that, too. But its important to remember also that for bryan, one of the things he disliked about the theory of evolution, he thought it was not just darwinism but social darwinism. He believed it taught the survival of the fittest, that might makes right. He put out a series of lectures about evolution before the scopes trial, which was entitled brother versus brute. For him to be a good christian meant that you were against the theory, the social theory of evolution. He didnt really understand the science very well, but he believed, rightly or wrongly, that the way the science was being applied by some people that did very well in American Society<\/a>, by some people in the military was that those who were doing well in society were those who should do well, who were biologically inclined to come out on top. This is one of the things he disliked about the theory. Again, he was a fundamentalist and he believed what the bible said was true. So he thought School Children<\/a> should not be learning something which could counteract that. There is an iconic photograph of Clarence Darrow<\/a> and William Jennings<\/a> bryan in 1925 in tennessee. How did the two come together for this historic moment in American History<\/a> . Well, bryan was asked by the prosecution to help in the trial. This was a state law that was passed that year in tennessee. They knew that if bryan helped them this would draw a lot of attention to the case. Similarly, once Clarence Darrow<\/a>, this great defense lawyer, defense lawyer for labor candidates, labor figures like eugene debs and many others, when you hear bryan, a former friend, by the way, was going to work for the prosecution, darrow said he had to be on the other side of the aclu, the American Civil Liberties<\/a> union, that begun several years before financed the defense of scopes. One thing that people should know about this. People might have seen the famous movie inherit the wind with Spencer Tracy<\/a> and the darrow character and frederick march as the bryan character. In fact, unlike what the movie shows you, scopes never went to jail. Scopes was basically a he agreed to be a defendant because he knew a trial was going to take place somewhere in tennessee. His town of dayton, tennessee, where he taught high school was hurting economically. He wanted to bring business to dayton, tennessee. Thats why the trial took place there. Cameras were allowed inside the courtroom and it was broadcast nagt witionwide on ra. Not only was it broadcast on the radio and tens of thousands of americans listened to it, it was a courtroom. For bryan to try to defend his christianity and creationism in the courtroom, it was the context of the courtroom and crossexamination that made it so difficult for bryan to say what he meant and what he was trying to convey about the importance of creationism in his thinking and about the social darwinist logic that, as he saw it, was infecting American Society<\/a>, as michael pointed out. He ends his life sort of as a man out of context. Making an argument in a place where unlike 1896, where the context was perfect for him to make the speech, the context of the courtroom in dayton, tennessee, proved very challenging for bryan. Peter is on the phone. Good evening, welcome. Caller how are you doing . Yes, youre on the air. Caller id like to make one point and then ill get off youre a well go to mark next. We apologize for that phone call. Well go to mark in arlington, texas. Go ahead, please. Caller hi, im calling because ive noticed the Gold Standard<\/a> debate appears to have made a comeback with Networks Like<\/a> cnbc having debates whether the Gold Standard<\/a> should come back. And then people will come out arguing against the Gold Standard<\/a> and against the Federal Reserve<\/a> and for the governments ability to print its own currency. Those people in particular almost always seem to quote William Jennings<\/a> bryan for their argument. He seems to be making a comeback in that regard. My question for the panel was, if they themselves see any ways in which his speech from 1896 is relevant to the america we live in today . Ron paul has talked about the Federal Reserve<\/a> and even governor perry has been critical of ben bernanke. Making some pretty sharp comments about him. So to the point of what he was talking about a century ago. The gold and Silver Standard<\/a>, the legacy of that debate was among other things a Federal Reserve<\/a> system, also getting off the Gold Standard<\/a> eventually in the early 1930s. What bryan wanted, the people on his side wanted, was a more flexible money supply. They wanted in hard times Interest Rates<\/a> to go down, more money in circulation. In prosperous times, they were happy to have them go up. The kind of thing the fed does today. At the time america was in great reform. We get in economic trouble now, people look for panaceas, going back to the Gold Standard<\/a>. As a historian, i think one of the reasons weve been able to avoid economic downturn between the Great Depression<\/a> and now is because we had a flexible money supply and the fed has been able to take charge when necessary. Will may have a different idea. I think one of the big issues bryan was trying to confront with the silver issue and