View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.


" I am a natural born rebel against oppression and wrong."


H O N .


M .

A L L E N ,




SATURDAY, A U G U S T 26, 1893.



S P E E C H




The House having under consideration the hill (H. R. 1) to repeal a part of
an act, approved July 14, 1890, entitled "An act directing the purchase of
silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes thereon, and for other purposes"—

Mr. ALLEN said:
Mr. SPEAKER: Most of the gentlemen who have addressed the
House in this debate have disclaimed being financiers or political
economists. Sir, I am both. [Laughter.! But I insist that I
am in no way responsible for the present panic and financial
trouble. I have kept my money in circulation [laughter], and
any person who doubts this has leave to search my stockings for
i ' hoarded " currency.
Mr. Speaker, I have been studying the money problem for the
last forty years. [Laughter.] When, as a child, I first began to
observe, one of the problems that claimed my attention and
aroused my budding curiosity was, why people would exchange
their good candy and cakes, for these were the commodities of
commerce I most desired then [laughter], for little pieces of
silver that were neither beautiful to look on nor good to eat or
I soon discovered that while the money for which everybody
seemed to be struggling and contending was not desired for the
intrinsic qualities in the metal of which it was made, but for the
function it performed in the affairs of the human race—I found
that by law and common consent it had been made the medium
of exchange, and the standard by which values were measured
and time contracts liquidated; that it was the yardstick by which
the transactions of the human race were measured; that men
parted with what they had that was desired by others, and gave
their labor and made all sorts of sacrifices to get money, not because they wanted a piece of gold or silver, but because they
wanted money which would, in turn, buy them such commodities as they desired and pay such debts as they had contracted.
It is the important function in the affairs of men performed by
money that puts every man in competition with every other man
to obtain it, and not the material of which it is made. All sorts
of things have been made to perform this function in various
ages of the world, and, except as a matter of convenience, it
makes but little difference of what material it is made, so long
as it can be made to perform its high and important function.
And, in my judgment, much of the confusion that has grown up


on this question arises from the fact that people fail to discriminate between the money function and the commodity value of
the material of which money is made.
Take gold, for instance, W h o doubts that it is the coining privilege, the money use of that metal, that gives it its commodity
value? Who can give any estimate of what gold would be worth
per ounce if it were not for its money use? Then, how absurd
to say that nothing but gold shall be coined as money unless its
commodity value in the dollar shall equal the commodity value
in the gold dollar, a value that has been given it by the special
coinage privilege that has been conferred upon it and denied to
other metals by governmental action.
Advocates of gold have induced the Government to destroy
the parity between the commodity value of gold and silver,
denying one the privilege accorded the other, and they now insist that silver shall never be coined again, because of the want
of parity thus destroyed. They are unwilling to undo the wrong
done to silver. Let us put it back where it was prior to the act
of 1873, by which it was demonetized, and then see if it will not
take care"of itself. The gentleman from New York [Mr. HENDRIX], in his speech the other day in favor of gold monometallism, spoke of the friends of silver going around like a lot of
" gibbering idiots " worshiping silver.
Did it ever occur to him that a " gibbering idiot " might worship gold as well as silver?
ML*. Speaker, I suppose it will not be denied, that as money is
the measure of values, the amount of money in the world regulates the money value of all the property in the world. That is,
money being the standard by which all property is valued, and
money being- the one thing desired and competed for by everybody, it is therefore more essentially affected by supply than
anything else. It therefore follows that the destruction of onehalf of the money of the world would destroy half the money
value of all property.
It is true the property would have the same inherent value
that it had before, but it would have but half the money value.
In other words, the property is the same, but the supply of
money having been cut off one-half, its value or purchasing
power is doubled. Under these conditions a man who had contracted to pay a certain sum of money before one-half the supply had been destroyed, would afterward have to pay twice the
amount in property or labor, in other words he would have to
make double the sacrifice that he contemplated when the debt
was contracted, or that he would have had to do had the volume
of money remained the same.
Gold and silver have been the metals mainly used for the coinage of money for many centuries. Certain ratios have been fixed
under the coinage acts of the various governments using these
metals which have not been exactly the same at all places and
all times. But the variations were very slight up to the time the
leading nations of the world began to discriminate against the
one and in favor of the other. The two metals worked well side
by side and performed well the functions assigned to them, until
certain classes, whose interest it was to make money scarce and
high and give it the largest purchasing power, began to conspire

