William Jennings Bryan: Boy Orator, Broken Man, and the "Evolution" of America's Public Philosophy

Home , 1890s, Cross of Gold speech

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE

provided by DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Great Plains Quarterly Great Plains Studies, Center for

May 2002

WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN: BOY ORATOR, BROKEN MAN, AND THE "EVOLUTION" OF AMERICA'S PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY

Troy A. Murphy University of Michigan-Dearborn

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly

Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons

Murphy, Troy A., "WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN: BOY ORATOR, BROKEN MAN, AND THE "EVOLUTION" OF AMERICA'S PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY" (2002). Great Plains Quarterly. 40. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly/40

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Quarterly by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in Great Plains Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 2 (Spring 2002). Published by the Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Copyright © 2000 Center for Great Plains Studies. Used by permission. WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN BOY ORATOR, BROKEN MAN, AND THE "EVOLUTION" OF AMERICA'S PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY

TROY A. MURPHY

He wanted our religion to rest on the basis of love and not on the basis of force; and, my friends, when we get down to the root of our government, and the root of our religion, we find that they alike rest on the doctrine of human brotherhood-"that all men are created equal."

- William Jennings Bryan, on Thomas Jefferson1

If you would be entirely accurate you should represent me as using a double-barreled shot- gun, firing one barrel at the elephant as he tries to enter the treasury and another at Darwinism-the monkey-as he tries to enter the schoolroom.

- William Jennings Bryan, on his own life's work2

Perhaps more than any other figure in Ameri- KEYWORDS: William Jennings Bryan, Cross of Gold speech, democracy, Populist myth, rhetoric, Scopes can history, William Jennings Bryan is remem- Trial bered for specific and identifiable moments of rhetorical action: the much-revered 1896 "Cross of Gold" speech and the much-maligned Troy A. Murphy is Assistant Professor ofCommunication Scopes "monkey trial" of 1925. The dissonance at the University of Michigan-Dearborn. He received his between these two events, at least with re- Ph.D. in Rhetoric and Public Argument from the University of Pittsburgh in 1998. He is the recipient of the spect to the ways in which political and rhe- Gerald R. Miller Outstanding Dissertation Award and torical history has traditionally recorded them, author of "American Political Mythology and the Senate could not be more striking. Bryan, the "Boy Filibuster" in Argumentation and Advocacy. Orator," was, at thirty-six years, the youngest and most left-leaning candidate ever to re- ceive a major party nomination for the US [GPQ 22 (Spring 2002): 83-98] presidency. He is often regarded as the founder 84 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002