Gold Standard<\/a> was the great contraction of the American Economy<\/a>. Weve lived through a similar contraction in the American Economy<\/a> recently, so i think its not surprising that some of these issues are coming forward when they are right now. I think the difference is, of course, that bryans efforts to broaden the money supply were mainly aimed at trying to rescue a class of americans who were struggling deeply with their Financial Wellbeing<\/a> in their situation. And so so i dont see that quite playing out today in the same way when the Gold Standard<\/a> is being brought up. Two history professors representing georgetown and university of nebraska at lincoln. Michael kazin is the author of a book about William Jennings<\/a> bryan, and also author of the iron way, the making of modern america. Harold is joining us from youngstown, ohio. Good evening. Caller good evening. It seems rather ironic that many of the parallels from William Jennings<\/a> bryans day and our day is just amazing. Again, were arguing soft money versus hard money. We do see the class warfare argument. This time its coming from rich against the poor as opposed to poor against the rich. Like i say, the irony in my mind is just amazing. Who would like to take that point . Well, i think it is interesting to look back at that time, because for bryan, making the argument not only about the money supply and silver issue but also about the income tax and the monopoly power he saw all around and the corruption in politics and the trust. All of those things together, he was accused by the republicans of practicing a form of demagoguery or class warfare, of opening the door to class warfare by even mentioning these things and bringing them up. Bryan was trying to lead or from what he saw, he was trying to lead americans to see that the class in power was not necessarily looking out for their own interest. That was his main argument. But he had to frame it in a way that it didnt become class warfare. Americans didnt want class warfare. They had seen a series of strikes in the last 20 years that looked an awfully lot like class warfare or something they feared from europe, communist organization and conflict. So that fear of class warfare is very vital to the period of the 1890s when bryan is campaigning. It turns out that the strike of 1877, for example, with the militia and federal government bringing out gatling guns and mowing down American Workers<\/a> that were striking, that didnt sit well with american people. So bryan was walking this thin line trying to raise the issue but not class warfare. He was born in illinois, moved for nebraska where he practiced law, ran for congress, served two terms, and became the democratic president ial nominee in 1896. He moved to this home in 1902 with his wife mary. Bob, with the Nebraska Historical<\/a> society is down below. My question is how did they use the home back in 1902 when they first moved here . Its an interesting combination of uses. The second floor, right above where youre sitting was the family bedrooms and sleeping chambers. The first floor was meant primarily for entertaining. You can see the wide spaces, the open spaces where they would entertain their friends. The lower level was more a family area, including the dining area and, of course, the office in which we had seen earlier. As you research the home and visitors of the home, who would have been here . Well, there were a number of prominent guests. Woodrow wilson being one of them. But a number of social acquaintances would have been visitors to the house. We talked earlier about the name of the home, fairview, because it did give you a sense of the nebraska landscape. Now, of course, its the home of the Medical Center<\/a>. Thats correct. Bryan said the house was one of the most beautiful vistas of farmland he had ever seen. They acquired the land east of lincoln and chose this site for their new home in 1901. Thomas, here in lincoln, nebraska . I think hes one of the most famous sons. I think his name is widely recognized by nebraskans and nationwide. I think nebraskans are proud we have generated people of his stature, even though he did not win the presidency. It was an important aspect in nebraskas political life to have such a character. This, of course, being a historic landmark. His legacy, will . I think he does bring the Democratic Party<\/a> into nebraskas history. Of course there were democrats here before William Jennings<\/a> bryans campaigns but he elevates the Democratic Party<\/a> in its stature in nebraska. Here, obviously hes a major figure in nebraska history, and but the local legacy, of course, is this home and the hospital which bears his name. John is joining us from san francisco, as we look at the life and political career of William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Go ahead, please. Caller bryan publicly defended the ku klux klan in 1924 Democratic National<\/a> convention. Did he also privately embrace the practice of lynching in the south . He did not defend the klan in 1924. Im not defending him retrospectfully. There was a debate in the convention in new york city was about whether to denounce the klan by name or not. He believed that democrats should win over the klan