to curtail the supply of money and to contend for the use of a
single metal as money.
Tiieir attacks were made sometimes on gold and sometimes on
silver; but it was always made on the metil that would, on account of the amount produced at the time, diminish the supply
most, until they settled down on gold as the money metal and
determined to destroy silver, so far as its future coinage was concerned. I will not attempt to go into the history of just how
they have done this; but suffice it to say that in 1816 silver was
demonetized in England; that is, it was denied the right of coinage, and in this country the same thing was done in 1873, and
has now been done in all the leading nations of the world. I will
pass over the methods by which it was accomplished in the
United States, but I do say wherever it has been done it was in
the interest of and at the dictation of a small minority in numbers of the people, and against the interest and over the protest
of four-fifths, if not nine-tenths, of the human race. It may be
asked how this could be done.
I answer that, while it was a small minority in numbers that
accomplished it, it was nevertheless a very powerful force by
reason of the great influence exercised by the moneyed classes in
legislation. They h ad their lobbies and their agents, who looked
well after their interest, and by many questionable means procured their ends, while the great masses of the people were following their avocations, unmindful of what was taking place until
after it was done. W e all know that there are a great many
people who think that only those who have plenty of money are
financiers, and that only financiers should be heeded as to what
the financial policy of governments should be.
Now, Mr. Speaker, when the people of free America found out
what had been done, they took a hand in the matter themselves
and demanded the restoration of silver to the position it occupied prior to 1873. This demand was stoutly resisted by what
is known as the money power, but finally resulted in the partial
restoration of silver in 1878 under what was known as the BlandAllison act. That act gave us limited coinage and was passed
over the Presidential veto.
The Bland-Allison law was a compromise measure and not satisfactory to either the friends or opponents of silver. The classes
to whom I have referred as the opponents of silver were dissatisfied that silver was recognized at all, and the masses were not
satisfied because silver was not fully restored and given the same
chance as a money metal that gold enjoyed. The gold monometallists began the efforts for the repeal of the law, but were unsuccessful, and in 1890 we found in each end of the Capitol a majority
of the representatives of the people in favor of the free and unlimited coinage of silver, and to checkmate them the Republican
majority in both branches coerced the silver Republicans into
voting for and passed what the last Democratic national convention denounced as the "cowardly makeshift" known as the
" Sherman law."
This law was passed by Republican votes—every Democrat in
both branches of Congress voting against it. It repealed the
Bland-Allison law of 1878 and provided for the purchasing of
4,500,000 ounces of silver per month at its market price and the

issuance of Treasury notes for the same, which added to our circulation from forty to fifty millions of dollars a year. Now, we are
called together in extra session and we find the country in the
midst of one of the most serious financial panics it ever experienced, and we are told that the Sherman law is responsible for
it, and that we must repeal that law without accompanying that
repeal with any other act save a declaration in the repealing act
which, in effect, declares that all the silver and paper money of
the Government outstanding, amounting to nearly $1,000,000,000,
shall be redeemable in gold at the pleasure of the holder, with
only ninety or one hundred millions of dollars of gold in the
Treasury to redeem with!
Mr. Speaker, I will not vote for the unconditional repeal of
the Sherman law [applause], and especially for the bill known as
the Wilson bill.
I never favored the Sherman law. I voted against it, and
standing right where I now stand. I spoke against it at the time
of its passage. I did not like it then and I do not like it now,
bat, sir, it is the only law on our statute books providing for m y
increase in the volume of our currency, and to remove that without substituting anything in its place would, in my opinion, put
us very much in the condition of the negro's cow. I saw a letter
here some time ago, written to some friends of mine by the negro man who was left in charge of the home in Mississippi, and
among other things he said:
The cow have been very sick; I give her some medicine, and she are now
well of the disease, but I think she will die of the remedy.