presidential campaigning, and perhaps presidential governance, by making both candidate and message more immediately accessible to the American public. For Bryan's many admirers, he was a man ahead of his time. As Myron Phillips put it simply, Bryan was born "thirty years too soon."5 Yet his performance as a witness in Tennes- see w. Scopes, the so-called trial of the century, engenders a much different perception of Wil- liam Jennings Bryan. When, in the final scene of lnherit the Wind,Spencer Tracy laments that "there was much greatness in the man," view- ers of the film version of the Scopes trial are left wondering what that greatness might have been or how a fall from grace might have occurred so dramatically. According to both popular lore and most standard histories of the trial, Bryan revealed himself as a woefully ignorant leader of small-minded fundamen- talism, a man whose rigid interpretation of the Bible exemplified a backward defense of a long-past ethic. H. L. Mencken referred to Bryan variously as a "zany," a "mountebank," "a peasant come home to the barnyard," and a FIG. 1. The Honorable William Jennings Bryan, 1890. Courtesy of the Nebraska State Historical "poor clod . . . deluded by a childish theol- Society. ~g~."~The Nation described Bryan's performance as that of a "pitifully ignorant old man."' Taking his cue from Paul Anderson's widely circulated reporting on the trial, which proclaimed that "Bryan was broken, if ever a man of the modern Democratic party if not much was broken," rhetorical scholar Michael of modern liberalism. The causes for which Hostetler describes the various characteriza- the former Nebraska congressman and three- tions of Bryan's ostensible demise in the Scopes time presidential candidate fought anticipated trial as the "broken man narrative."$ This and buttressed many of the Progressive Era's narrative not only interrogates Bryan's intel- largest accomplishments. Years after Bryan's ligence on the witness stand and his funda- death, Herbert Hoover would note his legacy mentalist Christian beliefs, but is premised on with some bitterness, saying that Franklin D. an underlying assumption that his anti-evolu- Roosevelt's New Deal was merely "Bryanism tion crusade was contrary if not antithetical under new words and methods."j Bryan would to the progressive causes he so famously cham- make a distinctively rhetorical mark as well. pioned for decades. In the influential Ameri- Michael Kazin calls him the first "celebrity can Political Tradition, Richard Hofstadter ends politician," a man whose oratorical skills his scathing critique of Bryan with a disdain- earned him a massive and loyal following of ful view as simple as Phillips's was admiring, supporters willing to travel miles just to hear saying that Bryan "had long outlived his time."9 him speak.4 His barnstorming campaign prac- The popular images of William Jennings tices and popular rhetoric changed the face of Bryan that resonate throughout history are at WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 85 times as contradictory yet oddly informative saliency of which is dependent on the politi- as applying the adjective "great" to the noun cal and rhetorical context in which democratic "commoner" to describe him. Certainly, the claims are made. I conclude the analysis of labels "boy orator" and "broken man" are cari- Bryan's democracy by suggesting how the ide- catures of Bryan and his career in public life. als he articulated continue to resonate today, Yet history nonetheless has been inclined to albeit in much different political and rhetori- distinguish between a "good" and a "bad" cal forms. Before illustrating how Bryan at- Bryan, or an "early" and a "late" one.1° Indeed, tempts to define the preferred character of the ostensible transformation from the silver- democracy in both the 1896 campaign and tongued "Boy Orator of the Platte" to the dis- the Scopes trial of 1925, I begin by noting the credited and ignorant "broken man" has importance of viewing democracy as an inher- enough holding power to warrant an exami- ently rhetorical enterprise. nation of its causes and a rhetorical assessment of the events most central to its constitution. DEMOCRACY,RHETORIC, AND I argue here that at the heart of the trans- AMERICA'SPUBLIC PHILOSOPHY formation lies a consistency. By examining the "Cross of Gold" speech delivered at the 1896 Democracy is more than a form of govern- Democratic convention and the "On Evolu- ment. It is also an idea. In his cultural history tion" speech prepared and widely distributed of American democracy, Robert Weibe traces after the Scopes trial, I mean to highlight the the historical ambiguity associated with the ways in which these texts rhetorically create a meaning of democracy and how it has oper- consonant vision of democracy that is ated as an idea throughout American history. grounded in the republican ideals of agrarian Calling it "America's most distinguishing char- community." Bryan's populist rhetoric con- acteristic," Weibe wryly comments that sistently defends a democratic ideal, expressed "Americans act as if democracy were too im- in part through the nobility of "plain people" portant to define."14 The absence of a consen- and the moral fabric of agrarian communities, sus definition is certainly not for lack of trying. against the attacks of a rapidly changing world Virtually every major political figure and so- and the "force" of a supposed elite, whether cial movement has in some way attempted to those elites are the bankers of 1896 or the utilize the ideals associated with the term to scientists of 1925. their rhetorical advantage. As an idea marked Highlighting a measure of consistency in by such rhetorical elasticity, the ambiguous Bryan's rhetorical battles against both "gold" and malleable meaning of democracy is per- and "evolution" is not intended simply to re- haps best understood by the discourse used to vise or reclaim a reputation destroyed by what define it within specific historical contexts. Edward Larson calls the "legend" of the Scopes Historian Russell Hanson concurs on the trial.'' Rather, the consistency in Bryan's vi- centrality of discourse in understanding de- sion of democracy illustrates an enduring strain mocracy, arguing that American democracy is of democratic discourse that yearns for and itself a rhetorical tradition. While admitting attempts to defend a communal and moral di- that "to speak of liberal democracy as a rhe- mension of democracy against a "public phi- torical tradition may seem a bit odd," Hanson losophy" of political liberalism that emphasizes insists that understanding American democ- individual rights and "brackets" such issues racy by the discourse used to define it provides from public discussi~n.'~Bryan's fundamen- a historical specificity lacking in other forms talism or anti-evolution crusade need not be of analysis. He maintains that most Ameri- defended today in order to understand how cans think of democracy as either a specific the impetus to defend those beliefs springs from set of institutional arrangements, or, more a particular understanding of democracy, the abstractly, as that which is somehow superior 86 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002 to communism or socialism. However, Hanson undergone "perpetual transformation" since argues "that way of construing it has the sin- it was first introduced into American rhetori- gular disadvantage of reducing liberal democ- cal culture, continuously serving as a "discur- racy to a set of ideas that seem to exist apart sive foundation of American public life."'" from or independently of the political institu- Similarly, democracy may be understood as tions and practices they inform."I5 a historically contingent rhetorical construct There is no ahistorical, definitive, or ety- which is both creator and creation of a "public mological standard capable of determining the philosophy," a foundational set of understand- proper meaning of democracy across histori- ings Michael Sandel describes as "the often cal contexts. One need not revisit the founda- unreflective background to our political dis- tional debates between Federalists and course and pursuit^."'^ The enacted rituals Antifederalists to appreciate how America's most and rhetorical events operating in the public sacred ideal was once one of its most scorned arena serve as an intuitive point of reference ideas, As a rhetorical construct, democracy is for individuals to make sense of the world, as historically contingent; its meaning, continu- well as a source from which a nation might ously mediated through language and thus collectively form its identity. achieving explanatory power in the minds of Seeking to understand the meanings of de- citizens, is always dependent on the manner mocracy within specific historical periods thus in which it is articulated and the context in highlights both the historical legacies and which it operates. contemporary continuities that guide the Rhetorical inquiry is uniquely situated to meaning and manner of our self-governance. shed light on how the meanings of democracy Thus, we might view democracy as a type of are constituted, change over time, and become rhetorical collage, a mythological construct naturalized to the point where they are taken whose symbolic meanings "provide a way to for granted, becoming the "common sense" understand such abstract political entities as a that directs action within a given historical nation and a means (indeed the compulsion) moment. Tracing the ways in which politi- of identifying with them."20Like a collage, the cally sacred ideals such as democracy are in- most salient features of which change with voked in public argumentation across time and each successive layer, the meaning of democ- in different contexts is consistent with Michael racy is imbued with layers of history, but is McGee's influential theory of the ideograph.16 continually constructed anew to fit the spe- McGee posits that the link between rhetoric cific context in which public arguments are and ideology-between situated, practical dis- being advanced. course and the structures or systems in which In the sections that follow, I highlight how they take on meaning-is best understood William Jennings Bryan attempts to create and through examination of culture-specific and define an understanding of democracy appro- collectively honored ideographs. "Liberty," priate to the rhetorical contests and contexts "freedom of speech," and "equality" are ex- in which he engaged. In the period from the amples of such abstract, normative terms that mid-1890s to the end of his life only days after contain and express a particular ideological the Scopes trial concluded, few Americans commitment. McGee describes ideographs as were better known-and even fewer were more ordinary-language terms "pregnant" with ide- often heard-than Bryan.ll Between his 1896 ology .I7 In their work Crafting Equality, Celeste campaign for the presidency and his role in Condit and John Lucaites demonstrate the the 1925 Scopes trial, Bryan would become ways in which the commonsense meaning of the "most important figure in the reform poli- the ideograph "equality" has been "crafted" tics of Ameri~a."~~He would twice more run through time and by a multiplicity of voices. for the highest office and continue to speak They describe how the term "equality" has out in favor of such issues as woman's suffrage, WILLIAM IENNINGS BRYAN 87 a federal income tax, state initiative and ref- erendum, a department of labor, and campaign fund disclosure. In addition to his commanding role in politics, Bryan was one of the most recognized and popular figures in a series of adult education and community programs known as circuit chautauqua. In his history of the circuit chautauqua and its adult education predeces- sors such as the lyceum, John Tapia characterizes chautauquas during this era as part education, part entertainment, and part ve- hicle for social change.13 Leroy Ashby concurs on the importance of the chautauqua, describ- ing it as the "centerpiece of American mass culture from the 1890s into the 1920~."~~ Chautauquas, which enjoyed the most popularity throughout the rural Midwest, provided a forum in which speakers such as Bryan commonly invoked the value of rural life and the ideal character of agrarian c~mrnunities.~~ In both politics and mass culture, Bryan loomed on the national stage like no other public figure. William Allen White argues that FIG. 2. WilliamJenningsBryan, c. 1896. Courtesy Bryan "influenced the thinking of the Ameri- of Nebraska State Historical Society. can people more profoundly than any other man of his generation."16 His views, perhaps as important as any figure of the era, begin to map the rhetorical terrain of American democracy. I begin the analysis with his most government? Throughout most of the nation's recognized speech and the most heralded of history, the United States recognized both his campaigns, the "Cross of Gold" and the gold and silver, the latter metal backing the 1896 pesidential campaign. dollar at a ratio of "sixteen to one," meaning sixteen times as many grains of silver as gold THECRIME OF '73: CRUCIFYINGMAN- were required to constitute an equivalent dol- KIND ON A "CROSSOF GOLD" lar. The Coinage Act of 1873 officially demon-