rather than denounce them. You know, he certainly had supporters who were in the klan. Its unfair to say he was a supporter of the klan. He was not. He was a racist against africanamericans, and we consider him that now, but he did not support violence against them. He denounced lynchings, but he was a white supremacist. But i wanted to clarify, his racial views are not so simple as to say he was a klansman or in favor of lynching people without a trial. He wanted he supported the views of most white southerners and white northerners as well, which is they thought european americans were superior to other people. So in that sense, he was certainly not a modern figure. I think hes certainly a Democratic Political<\/a> figure in the sense from that period in the sense that he broadly believes in white supremacy. Hes appealing to votes in the democratic south, really, on those terms as well. What would he think of the Democratic Party<\/a> today, which counts so much of africanamericans as a core constituency . He would have been surprised. He was a democrat with a small d as well as large d. For him the majority of the people in the country were white. He was mostly concerned with their welfare, its fair to say. He didnt know very many black people. The nebraska side is interesting. In 1896, there was a group of what we called silver republicans, africanamericans in omaha, who did support him in that campaign. He had African Americans<\/a> to fairview at different occasions to visit. But politically, he wanted to stay as far from that issue as he could. In fact, 1908 campaign, w. B. Du bois, black intellectual and activist and founder of the naacp wanted to support bryan and did support bryan against william taft, but bryan would not be with him and acknowledge his support because he was afraid he would lose parts of the white south if he did. Our next caller from memphis, tennessee. Chuck is on the phone. Good evening, good to hear from you. Caller good evening. This series has been fascinating, and your guests are very interesting. I had heard at one time that the wizard of oz was an allegorical novel about the election of 1896 where William Jennings<\/a> bryan was actually depicted as the cowardly lion. I would be interested in your guests thoughts on that. Had either of you heard that . Thats one of the great myths of American History<\/a>. Unfortunately i used to give lectures about this. Its a wonderful way to teach students about the election of 1896. Different figures in that in the first oz book corresponding to figures in that campaign. Unfortunately if you look at l. Frank baums biography, it doesnt bear out. He was a window dresser. He dressed windows in Department Store<\/a>s. For him, the artifice of the design of the Department Store<\/a> windows was one way he saw American Society<\/a> developing. For him the wizard of oz was a figure of sort of commercial artifice. So baum, i think, would have been surprised by the allegorical meanings that people found. Even though its an entertaining way to look at it, unfortunately its probably not true. In 1999 we sat down with ka he karl rove and he talked about how he tried to take some of the lessons from that campaign for george w. Bush in 2000. Can you touch on that . One of the things the 1896 campaign did, it established Republican Party<\/a> in president ial elections and most Congressional Elections<\/a> as well as the Majority Party<\/a>. There was really no Majority Party<\/a> in the gilded age from 1868 to roughly 72, until 86. 1896. What karl rove wanted to do was produce a new republican majority based on what he would have seen as the most forwardlooking elements of the Business Community<\/a> and also a pretty heterogenous group of middleclass American Voters<\/a>. One of the ways he wanted to do this was include hispanic vote, a very large group growing. Mckinley tried to appeal to european immigrants. He was able to win over german American Voters<\/a> who had for the most part been democrats before. Most of them became republicans for various reasons. So rove saw not just mckinley but hannah, impresario of his career and campaigns producing this new public majority. It didnt happen. George w. Bush was not a successful president as William Mckinley<\/a>. Coming to you from nebraska where William Jennings<\/a> bryan served two terms in the house of representatives. Went on to run for presidency on two separate occasions, 1896. Frank is joining us from salem, illinois. Go ahead, please, the birthplace of William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Caller yes, his birthplace is open to the public on as you call it that. My question is, how much influence did w. J. Have in getting his brother nominated in 1924 to be his Vice President<\/a> ial candidate . Yes. Thats a side light people dont really know about. In 1924 then governor of nebraska whats his first name again. Terrible, forgetting his first name. Charles bryan, younger brother of William Bryan<\/a> was Vice President<\/a> ial candidate of democrats coming out of that tumultuous convention in 1924. It was more because of his name than because his older brother pushed him. At that time William Jennings<\/a> bryan was a divisive figure in the party, partly because of the klan