Mr. Speaker, I am as anxious as any member on this floor to
cure the country of the disease, but I do not intend to vote for a
remedy that will be worse th m the disease itself.
Mr. Speaker, I am no defender of or apologist for the Sherman
law. The Republicans who passed it over our protest have
abandoned it, and I am not going e to the rescue of their bastard
offspring. I never favored the p'urchase and storage of silver
bullion and I do not favor it now. I favor silver money, but, sir,
I do not believe for a moment that the Sherman law or our silver money is responsible for the distressing financial condition
with which we are confronted.
I have not the time to give in detail the causes which have,
in my opinion, brought us to this condition, but this depression
is worldwide and is affecting the people of all n xtions, more or less
where the Sherman law can have no effect. Besides this, in this
country we have been living for many years in the midst of great
governmental and individual extravagance. People have overtraded themselves, and pay-day has come. In my judgment one
of the most potent causes of this trouble lies in a fact that has
been stated here by almost every advocate of monometallism
who has spoken in this debits, that is, that 95 per cent of the
business of the country is done by checks, drafts, and credits, and they argue that for that reason we do not need much
I admit the fact that 9o per cent, or maybe more, of our business transactions are clone with drafts, checks, credits, and
clearing-house certificates; but I do say that that is a condition

which intensifies rather than mitigates such conditions as confront us now. Our whole financial machinery is overloaded with
credit. It is top-heavy, and whenever there comes the least distrust, panic and financial disaster is the logical consequence of our
present system.
Let me illustrate: At the beginning of this trouble the national, State, and savings banks in this country owed about $5,00 J,000,000, and they had in their vaults about $500,000,000; about
10 per cent of their liabilities. I can not imagine a condition more
fraught with danger of financial disaster. It is well enough
while everything moves on smoothly and everybody has confidence and the people are willing to let the banks keep their
money and lend it to others; but the very moment distrust sets
in, the banks begin to gather in all the money they can get to
meet runs made on them, by their depositors; distrust widens as
money grows scarcer, and people who have money on deposit get
uneasy lest the banks will not have it, and they begin to call for
their own and lock it up or hide it; and the conseq uence is that
the larger the proportion of credits to the amount of actual
money the greater the danger of financial disaster.
When the confidence that supplied the difference between the
$500,000,000 and^the $5,000,000,000 is shaken, panic and ruin is
the necessary result: and this, although used as an argument by
those who claim we have more money than is necessary, is, in
my opinion, one of the strongest points against their contention.
1 have tried this scheme of doing 95 per cent of my business on
a credit basis [laughter and applause]; but, Mr. Speaker, it does
not work well, for now my creditors are clamorous for me to do
something to restore confidence. [Great laughter.]
W e are told by the advocates of repeal that the cause of this
panic is the distrust of our money on account of the purchase and
use of silver.
It does seem to me that if there ever was a contention, the untruth of which is clearly demonstrated by the facts, this is one.
The very money you say the people are afraid of is the very
money they are hoarding. If they thought it bad money they
would be getting rid of it instead of hoarding it. The very money
they say the people are- afraid of is at a premium to-day over
gold. No; it is not a want of confidence in the money that is
making the trouble; but it is the fear the people have that they
can not get their money when they want it that is making the
In my opinion the opponents of silver, in their anxiety to have
the Sherman law unconditionally repealed, have manufactured
this panic. I do not charge that all of them intended it, or that
any of them intended to make it as bad as it is, but I do believe
that, by their predictions of the evils that were coming and
their advertisement of the drainage of gold, and the manipulation of some of them of the shipment of gold abroad, in the hope
of forcing the repeal of the Sherman law and the sale of gold
bonds, they have been the chief factors in destroying public
confidence in the financial condition of the country.
They have started a panic they can not control, and now they
are appealing to us to take such action as they say will restore
confidence and induce the people to put their money back into