No issue received more popular- - and politi- etized silver, placing the nation on the single cal attention in the era immediately preced- gold standard. The "Crime of '73," as it being the rise of the populist movement and came known to populist reformers, quickly Bryan's first candidacy for president in 1896 achieved symbolic status as a conspiratorial than the "money question." Roughly speak- act by the monied classes, acting through the ing, the question revolved around both the legislatures, to continue a contracted money quantity and the basis of the nation's money supply, thereby effectively weighing the supply: would the US government base its economy against those who borrowed money monetary system on a standard of gold, a and in favor of the capital-holding class. Sta- combination of gold and silver (bimetallism), bilizing the economy of a rapidly growing na- or paper dollars backed by the credit of the tion and achieving a "sound" dollar was of 88 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002 course not as simple as many populist reform. By broadening the definition of "business- ers believed. By the time of Bryan's campaign, man" to include the "plain people" of the coun- various legislative actions amended and modi- try, Bryan expands the principle of equality to fied the original act of 1873, but the gold stan- the principles of democracy and democratic dard as a "crime" remained salient to populist decision making. While he states that "we say reformers. The symbolism of gold versus silver not one word against those who live upon the fit quite neatly within a populist framework Atlantic coast," the rhetorical division, the that Richard Hofstadter describes as "social social dualism between the robbers and the dualism," a persistent division between "two robbed, the monied interests and the hard nations," rhetorically drawn in various ways working-laborers, the Eastern cities and the but often succinctly understood as a distinc- farms and prairies of the West, is clear through- tion between the "robbers" and the out Bryan's initial development of the silver Bryan's knowledge of monetary policy was issue.32 perhaps limited. He once proclaimed that he In his recent analysis of the "Cross of Gold" was for free silver because the people of Ne- speech, William Harpine argues that the con- braska were for it and that he would look up sistent and often stark divisions drawn by Bryan the arguments later. More important to Bryan throughout the address are best understood was his certainty that larger issues revolved rhetorically as a radical form of "p~larization."~~ around the money question. In his view, the In this polarizing rhetoric, the gold standard money issue was about democracy and the right serves as a "flag issue," a concrete way of sym- of people to govern themselves. bolizing more widespread divisions through Bryan took the stage in Chicago in defense the creation of a common and identifiable of an honored principle, a cause he described enemy. While often appropriate for solidify- as nothing less than the "cause of h~manity."~~ ing support among like-minded constituen- Suggesting that the contest at issue in the con- cies, as in social movements, Harpine vention and campaign cannot be reduced to maintains Bryan's confrontational use of the individuals, Bryan claims he is merely acting gold standard polarized potential voters and under "binding and solemn instructions" of contributed to-his electoral defeat.34 those for whom he speaks, the "plain people" While it is accurate to suggest that Bryan of the country.29Their judgment on the silver uses the gold standard as a flag issue in oppo- issue has already been rendered, and they, sition to bankers and organized wealth of the being "equals before the law," have come to East, it is equally important to recognize and say to the gold delegates whose supposed ex- appreciate that the divisions he created were perience in the world of business afforded them based upon and symbolic of his vision of equal- a greater understanding of business issues, you ity and American democracy. That is, Bryan's "have made the definition of business man too opposition to the gold standard and its sup- limited in its application."30In a series of rhe- porters stemmed from his belief that both were torical divisions, Bryan speaks for the "broader abjectly undemocratic. In speaking for the class of business man," contrasting the em- "hardy pioneers" of the West who are as de- ployed and the employer, the country lawyer serving as anyone to be heard in a democracy, and corporate counsel, the farmer who "goes Bryan establishes his constituency's position forth in the morning and toils all day" and the as both defensive and democratic. He states: "man who goes upon the board of trade and "[Wle do not come as aggressors. Our war is bets upon the price of grain." He maintains not a war of conquest; we are fighting in the that the man working in the mines is as much defense of our homes, our families, and poster- a businessman as the "few financial magnates ity." This defense has been democratically who, in a back room, corner the money of the waged before, yet the plain people's "petitions ~orld."~' have been scored," "entreaties have been dis- WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 89 regarded," and their begging has been mocked. more often quoted passages of the address, Having established these people's own demo- Bryan states: "You come to us and tell us that cratic legitimacy by illustrating that they have the great cities are in favor of the gold stan- indeed followed democratic procedures, Bryan dard; we reply that the great cities rest upon can more authoritatively demand their voices our broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your be heard: "[Wle beg no longer, we entreat no cities and leave our farms, and your cities will more; we petition no more. We defy them."35 spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our In turning directly to the role of monetary farms and the grass will grow in the streets of policy in democracy, Bryan makes explicit the every city in the country."39 relationship between the money question and Bryan returns to the claim that the issue is the principles of democracy by essentially as great as any the country has seen, equating equating the two. Intimating the historically the battle over the money issue with the very contingent nature of democracy, he states: revolution that created America: "Our ances- "[Tlhe principles upon which Democracy rests tors, when but three millions in number, had are as everlasting as the hills, but . . . they the courage to declare their political indepen- must be applied to new conditions as they dence of every other nation; shall we, their arise."j6 The newest condition is the right to descendants, when we have grown to seventy coin and issue money, which Bryan and his millions, declare that we are less independent followers believe is a function of government. than our forefather^?"^^ He assures his audi- Again, Bryan makes the contrast clear by hon- ence that this will "never be the verdict of our oring sacred traditions and ideals of American people" and concludes with the phrase that democracy: "Those who are opposed to this gave the address its name: "Having behind us proposition tell us that the issue of paper the producing masses of the nation and the money is a function of the bank, and that the world, supported by the commercial interests, Government ought to go out of the banking the laboring interests, and toilers everywhere, business. I stand with Jefferson rather than we will answer their demand for a gold stan- with them, and tell them, as he did, that the dard by saying to them: You shall not press issue of money is a function of government, down upon the brow of labor this crown of and that the banks ought to go out of the thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a governing business."37 cross of gold."41 Standing with Jefferson and on the side of Several themes inherent to Bryan's vision the sovereign democratic citizens of the West of democracy emerge from the "Cross of Gold" and Great Plains, with the "struggling masses" speech. First, and perhaps most obviously, rather than the "idle holders of capital," Bryan Bryan consistently invokes a social dualism, a asks his audience where the Democratic party rhetorical division which forms the founda- shall stand. In a phrase foreshadowing debates tion of populism. According to Kazin, popu- of modern politics, Bryan states that one party lism should be viewed as "a language whose believes if you "make the well-to-do prosper- speakers conceive of ordinary people as a noble ous, their prosperity will leak through on those assemblage not bounded narrowly by class, below. The Democratic idea, however, has [who] view their elite opponents as self-serv- been that if you legislate to make the masses ing and undemocratic, and [who] seek to mo- prosperous, their prosperity will find its way bilize the former against the latter."42 A gold up through every class which rests upon standard does not serve the interests of the them."3KBryan is not simply making a distinc- plain people, the foundation of democracy, tion between the political parties. He is also and is therefore itself situated as undemocratic maintaining that America itself "rests" on the and elitist. If Bryan engaged in polarization, often less prosperous masses, which Bryan sees he sought to draw a sharp distinction not sim- in particularly agrarian form. In one of the ply between the rich and poor, East and West, 90 GREAT PLAlNS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002 elite and "plain," but, more importantly, be- defining the 1896 campaign around the money tween those who believed in democracy and question, saying it crowded out many other those who did not. issues contained in the platform of the Popu- Second, Bryan grounds his view of democ- list and Democratic parties.44 Issues such as racy in what many scholars have called the the direct election of senators or government "agrarian myth." This myth, often linked with ownership of railroads might have more le- Jeffersonian ideals, holds the simple yeoman gitimately alleviated the imbalance of power farmer as the avatar of effective self-gover- at the heart of the agrarian revolt. From a nance and democratic virtue and the small rhetorical perspective, however, free silver is towns and farming communities throughout not simply a single issue upon which voters the land as the bedrock of democracy. In his might analyze the positions of candidates and book on the 1896 presidential campaign, his- render judgment in the campaign. Rather, the torian and Bryan biographer Paul Glad argues silver issue becomes symbolic of democratic that the "agrarian mythn was more than a decision making and self-governance, a rhe- theme Bryan employed in the convention torical construct seeking to explain and de- speech, it was the basis of the entire cam- fine a larger reality about the importance and paign. Glad maintains that in the contest be- proper character of American democracy. tween Bryan and McKinley, each attempted Bryan said throughout the campaign that solv- to define democracy through competing myths: ing the money question was necessary before the "agrarian myth," represented by Bryan, and subsequent reforms were possible; this was true the "myth of the self-made man," represented not only with respect to alleviating the power by McKinley. Glad makes clear that McKinley of monied interests in the development and joined Bryan on the rhetorical terrain of de- framing of future reforms, but also because citi- fining democracy, but asserted a different ideal: zens who felt their voices were excluded "[McKinley] quarreled not with the abstract needed to establish themselves as a part of the idea of democracy but with Bryan's agrarian larger governing body. conception of it. As committed to the myth of Eighty percent of eligible voters made it to the self-made man as Bryan was to the agrar- the polls on 3 November 1896; the majority of ian myth, McKinley did not question the mo- them voted for William McKinley. Bryan's rality that came with industrial expansion. . . . popular vote of just under 6.5 million (to Industry built their morality around Darwin- ~c~inle~'s7 million) was more than respect- ian concepts; and Social Darwinism as the new able in light of the powers of the Republican system of values came to be called, seemed machine and a staggering disparity in cam- plausible to those who had faith in the myth paign finances. (While figures vary widely, of the self-made man."43 This "new system of contributions McKinley received from J. P. values" begins to emerge as a public philoso- Morgan and Standard Oil alone surpassed the phy that forms an often "unreflective back- total fund of the Democratic party.)45 The ground" to questions concerning industrial legacy of Bryan's campaign, however, would expansion, helping to frame both the ques- be more lasting. As Kazin writes: "Despite the tion of money and the question of democracy outcome, the conviction at the heart of Bryan's during the era. candidacy lived on in more than a half-cen- Finally, these themes are emblematic of the tury of public rhetoric and action."46 While larger mythology of democracy, a mythology the money issue itself faded, its symbolic reso- that is simultaneously historical and contem- nance did not: "[Tlhe idea that the federal porary, elastic enough to capture various ide- government should routinely take the side of als in various historical periods, and sacred to wage earners and other citizens of modest the meanings and identity of a particular cul- means grew in popularity and was the basis for ture. Many questioned Bryan's insistence on the domestic politics of liberal presidents from WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 91