debate, partly for other reasons. But the bryan name was still sort of the democrats hoped would enable them to win a lot of rural votes, especially in the midwest, which they were afraid progressive rural votes, they were afraid it would go to independent campaign. So charles bryan, his nomination as Vice President<\/a> by the democrats was an attempt to keep some of the Progressive Farm<\/a> vote on their side. For the most part, it did not succeed. Terry is joining us from easton, pennsylvania, as we look more at the study of William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Go ahead, terry. Caller gentlemen, very interesting talk. You stated that William Jennings<\/a> bryan was a fundamentalist and progressive. I believe states like kansas and nebraska, which had large fundamentalist populations were also during his day very progressive. Today they are extremely conservative. What happened . To cause this change . Will thomas, what did happen . Thats a great question, i think the progressive that bryan espoused had a great deal to do with the Economic Conditions<\/a> of his day. The prosperity that came forward in American Life<\/a> changed that in the 20th century in ways they couldnt have predicted. In terms of todays conservativism, bryan also foreshadows some of that in his commitment to faith in public life. His faith, as michael pointed out, was based around the social Gospel Movement<\/a> and applied christianity. Helping those in the cities, helping those in need, and that branch of christian thought and experience did not grow in the same way as the fundamentalist movement. Chris is joining us did you want to follow up . Just one quick question what will said is right. Both liberalism and conservativism changed their views and postures towards very active christianity and public life. Liberals generally especially white liberals got soured on public religiosity. They became much more identified with the christian right in the 1970s. The issues were different, too. Abortion and gay marriage were not issues for bryan. Chris, youve been patient. Thanks for waiting, from austin, texas. Go ahead. Caller thank you for taking my call. Bryan was populist in both ways, in economics and social issues. Economics that meant progressivism, socialism meant conservatism. There was a similar move in europe as the advent of christian democracy going on as well. It seems theres no really outlet for for a position like that within todays two major parties, but i was wondering, you know, i think that theres actually a big constituency for that if there was an outlet for it. I wanted to get your take on what you think the possibilities of a bryan type of position would have today in american politics . Thanks for the call and the question. Well, you know every politician today, whatever their ideological position, in a sense has to be at least at least has to appear to be a religious person, whether they go to church or not. So in that sense, everybody who has a chance is a religious person, and so far as a christian. But i think, though, most people on the liberal side of politics mistrust people who talk too much about their religion in politics. And most people on the conservative side want that religious talk to be focused primarily, i think, on issues of the body, you might say, issues of personal piety, personal responsibility, abortion, samesex marriage, this kind of thing, stem cells and so forth. So the kind of social christianity that, as you say, many christian democrats in europe stood for and certainly bryan stood for, i dont see that really as a real possibility, at least in the near future. One actually figure who is important to realize is we have a National Holiday<\/a> named after him is Martin Luther<\/a> king, jr. He was very left wing in economics but obviously he was an evangelical minister at the same time. So we in some ways, there is a lot of differences between bryan and king, race and others. But its interesting we have a National Holiday<\/a> after somebody who did try to put together what you call conservative not quite fundamentalist but conservative sense of biblical truth. And also a very left wing belief about economic issues. On a separate note, connection between William Jennings<\/a> bryan and arbor day. What is it . This goes to nebraska again. His mentor in the Democratic Politics<\/a> in nebraska was a man who was a leading figure, but never elected in his own right, but became the father of arbor day. It was a way of bring getting sterling morton, bring more business, really to this part of the plains. Larry is joining us from everett, washington. Good evening. Caller my question was about the australian ballot or lack of one, the secret ballot, 1900, 1908. Did bryan ever talk about the need for a secret ballot, or if they had one at the time would it affect the outcome . I had read anecdotally, where there were where employees put in the right ballot for mckinley. Is that true and did bryan ever talk about it . Thanks for the call. Who would like to take that . Ill take it. Bryan did talk about the secret ballot. It was a subject of some discussion in 1894 and 1896. It wasnt a major issue but it came up in context like the potential corruption of companies that would bring