the banks that they may lend it out at a larger rate of interest
than ever. I am squarely at issue with those gentlemen. Several of them who have spoken on the other side of this question
have contended that the cause of the trouble is we have too much
There may be too much for those who have money and fixed
incomes and money obligations due them, but not for nine-tenths
of the people. I also am at issue with those who claim that we
have even a sufficient supply of money. I would be willing today to submit that question to the voters of this country, feeling assured that at least three-fourths of them would vote with
me in favor of an increase of our money circulation. I do not
agree with my friend and colleague [Mr. CATCHINGS], who in
his very able speech against silver the other day contended that
our people in the South were, of all others, least interested in
a larger volume of currency. He argued that even a contraction
of the currency only affected people who owed long-time debts,
and that what indebtedness there was due by our Southern people was on contracts of only a few months duration.
My notion is that the people of my State are largely debtors,
and that these debts are made up of balances that have gone
over from year to year for many years back, and that the increased value of money, as compared with the value or prices to
be obtained for their products or their property is so great that
it is almost impossible for a person to make money to pay debts
with. If he will go to the records in our counties and see the
large number of mortgages given to foreign money lenders, when
they would not advance more than two-thirds or one-half the
supposed value of the lands when the money was loaned, he will
find that many of them have been foreclosed and that many others are ready to be foreclosed, and that the lands will not now
pay the mortgage debt. He will then see how appreciating
money is serving our people.
He is also mistaken in supposing that our people do not need
or want much money in their business transactions. The man
he spoke of, who carried his cotton to town and sold it to one
man and got an order with which he paid a debt, or got meat
from another, is not satisfied with that system. Our farmers
who raise cotton like to handle the actual cash, even if they
have to pay it out. It makes them feel better and richer ana restores confidence with them to have money, even temporarily.
I have heard gentlemen in this debate talk much of the evils of
an inflated currency, but I believe that more of wrong and misery
and ruin and cruel oppression has resulted from the contraction
of the supply of money than from any other cause, and I believe
the history of the world will bear me out in this statement.
What can be worse than a declining scale of prices? It drives
people out of business, causes bankruptcy, checks enterprise,
unsettles and destroys confidence, and either brings the world
to a standstill or turns it back in the march of progress. I have
heard a great deal said here about an k£ honest dollar." It is a
great u f a d " here for gentlemen to proclaim their devotion to
an honest dollar. I do not know when I have ever witnessed
such an exhibition of verbal honesty. [Laughter.] They are
very solicitous about an honest dollar for the creditor, but I do

not hear much about it for the debtor. If a man owes a debt
that he can pay in silver or gold you come along and take away
from him the right to pay it in silver by robbing silver of its
place as a coin metal and force him to pay it in gold, which is
made dear and harder to get by this action, and do this in the
name of an honest aoilar.
What a mockery! I am no advocate of anything dishonest,
but if legislation is to help one or the other, or one class at the
expense of the other, is it not better that the weaker, the
debtor class, should have the benefit of the legislation? I am,
at least, unwilling to restrain all progress for fear some one
will have an easier time in paying his obligations than those he
owed desired. My information is that the nation that is suffering the least to-day from the depression of the times is France,
which country has the largest per capita circulation of money of
any country in the world, and the largest amount of silver
With but little more than half the population of the United
States, with not one-tenth the area and nothing like the facility
for absorbing money that we have, they have twice as much
money as we have and twice as much silver. I am a believer in
a much larger circulating medium than we have, and I want to
warn gentlemen here to-day that in my judgment the people are
going to have it. They are willing to take it now in silver, but
if you deprive them of silver anql attempt to hold them down to
monometallism and the gold standard you may look out for the
Greenbackers, who have been so much derided by some of the
speakers in this debate. And I say now that I prefer an inflation
with greenback paper money to a contraction of the currency.
I am not an advocate of silver for silver's sake, but I am contending for more money than the gold standard will give, and I do
not think the free coinage of silver would give us too much—at
least not for a long time—and then when we get enough we can
Silver and gold have been for a long time money metals and
they have not afforded more money than the world needs in my
' T h e difficulty of procuring them is a good safeguard against
the business being overdone; but if those who are wanting us
confined to gold succeed now, in my judgment the people who
have been forced to do without silver will after awhile conclude
to do without metallic money at all. W e are told we must have a
dollar good in every part of the world. Now, Mr. Speaker, I never
needed a dollar outside of the United States in my life, and I
think most of our people are in the same condition. W e do not
propose to be impoverished in our money supply in order to accommodate people who want a dollar good somewhere else.
I am a great believer in our own country. This lovely land of
ours, so boundless in its resources, so salubrious in its climate,
so benign in its government, so incalculable in its strength, so
matchless in its people—all in all it is the pride and glory of its
own people, and the envy and admiration of the rest of the world.
With this view of our own America, how humiliating it is to
hear it argued here that we are dependent on other nations for
our financial system. I repudiate the idea. I believe we can