Woodrow Wilson to Lyndon J~hnson."~~Thus, as Walter Lippmann remarked on a crisis of while Bryan's advocacy of free silver may not democracy and the loss of an American "pub- have secured him the presidency, his populist lic" brought on by modern influences, espe- vision of democracy, an essential element un- cially the mass media. Lippmann's Public Opinion, derlying the entire campaign, had a funda- published in 1922, argued that the nature of mental impact on the understanding of American democracy had fundamentally democracy that moved into the turn of the changed since its inception. Given the com- century and the progressive movement. plexity of the modern world, he contended the average American was in many ways no The "Cross of Gold" speech continues to longer cpalified to make judgments on the hold a hallowed place in the annals of rhe- important matters of the day. Lippmann re- torical history, securing Bryan's place as one jected the "democratic fallacy" of self-rule and of America's great orators in the tradition of argued that government should be directed what Kathleen Hall Jamieson calls the "old primarily by a more elite class of experts. stylen of rhetorical eloquence.48 Of course, Lippman would continue to question compe- Bryan would not leave his mark only with such tency in his sequel volume, The Phantom Pub- a rousing success. If the "new system of val- lic, where he wrote: "The 'omni-competent ues" of Social Darwinism was at the heart of citizen' capable of effectively acting within a the debate between Bryan and McKinley, it modern democracy is a 'false ideal,' it is unat- would only become further solidified as a com- tainable. The pursuit of it is mi~leading."~'In mon background for politics in the proceed- the context of a modern, urban, and industrial ing twenty years. Bryan continued to contest society, he summed up his view of the citizen: the view, eventually taking his battle to the "The number of mice and monkeys known to place he saw as the first line of defense: have been deceived in laboratories is surpassed America's public schools. only by the hopeful citizens of a dem~cracy."~' Lippmann advocated bureaus of experts who THECRIME OF '22: CRUCIFYINGMAN- would organize issues into more manageable KIND ON "GUESSESTHAT ENCOURAGE frames, allowing for a limited form of citizen GODLESSNESS" input that would more readily approximate what citizens were actually capable of provid- If the dualism between the plain people ing. and the educated elite was a staple of the popu- If Lippmann was the most noted for his list language Bryan employed throughout his analytical insight, he was certainly not the 1896 campaign, a potential irony finds the only one questioning the efficacy of popular first decade of the twentieth century bringing democracy during this period. Out of this con- more and more Americans into both high fusion-indeed, arguably because of this con- schools and land-grant universities across the fusion-progressive leaders began to take a country as the progressive movement began more national orientation to the practice of to take shape. Citing a "phenomenal expan- democracy and democratic reform. Many sion" in public education, Eric Goldman re- progressives enveloped populist beliefs in wide- ports that even a college degree was "nothing spread popular democracy, but they attempted spectacular for the child of a moderately suc- to model democratic governance on the basis cessful farmer" by the end of the decade.49Such of a unified, national community whose inter- enlightenment could not, however, stave off ests were best determined through the objec- the anxiety and confusion many Americans tivity povided by a scientific elite. James felt toward rapidly advancing technology and Morone characterizes the development as two the increasingly grand scale of modern indus- competing forms of progressivism. The first trial life. By the 1920s, influential writers such group, represented in part by Lippmann, em- 92 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002 braced the great scale of twentieth-century istically American struggle between individual America and spoke for a constituency of a liberty and majoritarian democracy, and cast single, national people. The alternative group, it in the timeless debate over science and reli- representing a more traditionally "populist" gi~n."~'Yet Larson makes clear that the "leg- vision espoused by Bryan, believed "democ- end" of the Scopes trial that resonates through racy resided in the 'collective will' of small history emphasizes the debate almost to the communities across Ameri~a."~~ exclusion of the struggle. That is, from lnherit While often looking "wistfully to Jefferson" the Wind to many of the most influential his- and invoking republican ideals associated with tories of the case, Bryan is portrayed as almost the agrarian myth, Morone argues that pro- exclusively concerned with fundamentalist gressive practices increasingly became closer beliefs, a literal interpretation of the Bible, to Lippmann than to Jefferson. He writes, and antagonistic toward those who would ven- "[Tlhe Progressives pushed democracy back ture to teach evolution in the public schools. on the people, then seemingly snatched it The historical narrative of the "broken man" safely away to the expert."53In 1925 the issue dramatizes the "fierce ignorance" of the mil- of teaching the theory of evolution in public lions, with Bryan as their exalted hero and the schools stood at the center of this debate con- epitome of such ignorance, yet the issue of cerning the scope of democracy and the proper democracy is scarcely a part of the standard role of expertise in an increasingly complex history of the trial. world. Aside from famed writers such as H. L. While Bryan no doubt relished the oppor- Mencken who were unapologetic in their dis- tunity to engage in a debate on the merits of missal of democracy, many progressives found evolution, it is important to frame his advo- the distinctions precarious to manage. In a cacy within an appropriate context. First, letter to friend and famed jurist Learned Hand Bryan saw the Scopes case as primarily about about the Scopes trial, Lippmann wrote: "I the right of common people to decide demo- want your advice badly on the Tennessee case." cratically what ought to be taught in their Citing others who believed the "constitution- schools. Leading up to the trial, he commented ality of the law ought not be attacked" be- on the case: "I have been explaining this case cause "such foolishness ought to be within the to audiences. It is the easiest case to explain I province of the legislature," Lippmann offered have ever found. The right of the people speak- his own views on whether and when democ- ing through the legislature, to control the racy ought to be followed: "Now I know this is schools which they create and support is the progressive dogma as we all accepted it in the real issue as I see it." To Bryan, the issue was days when the courts were knocking out the again about democracy. As to the question of laws we wanted." Perhaps speaking for many, evolution itself, he remarked: "I am not so Lippmann continued, "My own mind has been sure that it is involved."56 getting steadily antidemocratic: the size of the Additionally, Bryan, almost as devout a electorate, the impossibility of educating it Jeffersonian as he was Christian, did not, as sufficiently, the fierce ignorance of these mil- commonly assumed, seek to break down lions of semi-literate priestridden and Jefferson's wall between church and state. In- parsonridden people have got me to the point deed, Bryan argued for neutrality on the mat- where I want to confine the actions of majori- ter of teaching evolution versus creationism, ties."54 maintaining that the Darwinian "hypothesisn In his Pulitzer Prize-winning history of the simply ought to be taught as theory and not Scopes trial, Edward Larson explains the case fact. He did not advocate teaching Genesis in democratic terms. He argues, "[Tlhe issues within the schools. As Bryan recognized, the raised by the Scopes trial and legend endure biblical account could not be defended in the precisely because they embody the character- schools. Thus, Bryan's position in the Scopes WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 93