in voters to vote for elections or require voters to vote in a certain way, that is, their employees. These accusations made especially in nebraska with regard to the burlington railroad. It had, in fact, released all of its men from its western job sites and brought them into omaha or lincoln and told them which way to vote. So that kind of activity led politicians like bryan and others to object and to call for the kind of secret ballot that would allow individuals to vote for who they wanted without the pressure of corporate interests in the election. Our next caller comes to us from reno nevada. Go ahead, please. Youre on the air. Lets go to nancy. Go ahead. Caller okay. Caller, are you with us . Well try one more time. Were getting some feed back, so lets go to nancy next joining us from another town important to William Jennings<\/a> bryan, dayton, tennessee. Go ahead, nancy. Caller i am nancy sawyer, and im from dayton, tennessee, home of the scopes trial. Im not old enough to remember it, im just 70 something, but i know several people that were there. It was a carnival like. And the drug stores was there for many years, and the table where it all started, and as i understand, it just started as lets do something exciting or unusual. Lets do this. So thats how it got started as the older people have told me. Dayton has grown into a booming little town. It has a play on the anniversary depicting the trial, and it is a very interesting place for people to come from all over the United States<\/a> to see, and i i just wanted to say that we were kind of dubbed as the monkey town for a long time, but now were known as home of the scopes trial. I did not know William Jennings<\/a> bryan, but i did meet Clarence Darrow<\/a> at a tea held for him by the women of dayton. Were glad that it happened there. As i was told, it was kind of started for chattanooga, and chattanooga didnt really want it, so they decided to bring it to dayton. It has brought much economy to the city of dayton. Well, nancy, thank you for calling and sharing your firsthand account to that famous trial. Thoughts from either of you . Actually talking about tourism, theres a very good museum in the basement of the courthouse in dayton, tennessee, about the trial and about the reception of it around the world. You can also visit the courtroom itself. Ive sat in the judges chair. The famous crossexamination, darrow crossexamining bryan was actually not held in the courtroom itself, it was held on the lawn outside. If you think about it, as many as 3,000 people were probably in attendance listening to and watching this crossexamination. This is the kind of trial we dont have that kind of trial today. But it was, as she said, a carnival. It did help the economy of daytona good deal. It was an economy that needed help. Lets talk about the legacy of William Jennings<\/a> bryan when it came to womens rights and prohibition and income tax and population election of u. S. Senators. Will thomas. I think the legacy and michael handles this beautifully in the book. The legacy is damaged by the end of the scopes trial and particularly the obituary of bryan, which depicts bryan as just a bumbling back country misguided figure in 1924, 25, that period. So his legacy is tarnished, really, at the end of his career by this. Michaels book, i think, recovers bryans legacy beautifully. All of the reforms that he championed, womens rights in particular, the right to vote, the suffrage, which was an active issue in the 1870s, 1880s, 1890s and bryan was at the forefront of it and other issue as well, as you just mentioned, were ones that he was deeply involved with from the beginning. I think i emphasize this in the book. I think one of the legacies is in many ways without bryan you dont get wilson or franklin roosevelt. I think he was a major figure of remaking the Democratic Party<\/a> as a party you think of today, for those that like it Big Government<\/a> problem, those that dont, more economically liberal party. He does 1908 forge for the first time a very strong relationship with the labor, Democratic Party<\/a>, a relationship that for the most part has remained for the last century between that movement and that party. So he wasnt obviously the only figure who did this, but i think he was the key figure in the depression of the 1890s in helping make the Democratic Party<\/a> into the kind of party we think of it as today. That is wanting the government to be stronger to serve the interest of working people, of people who are down on their luck. So in some ways, that is an important legacy, which doesnt often get credit for. This is a what if question very briefly. Had he been elected, what kind of president would he have been . I dont think a very good one. His skill as an ora tore or agitator, but he probably wasnt a very good administrator. He wasnt very good as secretary of state. As president he would have been a very divisive figure and i think it would have been difficult to work with the Opposition Party<\/a> in congress. Time for one more call. Mark is joining us from dallas. Go ahead, please. Caller yes. In 1900, did a senator Joseph Blackburn<\/a> run against William Jennings<\/a> bryan for the nomination, and did he tie with him . Can you tell me about that . Blackburn got a few votes. 