have and maintain a financial system for our people, independent of England and other nations.
W e do not expeot to terminate all relations with the outside
world by regulating our own financial system. W e will have
many things they will want and must have; we will send them
our wheat, cotton, corn, meat, and other products in exchange
for what we get from them if they will not take our money; and
I want to dissent right here from the position so much contended
for here, that we must so shape our legislation as to attract to
our shores foreign money.
Mr. Speaker, I have given this subject much consideration,
and my judgment is that people are better off who do business
on their own capital. If foreign money comes here it comes to
earn dividends and interest, and in times like these it runs
away and aggravates our trouble at the very time we need it
I want plenty of American money for Americans. [Applause.]
W h y is it that England insists on the single gold standard?
It is because England is the creditor nation of the world, and
she desires just what creditor classes generally desire—a dearer
money returned than she let out? Mr. Gladstone in a speech
of few months ago, spe-aking of the international monetary conference at Brussels, made use of the following language:
Why continue the conference? What necessity is there for England to
send any more commissioners? We do not intend to have anything but the
gold standard; we are the creditor people of the world, and we want money
to have the highest purchasing capacity, the largest quantity of which can
be put in the smallest bulk.

This states the whole case in a nutshell. Now, the trouble
with us is that New York and the East occupy to us just the same
position England occupies to the rest of the world". They constitute the creditor classes in this country, and they are interested just as Mr. Gladstone said England was, and want money
to have the highest purchasing and smallest debt-paying power.
I have had some requests from boards of trade and other commercial bodies to vote for the unconditional repeal of the Sherman bill, but I prefer to respond to what I believe to be the interest and wishes of the great body of the people who sent me
here to represent them. I came here determined to give my
vote for every practical measure that was offered me for increasing the currency.
I will vote, when I have a chance, for the repeal of the 10 per
cent tax on State banks. I will vote for the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, and for every other measure looking
to an increase of the currency except that of giving increased
facilities to national banks. I have never fought national banks.
I expected when I came here to vote for a liberal policy towards
them. I have thought they might perform a good office in our
financial system, but I have become convinced that they are a
dangerous power in this land and that they have determined to
control the finances and financial policy of this country in their
own interest, and I am against them, and I propose to light them.
If I had the time I could give many good reasons why I have arrived at this conclusion. I believe it is a power the people must
destroy or it will destroy the people's rights.

I think most of the great metropolitan papers are in their pay,
and I see many other signs of their corrupting power. I want
to give you an additional reason why some of the people who are
urging this repeal should not be gratified. It just proves what
I have said about the methods resorted to for the destruction of
silver. Now, this is the honest confession of Mr. WALKER, who
is a leading Republican light on finance, in his speech for repeal
on the floor of this House the other day, he said:

That the purchase clause of the silver law of July 14, 1890, is a menace to
the best economic conditions of our people and ought to be at once repealed
is practically unanimously agreed to by all. None see its uneconomic provisions or are more earnest to wipe them from the statute books than those
who framed it. They see them now no more clearly than they did on- the day
they framed it and secured its passage.