matter was to him a familiar one of defending defense witnesses or to give his own closing the common people and their way of life from argument^.^^ the forces of an outside elite. Bryan put it sim- Bryan was defeated and legally outmaneu- ply: "If the Bible cannot be defended in those vered in Scopes, but the popular account of schools it should not be atta~ked."~' his being destroyed and broken is question- Finally, Bryan was not the intolerant zealot able at best. As Lawrence W. Levine argues, he was portrayed as in Inherit the Wind and in "If Bryan left the Scopes Trial 'an exhausted other histories of the case. When the issue of and broken man' . . . he did a masterly job of anti-evolution statutes first arose, Bryan origi- concealing it during the five days of life re- nally withheld his support of the Butler Act, maining to him."62 What Bryan did do during the law at issue in Scopes, because he thought those remaining days was to prepare a speech there should not be any penalty associated that he would reportedly consider his finest with teaching evolution. He did eventually and that was intended to become the center- support the Butler Act, but agreed with most, piece of his continuing battle against the including Governor Austin Peay who signed theory of evolution. Published after his death it into law, that it would never be enforced. by the New York Times and countless other Indeed, Bryan consistently disagreed with any newspapers across the nation, the speech was penalty and offered to personally pay the fine read by millions as Bryan's response to the John Scopes incurred in the Scopes trial.58 Scopes tria1.'j3 Known as "On Evolution," it While history has been prone to minimize outlines his objections to the teaching of evo- the democratic context in which the Scopes lution and provides insights into how, as the trial occurred, rhetorical studies on the trial late Stephen Jay Gould maintained, Bryan have traditionally focused on the distinction "viewed his last battle against evolution as an between Bryan's preferred mode of rhetorical extension of the populist thinking that had eloquence and the constraints placed upon inspired his life's his advocacy by the requisites of the legal Arguing against the broken man narrative, forum.59Even though Bryan was once trained rhetorical scholar Michael J. Hostetler refers as a lawyer, Kathleen Hall Jamieson illustrates to this "undelivered oration" as a "complex how the polished orator of political speeches rhetorical composition, more the work of an and chautauqua addresses was ill prepared artful orator still in his prime than that of a for his exchange with Darrow. Jamieson ana- sexagenarian in the throes of premature senil- lyzes the transcripts of the trial and concludes it^."^^ In a series of five indictments, Bryan that Bryan's "rhetorical demise" stemmed from outlines his objections to the theory of evolu- his own self-definition as defender of the Bible tion and the negative consequences resulting and from his agreement to defend his beliefs from its being taught in the public schools. In in a legal forum that by definition empha- what Hostetler calls an "evolution of evolu- sized Darrow's strengths as a lawyer and tion," Bryan argues that the theory of evolu- Bryan's weaknesses as an orator.60 There is tion represents a "moral digression." He little doubt that Bryan was outwitted, de- outlines how evolution is degrading to human feated, and embarrassed on the stand. Yet beings, contradicts religious beliefs and cor- Bryan eagerly anticipated his chance to de- rupts individual lives, turns the most educated fine the case in his closing arguments, a rhe- citizens against society's pressing problems and torical form more amenable to his talents. It efforts toward public reform, and eventually was only when Scopes pleaded guilty to the "lays the blame for World War I itself at charge and the defense refused their right of Darwinism's door."66 closing statement that the case was subse- Bryan's understanding of evolution is deeply quently closed and Bryan was left hanging flawed, and undoubtedly more so when his without an opportunity either to question beliefs are divorced from their proper histori- 94 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002 cal context.67 Yet merely refuting the errors democratic society. In doing so, he relies on inherent in Bryan's approach to Darwin's familiar dualities, contrasting the ordinary and theory of evolution does little to achieve an the expert, the community and the individual, understanding of Bryan that extends beyond shared values and scientific hypothesis. The history's already prevalent proclamation of his nobility of the ordinary man, rural virtue, and ignorance. To understand Bryan and how his the values of an agrarian community had al- vision of democracy is emblematic of an en- ways been an essential part of the agrarian during strain of democratic discourse, Bryan's myth but had become increasingly lost in the battle against evolution may be understood context of the early twentieth century and the rhetorically as similar to his fight against the nationalization of the progressive ideal. gold standard. Like the elephant entering the While one can certainly question Bryan's treasury, the monkey entering the schoolroom equating all of Darwinism and evolutionary becomes a symbol around which Bryan's de- theory with a "survival of the fittest" mental- fense of democracy converges. ity against which he also waged battle in 1896, In "On Evolution," Bryan again claims to it is clear that he believed this formerly "new be speaking in defense of a "majority" of plain system of values" was no longer new and was people against the forces of an undemocratic now a serious threat to American democracy. elite. Recognizing the Constitution, he states: Explicitly invoking Jefferson's distinction be- "The majority is not trying to establish a reli- tween brotherhood and force, Bryan writes: gion or to teach it-it is trying to protect itself "Within half a century the 'Origins of Spe- from the efforts of an insolent minority to force cies' had become the Bible of the doctrine of irreligion upon the children under the guise of the omnipotence of force." He continues, teaching science.'"j8 In opposition to true sci- "[Wlhat else but the spirit of evolution can ence, Bryan casts evolution as mere "hypoth- account for the popularity of the selfish doc- esis" strung together, "guesses that encourage trine, 'each one for himself, and the devil take godlessness." Renewing the populist defense, the hindmost,' that threatens the very exist- Bryan asks rhetorically: "What right has a little ence of the doctrine of br~therhood."~'For irresponsible oligarchy of self-styled intellec- Bryan, McKinley simply failed to question the tuals to demand control of the schools of the morality of the selfish doctrine. Darwin made United state^?"^^ The rhetorical division evi- it popular. dent in this contest is expressed, as it was Not only were evolutionists elitist enough twenty-nine years previous, as an effort to pro- to believe that they knew better than com- tect the common people and their way of life mon people what ought to be taught in public from the forces of an "insolent minority" of schools, but, for Bryan, the very theory threat- "supposedly superior intellects." In place of ened the root of democracy and was a direct bankers, traders, and monied interests who affront to the sensibilities and identity of com- "corner the money of the world" in a "back mon people. Bryan cites Nietzsche's condem- room," Bryan injects the "the inner circle of nation of the "sympathetic activitiesJJ of the the iconoclasts whose theories menace all the "herd," such as caring for the sick, the maimed, ideals of a civilized society."70 Bryan renews and the poor, all of which allow the "weak an 1896 populist vision of democracy by once members to propagate their kind," as evidence again speaking as mere representative of a of how such "supposedly superior intellects" community of plain people against the forces view the common man.72If generally adopted, of an undemocratic elite. At the same time, the theory of evolution would not only "de- his rhetorical telos has changed; Bryan is no stroy all sense of responsibility and menace longer fighting for economic well-being or the morals of the it would also make simple representation, he is engaged in a battle a mockery of the common