William Jennings Bryan's "Cross of Gold" Speech from the 1896 Democratic Convention

Artist's Conception of Bryan at the Convention

As the Democratic National Convention meets online tonight for the first time in history, we should remember William Jennings Bryan’s “Cross of Gold,” surely the most famous convention speech in American history. In 1896, it was not always a foregone conclusion which candidate would be nominated. Representing Nebraska at the Democratic Convention, Bryan finagled onto an important committee and got himself placed on the speakers’ schedule. He told his friends that he had prepared a speech that would ensure him the nomination. His magnificent oration, in which he defended ordinary Americans against the powers of big business that had aligned themselves behind Republican William McKinley, has inspired speech students ever since. Yet, glorious though the speech was, it was highly polarizing, to the extent that Bryan’s opponents were able to label him an irresponsible fanatic.

Yet, the speech’s main point – and one of the major issues of the 1896 campaign – was an economic absurdity. Bryan’s thesis was that coins should be minted from silver as well as gold, an economic policy called bimetallism. The Republican Party platform called for minting only gold coins. McKinley, however, was a long-standing advocate of coining silver. Politics is an odd business, is it not?

At this point, the reader might ask: who cares? Exactly! There was little reason for anyone to care. While the Gold Bugs screamed that the bimetallists were fanatics, and the bimetallists called the Gold Bugs slaves of monopolies and trusts, the United States had, in real life, long been on a de facto fiat/paper money standard. Gold and silver coins were little more than relics of the era of the Spanish Armada and Caribbean Pirates. Nevertheless, the opposing sides, motivated entirely by their ignorance of basic economics, turned gold and silver coinage into an issue for the ages.

As he rose to give his speech to a packed crowd in a huge Chicago arena, Bryan quickly turned the meaningless fight over coinage into an existential question, a dispute so powerful that he said it was greater than any in history:

“Never before in the history of this country has there been witnessed such a contest as that through which we have just passed. Never before in the history of American politics has a great issue been fought out as this issue has been, by the voters of a great party.”

Having brought his silly monetary theory to the forefront, Bryan explained that the ordinary working American was just as much in business as the industrial trusts, huge factories, and transcontinental railroads. This led him to give one of the most inspired defenses of political liberalism in our nation’s history:

“We say to you that you have made the definition of a business man too limited in its application. The man who is employed for wages is as much a business man as his employer; the attorney in a country town is as much a business man as the corporation counsel in a great metropolis; the merchant at the cross-roads store is as much a business man as the merchant of New York; the farmer who goes forth in the morning and toils all day -- who begins in the spring and toils all summer -- and who by the application of brain and muscle to the natural resources of the country creates wealth, is as much a business man as the man who goes upon the board of trade and bets upon the price of grain; the miners who go down a thousand feet into the earth, or climb two thousand feet upon the cliffs, and bring forth from their hiding places the precious metals to be poured into the channels of trade are as much business men as the few financial magnates who, in a back room, corner the money of the world. We come to speak for this broader class of business men.”

Bryan’s images were so vivid, so powerful:   

“The man who is employed for wages is as much a business man as his employer.” 

The farmer “who toils all day” is equally a person of business with the financial speculators who place bets “upon the price of grain.” 

The “miners who go down a thousand feet into the earth . . . And bring forth from their hiding places the precious metals to be poured into the channels of trade” are business people every bit as much as the “few financial magnates who . . . corner the money of the world.” 

We could remember this today, could we not? Today, after all, middle-class wages have stagnated, while incompetent hedge fund managers become wealthy by skimming off a portion of their clients’ money before placing the balance in unwise investments. Bryan could have added them to his list. 

The bulk of Bryan’s speech examined several arguments for and against silver coinage. Then, in his emotional conclusion, Bryan returned to defense of ordinary Americans. In vivid, powerful, even brutal language, Bryan ended:

“You shall not press down upon the brow of labor’s crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”

It is said that he spread his arms wide in imitation of a crucifix. The crowd cheered and he was carried bodily around the room. After several ballots, the Democratic convention nominated Bryan to be President of the United States, whereupon he lost convincingly to the less eloquent, but calmer and more conciliatory, Republican candidate, William McKinley. 

Bryan was nominated for and lost the presidency a total of three times. During his public career, he also was elected to two terms in Congress, served in the United States Army stateside during the Spanish-American War, and was Woodrow Wilson’s Secretary of State. Bryan was known for populist, often idealist policies, isolationism, and arms control treaties. He made a fortune on the Chautauqua speaking circuit, where people paid to hear him give an inspiring religious speech called the “Prince of Peace.” Most important, however, Bryan began the Democratic Party’s move from the backwards party of stodgy conservativism that it represented to the more liberal party that we have today. 

Bryan's point was not so much about economics, which he did not understand, but rather a feeling that Republicans stood for big business and harmed working people. That attitude led to a change in focus that has stayed with the Democratic Party up to the present. In 1896, however, the Republican Party was still at least the lukewarm party of civil rights, while it was the Democrats who supported the worst of the Jim Crow laws. 

Earlier Post: Steve Bannon's Polarizing Value Voters Speech

Almost 20 years ago, I was lucky enough to publish an academic article about the speech in the Quarterly Journal of Speech. The paper argues that Bryan’s polarizing cell helped him to gain the nomination, but was so controversial as to his him the general election. In addition to research databases, you can, if you wish, read a preprint of the article posted by the University of South Carolina. Chapter 4 of my book about the 1896 presidential campaign, From the Front Porch to the Front Page: McKinley and Bryan in the 1896 Campaign, contains an updated version of the article. Most large research libraries will have a copy, and bookstores carry it in paperback.

Let’s keep an eye on the Democratic national convention tonight. Will we hear a memorable speech? Or will the speakers all play it safe? The show (what else should we call it?) begins at 9 o’clock tonight, Eastern Time.

Image: Artist's Impression of Bryan after his convention speech, McClure's Magazine, via Wikimedia

Image: From TAMU Press website

Thanks to my graduate school classmate Martin J. Medhurst and his industrious staff for posting "Cross of Gold," as well as hundreds of other speeches, on www.AmericanRhetoric.com.