1900, most democrats rallied around bryan. It was not really a close contest. It was pretty much decided by the time they get to the convention, which was unusual at the time. Usually they were tempestuous affairs. The nomination was really decided at the convention. That was not 1900. 1900 by the time they got to kansas city where the convention was held, it was pretty clear that the nomination would go to bryan again. Two other famous speeches at democratic conventions in 1984, mario cuomo delivers the keynote that propels him to the national stage. In 2004 state senator barack obama delivers keynote address, and many say that propelled him to the presidency. Are there parallels to William Jennings<\/a> bryan . Obama in that sense was a par parallel. Though, as will said, he was better known in 1896 to americans than obama was in 2004, which may seem surprising given all the media we have. Bryan was giving speeches all around the country in 1896 to pro silver crowds. Great convention speeches, Hubert Humphrey<\/a> gave a famous speech for civil rights, democratic convention, which put the u. S. Put the Democratic Party<\/a> on record as being for civil rights, which it never had been before. We have no other parallel in american political history where someone gives a great speech and at the same convention gets the nomination . What about today, are there parallel to other modern politicians . I think obamas speech in that way is similar. It vaults him to national prominence. Michael is right, bryan had already achieved much of that. But the sense of party unity that both of them brought to those speeches and the kind of sincerity and speaking across a broad range of the public and really speaking outside of their party as well, both of them are able to do that in those settings. They are different in other ways. There is a similarity. William thomas is the chair of the History Department<\/a> here at the university of nebraska in lincoln. Michael kazin teaches history at georgetown university. You put the book a godly hero together when . I started doing research on it around 1996, about 100 years after. It was published in 2006. We thank you for your perspective on the life and career of William Jennings<\/a> bryan. Our thanks to the staff at the William Jennings<\/a> bryan home who opened their doors to the cspan cameras and to the staff and administration at the bryan lgh Medical Center<\/a>, which makes up the campus were at at the bryan home often called fairview. Well leave you with more words of William Jennings<\/a> bryan as we continue to look at his life and career. Check it out online cspan. Org, the contender series. In the words of what made an ideal republic, here is what he had to say. A republic resting securely on the foundations, founded by revolutionary patriots from the mountain of eternal truth. A republic in practice and proclaiming to the world the selfevident propositions that all men are created equal, endowed with inalienable rights, governments are instituted among men to secure these rights and that governments arrived just powers from the concept of the governed. Behold the public, religious liberty stimulate all endeavor and restrains every hand uplifted for a neighbors injury. A republic in which every citizen is a sovereign, but in which no one cares to wear a crown. Weeknights this month on American History<\/a> tv, were featuring the contenders our series that looks at 14 president ial candidates who lost the election but had a lasting effect on u. S. Politics. Tonight we feature eugene debs, a fivetime candidate for the socialist party. Watch tonight beginning at 8 00 eastern and enjoy American History<\/a> tv this week and every weekend on cspan3. The president s available in paper back, hard cover and ebook, Public Affairs<\/a> presents biographies of every president. Conversations with noted historians about the leadership skills that make for a successful presidency. As americans go to the polls next month to decide who should lead our country, this collection offers perspectives into the lives and events that forged each president s leadership style. To learn more about all our president s and the books featured historians, visit cspan. Org thepresident s and order your copy today wherever books are sold. Youre watching American History<\/a> tv. Every weekend on cspan3, explore our nations past. Cspan3, created by americas Cable Television<\/a> companies as a Public Service<\/a> and brought to you today by your television provider. Up next on history book shelf, robert merry talks about his book. He describes the president s role in the spanish american war, acquiring hawaii in the philippines and liberating cuba from spain and a implementing an open door policy with china. This was recorded at the Kansas City Public Library<\/a> in kansas city, missouri, in 2017. Its just over an hour. [ applause ]","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia601908.us.archive.org\/9\/items\/CSPAN3_20201008_200000_The_Contenders_William_Jennings_Bryan\/CSPAN3_20201008_200000_The_Contenders_William_Jennings_Bryan.thumbs\/CSPAN3_20201008_200000_The_Contenders_William_Jennings_Bryan_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}