man, and, by exten- for the ideals and values of a civilized and sion, Bryan's entire vision of democracy. In- WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 95 deed, it is possible in this light to understand tity and essential to their ability to navigate much of Bryan's consistent antipathy toward that storm. "atheists" and "agnostics" as being born in part In the Scopes trial, Darrow's interrogation from their elitist dismissal of the common man, forced Bryan into a dialectic exchange in which a disbelief in democracy as much as a disbelief his literal interpretation of the Bible was sub- in God. ject to intensive and widespread scrutiny. An In "On Evolution," Bryan speaks as the rep- examination of "On Evolution" illustrates how resentative of the plain people in defending Bryan saw the issue of evolution as a danger to from attack the shared values that constitute democracy as well as religion, and how Bryan's their identity against what Bryan sees as ram- vision of democracy, largely consistent with pant individualism and moral degradation. To his views in 1896, rests upon an enduring strain further understand how he relates evolution of democratic discourse that is grounded in to the principles of democracy, Bryan's sum- the agrarian myth and the ideals of civic re- mary near the end of the speech is worth quot- publicanism and Jeffersonian democracy. ing at length: CONTINUITIESAND CONCLUSIONS Let us, then, hear the conclusion of the whole matter. Science is a magnificent ma- William Allen White summed up Bryan's terial force, but it is not a teacher of morals. political career by calling him "the best politi- It can perfect machinery, but it adds no cal diagnostician and the worst political prac- moral restraints to protect society from the titioner the country had ever seen: never had misuse of the machine. It can also build he been wrong on a single diagnosis or right gigantic intellectual ships, but it constructs on a single solution."75Hardly a supporter of no moral rudders for the control of storm- Bryan, the noted journalist acknowledges that tossed human vessels. It not only fails to Bryan had a "curious instinct" for sensing supply the spiritual element needed, but "when things were wrong." Leroy Ashby con- some of its unproven hypotheses rob the curs, saying that this "instinct had again and ship of its compass and thus endanger its again guided him into the camps of people cargo.74 anxious about the future- people worried that the events were rendering them superflu~us."~~ It is not questioning Bryan's biblical foun- A distinction between diagnosis and prac- dation or his commitment to the fundamen- tice in an age of democratic anxiety may pro- talist movement to suggest that underlying his vide a useful frame in which to conclude the crusade against evolution lies an equally exi- present analysis and begin to understand how gent concern about American democracy. In Bryan's vision of democracy continues to reso- what seems a thinly veiled reference to his nate within contemporary American politics. progressive friends and their reliance on sci- Assessing the "discontents" of American de- ence and expertise as a means of democratic mocracy at the turn of the twenty-first cen- governance, Bryan maintains that the "ship" tury, Michael Sandel argues that two concerns of state requires a moral and spiritual element lie at the heart of present anxieties: "One is as well as an intellectual one. Further, it is of the fear that, individually and collectively, little doubt that Bryan would have considered we are losing control of the forces that govern the Roaring Twenties a storm, and that guid- our lives. The other is the sense that, from ance and direction for democracy were more family to neighborhood to nation, the moral needed than ever. And evolution, the "un- fabric of community is unraveling around proven hypothesisn of an elitist class, is in- From economic insecurity to a perceived tent on once again "robbing" the cargo of loss of shared values, Sandel argues that democracy of something central to their iden- American politics is "ill equipped to allay the 96 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002 discontent that now engulfs it" because the enduring "democratic wish," framed the public philosophy by which we live cannot progressives' use of Jefferson and the agrarian "speak convincingly about self-government ideal of community, but in practice lacked and ~ommunity."~~ forms of organization and association that In tracing political and legal precedents in would transform such ideals into realities. the creation of what he calls a "procedural Today, an important and growing element of republic," Sandel illustrates how the adminis- contemporary democratic theory emphasizes trative or procedural form of political liberal- related ideals of community and civic republi- ism that frames contemporary public life has canism by advocating methods of achieving a crowded out a more republican, "civic strand" stronger, more engaged, and more delibera- of discourse that has traditionally animated tive form of American democracy. Ranging the ideals of American democracy. Liberalism across a broad ideological spectrum, such theo- as "procedural republic" emphasizes individual rists note the importance of community and rights over the public good and necessarily associational life in cultivating democratic "brackets" moral and religious questions from citizens who both contest and complement public discourse. The state remains neutral institutions of democratic self-governance. toward what constitutes a good life, and indi- Certainly, I am not equating the fundamen- viduals, when entering the political sphere, talism of William Jennings Bryan with such must free themselves of their moral identity theories. As I have tried to show, however, an and commit to a form of political debate in analysis of Bryan reveals that both the prob- which constitutive elements of their identity lems he diagnosed and the themes he invoked are "bracketed" from public discourse. to address those problems continue to reso- Sandel argues that such bracketing engen- nate today. ders a particularly vapid and potentially harm- In a passage of Bryan's "Cross of Gold" ful form of public discourse. He writes: "A speech highlighted earlier, Bryan reminded the politics that brackets morality and religion Democratic convention that "the principles too completely soon generates its own disen- upon which Democracy rests are as everlast- chantment. Where political discourse lacks ing as the hills, but. . . they must be applied to moral resonance, the yearning for a public life new conditions as they arise." In assessing of larger meanings finds undesirable expres- Bryan's less successful role as political practi- sion~."~~In criticizing the "intolerant moral- tioner, we might look beyond both "silver" isms" of groups such as the Moral Majority, and "anti-evolution" to appreciate how the Sandel argues that a more pluralistic and tol- possibility of achieving the democratic prin- erant form of community and public life, ca- ciples for which he fought would require a pable of satisfying the persistent yearning for sustained form of democratic practice that larger meaning, is dependent first on norms of William Jennings Bryan as beloved "celebrity discourse that are more amenable to a liber- politician" would be perhaps least equipped to ally based understanding of community. The provide. That is, a "Bryanesque" democracy public philosophy operating in contemporary based on Jeffersonian principles and agrarian American politics does not allow for such a ideals would necessarily be more participatory, discourse. Writing in 1994, Sandel might well engaged, and deliberative than a traditional have been assessing the American context and firebrand populism may allow. The ideals of prevailing public philosophy of seventy years equality and community, which Bryan helped earlier when he notes: "Fundamentalists rush usher into the Progressive Era and which still in where liberals fear to tread."*O resonate today, may have lost their constitu- We might recall how this same yearning for ent ties in an age of rapid industrialization, a more communally based and meaningful form rising consumerism, and a nationalization of of democracy, what Morone calls America's the progressive movement. If democracy was WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 97