Gentlemen, that is an awful acknowledgment by the gentleman
from Massachusetts and a terrible arraignment of the Republican party. I have said a good many hard things about the party,
but I never said anything that was as hard as that. I never said
that they foresaw this ruin that has now overtaken us, that has
prostrated every industry of the country, in order to get rid of
silver. He gives the reason for its enactment. He goes on to
It was framed and passed to repeal the far worse Bland-Allison act of 1878,
and to break up and defeat the free-coinage forces of 1890; to be itself destroyed, after having done its work, which is already accomplished. It
now stands as the last fortress of error, in which are massed all the forces
of unsound financial theories. When its walls are leveled to the ground the
enemies of sound money, who were skillfully allured within its walls in 1890,
will be dispersed, never again to win another strategic position.

There, Mr. Speaker, is the opinion of the gentleman from
Massachusetts. The gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED] spoke
to-day in much more bitter and severe language than I am able
to command of finesse in legislation by which the people are unduly deprived of something that they esteem as worth something to them. Bat here one of the framers, promoters, and
advocates of the Sherman law says it was—
framed and passed to repeal the far worse Bland-Allison act of 1878, and to
break up and defeat the free-coinage forces of 1890.

In other words, the walls that protected silver were to be torn
down and the friends of silver will never again obtain a strategic
position in this country.
Gentlemen, there is a great deal of truth in it, and I admire
the candor of the gentleman who has the manhood to come up
here and tell how it was done. Those of you who think it is
your duty to help them tear down the walls upon us go with
them; but I tell you, gentlemen, for one I am not willing to do
it. [Applause.] I am a rebel by nature against oppression and
wrong. [Applause.] I do not propose to be driven or bullied
into doing that which, in my humble judgment, is a bad thing
for the great mass of people who have sent me here as their representative.
Mr. Speaker, I have made many speeches against the financial policy of the Republican party. I have made a great impression on my audience when I have denounced their policies
and practices. [Laughter.] I know of many of my Democratic friends over here who have achieved some of their
greatest victories in denouncing in thunder tones the " d e e p

damnation" of the " taking off "of silver by the Republican party.
I did the same thing, but I meant and believed in what I said.
Now, I find some of the loudest-mouthed Democratic orators—
some who always supposed they were real and devoted friends of
silver—making speeches here, the only logic of which is that
the best the Republicans could have done and the only wise thing
they could do was to demonetize silver; and if I occupied the position of a good many of my friends over here on this side of the
House, I should get up now and make an apology to the Republican party for having denounced it. [Laughter.]
There is a story that I once told in this House, but as the personnel of the House has changed a good deal since then, and as
the story seems very appropriate to this occasion, I may venture
to tell it again for the benefit of some of my friends here who
are in such thorough accord with the Republican financial policies now, although they have secured their own election and the
success of their party by denouncing those policies in the past.
Two of my constituents were candidates for the office of county
treasurer of Alcorn County. One of them had held the office
for two terms and the other was running against him in opposition to the third term. This man who was running for the office the first time followed his competitor all over that county
denouncing the proposition to elect a man to office for a third
The people indorsed him and he was elected in opposition to
the third-term candidate. He held the office himself for two
terms and the election was approaching. The time was coming
when he must get out of office himself or go back on the platform upon which he had been elected. The situation was serious. [Laughter.] He came to town one morning and said,
"Boys, have any of you seen anything of Beech Mitchell?"
Beech Mitchell was the man whom he had beaten. They told
him that Beech was in town. " W e l l , " said he, " I want to see
him; I feel that I owe him an apology. [Laughter.] Four years
ago I ran against him for the office of treasurer in this county
and I beat him on the third-term issue. I had heard this talk
about Grant and the third term and I thought the third-term
principle was all wrong. At that time I had never reflected very
much about the question, but since that time I have thought
about it a good deal, and when you come to apply that principle
to the office of county treasurer there is not a thing in the world
in it, and I thank God I have the manhood when I see I am
wrong to acknowledge it." [Great laughter.]
And now, my friends, those of you who received compliments
from the distinguished gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED]to-d )y,
and those who have been lauded for bravery and acumen in this
debate, everyone of you who has been going around the country
denouncing the Republican party for its financial policy and the
ruin and the wreck it wrought on the country by demonetizing
silver, you ought like my friend, when you find you are wrong,
have the courage to get up here and say you apologize humbly
to the Republican party. [Laughter and applause.] Mr. Speaker,
I never believed I was wrong, and I do not believe it yet, so I will
not apologize.
W e have heard a great deal of oral bimetallism from the anti326

