An Analysis of the Issues Underlying Bryan’s “Cross of Gold” Speech

Submitted by: Submitted by

Views: 73

Words: 700

Pages: 3

Category: US History

Date Submitted: 10/10/2014 07:45 PM

Report This Essay

An Analysis of the Issues Underlying Bryan’s “Cross of Gold” Speech

William Jennings Bryan, who ran for office against William McKinley in 1896, often pled the Protestant plight of suffering at the hands of inimical Jewish interests. Referencing the crucifixion of Christ, he told supporters that Jews would “not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold” (Macri). However, realizing that he might need their vote, he tried to pacify the Jewish interest by claiming he was not against a race per se, but against simple avarice. This paper will examine the issues that lay at the heart of the “cross of gold” speech.

Bryan and his followers supported the silver standard—but not all Democrats were satisfied with Bryan’s attempt back silver. The debate over silver and gold was certainly a thorny with some politicians like Grover Cleveland backing a gold standard (with the excuse that it made trade with foreign nations easier), and others like Bryan supporting bimetallism (with the idea that having a monetary standard based on both gold and silver would be better for the economy). Not everyone in Bryan’s party agreed with him, however. For example, the National Democratic Party formed at this time, causing a split amongst those who opposed the Republican Party. The National Democratic Party “(more widely known as the Gold Democrats) had been founded by disenchanted Democrats as a means of preserving the ideals of Thomas Jefferson and Grover Cleveland… The NDP accused the Democratic Party of forsaking that tradition by nominating William Jennings Bryan” (Beito 555).

The split, however, played right into the hands of McKinley’s Republicans, who had Wall Street money to support their campaign. Here was an example of the real issue that lay at the heart of the election (and Bryan’s “cross of gold” speech): big business vs. the common man. McKinley represented the former. Bryan attempted to represent the latter—but because the latter failed to see him as their leader...