"snatched safely away to the expert" during our understanding of both American history and this era, it likely remains there today, and vari- American democracy. 12. Edward J. Larson, Summer for the Gods: The ous forms of community and associational life Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over might provide the best hope for citizens to Science and Religion (New York: Basic Books, 1997), reclaim it again. This would put the onus for p. 225. democracy directly back on citizens, requiring 13. Michael J. Sandel, Democracy's Discontent: more peers and fewer "peerless leaders," but it America in Search of a Public Philosophy (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap, 1996), pp. 3-24. would be in line with a vision of democracy 14. Robert H. Weibe, Self Rule: A Cultural His- Bryan consistently defended. tory of American Democracy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), p. I. 15. Russell L. Hanson, The Democratic Imagina- tion in America: Conversations with Our Past The author wishes to thank Mary Beth Collery (Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1985), and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful com- p. 22. ments on an earlier version of this essay. 16. Michael McGee, "The 'Ideograph': A Link Between Rhetoric and Ideology," Quarterly Journal 1. William Jennings Bryan, The Credo of the of Speech 66 (1980): 7. Commoner (Los Angeles: Occidental College, 1968, 17. Ibid., pp. 7, 15. p. 45. 18. Celeste Michelle Condit and John Louis 2. Quoted in Stephan Jay Gould, "William Lucaites, Crafting Equality: America's Anglo-Afri- Jennings Bryan's Last Campaign,'' Natural History can Word (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 96 (1987): 20. 1998), p. 217. 3. Quoted in Michael Kazin, "William Jennings 19. Sandel, Democracy's Discontent (note 13 Bryan: The Forgotten Frontrunner," The Wilson above), p. 4. Quarterly 23 (1999): 25. 20. David Kertzer, Ritual, Politics, and Power 4. Ibid. p. 25. (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1988), 5. Myron Phillips, "William Jennings Bryan," p. 13. A History and Criticism of American Public Address, 21. Ashby, Champion of Democracy (note 10 vol. I1 (New York: McGraw Hill, 1943), p. 907. above), p. xiv. 6. Henry Louis Mencken, "In Memoriam: W. J. 22. Garry Wills, Under God: Religion and Ameri- B.," in William Jennings Bryan and the Campaign of can Politics (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990), 1896, ed. G. F. Whicher (Boston: DC Heath, 1953, p. 99. p. 84. 23. John E. Tapia, Circuit Chautauqua: From 7. Editorial, The Nation 8 (1925): 154. Rural Education to Popular Entertainment in Early 8. Michael Hostetler, "William Jennings Bryan Twentieth Century America (Jefferson, N.C.: as Demosthenes: The Scopes Trial and the Unde- McFarland, 1997). livered Oration, On Evolution," Western Journal of 24. Ashby, Champion of Democracy (note 10 Communication 62 (1998): 166. above), p. xiv. 9. Richard Hofstadter, The American Political 25. Tapia, Circuit Chautauqua (note 23 above), Tradition: And the Men Who Made It (New York: pp. 49-60. Vintage, 1948), p. 205. 26. White, quoted in Dixon Merritt, "Bryan at 10. Leroy Ashby, WilliamJennings Bryan: Cham- Sixty-Five" Outlook 140 (1925): 182. pion of Democracy (Boston: Twayne, 1987), p. x. 27. Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform: From 11. Limitations of space prevent me from fully Bryan to F.D.R. (New York: Vintage, 1955), p. 65. analyzing both of these "watershed" events. Given 28. William Jennings Bryan, "Cross of Gold," in the potential for oversimplifying the significance American Public Addresses: 1740-1 952, ed. A. Craig of the 1896 campaign and the 1925 Scopes trial Baird (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956), p. 194. and because of the certainty of omitting portions of 29. Ibid., p. 195. Bryan's career that ought not be omitted in assess- 30. Ibid. ing his impact on ~miricanpolitics, I leave a de- 31. Ibid. tailed analysis to others. I hope that my analysis of 32. Ibid., p. 196. these two events provides a glimpse sufficient 33. William D. Harpine, "Bryan's 'A Cross of enough to provide the reader with both an under- Gold': The Rhetoric of Polarization at the 1896 standing of William Jennings Bryan and how the Democratic Convention," Quarterly Journal of rhetorical contests he fought continue to inform Speech 87 (2001): 295. 98 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2002