silver men in this debate. They are going- to kill silver to get
bimetallism. When I see these gentlemen who say they are
advocates of bimetallism traveling along the same road with men
who admit that they are advocates of monometallism, I can not
help but believe that somebody is on the wrong road, and I think
that the friends of monometallism know just where they are
But we are told, Mr. Speaker, that we are going very wrong
about this matter because the President of the United States
has marked out a different programme for us, and all gentlemen who occupy a position antagonistic to the one I occupy
to-day are set down now as the friends of the Administration.
Why', Mr. Speaker, I would have to retract a great deal more
than any of these gentlemen who have retracted their views on
silver, if I were not a friend of the Administration. Why, I
helped to make the Administration. [Laughter.) I have made
more speeches and more good speeches [laughter] and bragged
more on the Administration! [Laughter.] Why, in a private
conversation between my friend PATTERSON and myself last
winter, after the election, it was mutually conceded by both of
us that we had done more to bring about his election than any
other two men in the country. [Laughter.]
Why, we are getting into a pretty position here, if these gentlemen's ideas are correct—if the men who favor the repeal are
the only friends of the Administration. Just think of it! The
gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED] and the gentleman from Iowa
[Mr. HENDERSON] and the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. BURROWS] the friends of the Administration, and all of us fellows
kept out in the cold! [Laughter.] Why, gentlemen, do you
know what it is that gave President Cleveland such a hold upon
the affections of the American people? It was the fact that he
had backbone and the courage of his convictions. [Applause.]
I would like to know what sort of an estimate he puts upon gentlemen here in the House who can give no other reason for their
change of front than that the Administration wants it. [Laughter and applause.]
Mr. Speaker, a conversation I had with the President one time,
in one of our long, pleasant interviews [laughter], when he said
to me that the Democrats were not like the Republicans: that
they could not be controlled and hurled as a mass, but the
Democrats were men of independent thought, and that was what
made a great party. [Loud applause.]
Why, gentlemen talk about breaking up, by reason of my exercising my convictions, the long-standing intimacy between the
President and myself. You can not do it. [Great laughter.]
My good friend from New York [Mr. CUMMINGS] got a little
off the other day and gave some of the Southern Democrats a
little lecture about having put Grover Cleveland on them, and
now " w e must take our medicine." W e put him on you as President, and then we elected ourselves here as members of Congress. [Applause and loud laughter.] I think, Mr. Speaker,
that we had better have another bill or two introduced h e r e one to restore a parity between the executive and legislative
branches of the Government [great laughter and applause], and
then another to restore a parity of backbone to some great men.

[Laughter.] No, sir; I know that I could pay the President no
greater compliment than to imitate him by doing-, in my official
capacity here as a Representative of a district in Mississippi,
'ust what the dictates of my conscience direct me to do. I know,
! am sure, that will meet his approval, and if it would not, gentlemen, I would have to take back many thousands of the good
things I have said about him. [Laughter and applause.]
The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. ALLEN. What a pity I have not an hour longer. [Great