34. Ibid., p. 301. 60. Jamieson, Eloquence (note 48 above), pp. 35. Bryan, "Cross of Gold" (note 33 above), p. 196. 31-42. 36. Ibid. 61. Larson, Summer for the Gods (note 12 above), 37. Ibid., p. 197. p. 191. For legal details of the trial, see ibid. pp. 38. Ibid., p. 199. 170-93; Lawrence W. Levine, Defender of the Faith: 39. Ibid. William Jennings Bryan; the Last Decade, 19 15-1922 40. Ibid., p. 200. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), pp. 41. Ibid. 324-57; Paolo E. Coletta, William Jennings Bryan; 42. Michael Kazin, Populist Persuasion: An Ameri- 111: Political Puritan 1915-1 925 (Lincoln: Univer- can History (New York: Basic Books, 1995), p. 1. sity of Nebraska Press, 1969), pp. 240-81. 43. Paul W. Glad, McKinley, Bryan, and the People 62. Levine, ibid., p. 355. (New York: J.P. Lippincott, 1964, p. 35. 63. Hostetler, "W. J. B. as Demosthenes" (note 44. Hofstadter, American Political Tradition (note 8 above), p. 168. 9 above), pp.188-89; Paolo E. Coletta, "The Bryan 64. Gould, "W. J. B.'s Last Campaign" (note 2 Campaign of 1896," in William Jennings Bryan: A above), p. 20. Profile, ed. P. W. Glad (New York: Hill and Wang, 65. Hostetler, "W. J. B. as Demosthenes" (note 1968), p. 29. 8 above), p. 166. 45. Ashby, Champion of Democracy (note 10 66. Ibid., p. 170. above), p. 67. The most standard figures place 67. For a good review of Bryan's "three-fold er- McKinley expenditures around 3.5 million, with ror" in understanding evolution, see Gould, "W. J. Bryan spending approximately 400,000. See Glad, B.'s Last Campaign" (note 2 above), pp. 16-26. McKinley, Bryon, and the People (note 43 above), 68. William Jennings Bryan, "On Evolution," in pp. 166-88. Bryan and Darrow at Dayton: The Record and Docu- 46. Kazin, "Forgotten Forerunner" (note 3 ments of the 'Bible-Evolution' Trial, ed. L. Allen above), p. 2. (New York: Russell and Russell, 1967), p. 173. 47. Ibid. 69. Ibid. 48. Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Eloquence in an Elec- 70. Ibid., p. 193. tronic Age: The Transformation of Political Speech- 71. Ibid., p. 194. making (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 72. Bryan's strategy in invoking Nietzsche is two- pp. 45-50. fold: first, it is intended to counter his adversary 49. Eric F. Goldman, Rendezvous with Destiny: A Darrow, who, in the famous Leopold and Loeb case, History of Modern American Reform (New York: defended his clients on the grounds that they were Vintage, 1977), p. 55. corrupted through university instruction in 50. Walter Lippmann, The Phantom Public (New Nietzsche's philosophy. In reclaiming an argumen- York: Macmillan, 1925), p. 39. tative stance against Darrow, Bryan also uses 51. Ibid., p. 30. Nietzsche's writing to inform the broader public 52. James A. Morone, The Democratic Wish: about how such theories impact the lives of the Popular Participation and the Limits of American nation's youth. Government (New York: Basic Books, 1990),p. 113. 73. Bryan, "On Evolution", p. 188. 53. Ibid., pp. 114, 118. 74. Ibid., p. 195. 54. Walter Lippmann, Public Philosopher: Selected 75. William Allen White, Memphis Commercial Letters of Walter Lippmann, ed. J. M. Blum (New Appeal, 29 April 1925, quoted in Ferenc Morton York: Ticknor and Fields, 1985), p. 176. Szasz, The Divided Mind of Protestant America 55. Larson, Summer for the Gods (note 12 above), (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1982), p. 265. pp. 122-23. 56. Bryan, quoted in ibid., pp. 128-29. 76. Ashby, Champion of Democracy (note 10 57. Bryan, quoted in ibid., p. 43. above), p. 202. 58. Ibid., pp. 59, 129. 7 7. Sandel, Democracy's Discontent (note 13 59. Citing a "unique alignment of dialectal and above), p. 3. rhetorical positions," Richard Weaver uses the ex- 78. Ibid. change between prosecution and defense to clarify 79. Michael Sandel, review of Political Liberal- classical distinctions between dialectic and rheto- ism, by John Rawls, Harvard Law Review 107 (1994): ric. See Richard Weaver, The Ethics of Rhetoric 1793. (Davis, Calif.: Hermagoras, 1985), pp. 27-54. 80. Ibid., p. 1794.