Newspaper Page Text
questions for 'twelve years deserve
credit for sincerity.
Now, you are inclined to talk
about Cleveland and sneer at
W eaver.
A voice. Tom, we will give you
fifteen acres of land and send you to
p lowing.
Mr. Watson. I’ll bet that man
doesn’t know a swivel tree from a
turn shvel. I know this, that
whenever it is necessary for me to
plow I can do it, and it is not so long
since I did it, either. (Great con
fusion out in the crowd.) Where
are those men causing that confusion
and noise? I cannot speak uless bet
ter order is maintained.
A voice. It is the Augusta
crowd.
A fellow in the Augusta crowd.
Yes, mister, it is Black’s hussars.
(Continued jeering and confusion.)
Mr. Watson. I will tell you one
thing my friends, you are not mak
ing your campaign any more re
spectable by the conduct indulged in
to-day. There are ladies here to
day like there were in Augusta.
You would not respect the ladies in
Augusta and you howled me down,
but I will tell you, you cannot
do it here to-day. These honest
farmers will not have their wives in
sulted by Augusta toughs.
Many voices. No, No! We
will have none of that here.
Col. Livingston. (Addressing a
group of disturbers.) Sit down, you
men over there, Sit down. Be
have yourselves. ’
Mr. Watson. I say this, that the
Peoples party proposes to do what
Henry Grady said ought to be done,
what the Farmers Alliance said
ought to be done, namely, to bury
the bloody shirt and tell the politi
ticians that we do not intend to al
ways be kept divided with partisan
politics, giving them a chance to rob
the people of both sections. We
propose to re-establish fraternity be
tween the South and the West to
have a union between the South and
the West. And we propose in do
ing this to carry the principles upon
which the rich and the poor, the
farmer, the laborer and the mechanic,
the man of the city and of the vil
lage can stand. With these pledges
we propose to go forward under the
People’s party banner rehabilitating
the temple of liberty, dedicated to
all races, colors and conditions.
Time called.
Mr. Lyon introduced Col. Living
ston as follows;
It is my pleasure, my countrymen,
to introduce to you the matchless
and honest statesmen, the Hon. L. F.
Livingston.
Mr. Livingston was received with
cheers by his adherents and a great
deal of confusion ensued, lasting sev
eral seconds.
col. Livingston’s reply.
(To persons standing in the audi
ence). Sit down! If you are not
satisfied by the time I get through,
these third party friends will, as
sure as you live. (Laughter). I
want to say to you that if you keep
up this racket you will break my
speech.
1 am glad to say that Mr. Watson
has discussed the questions on one
line at least, the political issues that
distract the country. If that is cor
rect, you ought to listen with all the
listening powers you have got. In
formation is what we want, and we
will soon have you all on the side of
the Democratic party. (Laughter).
We want more information and less
noise. lam sorry that he did not
take up his platform. I supposed
that he would. lam going to dis
cuss it for him, and for you Third
party men, arid don’t you forget it.
I have nothing to say about the
money and the men that have been
sent into his district. I know noth
ing about it, I have nothing to say
simply because I know nothing. I
do not know about a dollar concen
centrated in his district. I know
that Governor Northen has been
down in his district speaking. lam
not here to assail or justify men for
speaking m his district.
He says thus: “Let us examine
the difference between Jeffersonian
Democracy and modern Democracy.”
I am perfectly willing to go out on
that line with him. lie says that he
does not care to enter into a cat
fight with me. I am glad of that.
He asks this question, how are we to
judge a political party? and then
he proposes to define it.
A voice. Take it West.
Mr. Livingston. I will get you
West before I am through. Now,
here is my definition of a political
party. A political party is an aggre
gation of people under certain rules
and regulations for a definite pur
pose. Let me give you a rule by
which to judge that party when it is
presented to you. There are only
three rules by which you can judge
a political party. First, its princi
ples. Second, its laws; and third,
what it has done.
A voice. Fourth. Its rascality.
Mr. Livingston (ignoring the in
terruption). And a political party
that cannot be judged by that rule
is not worth picking up in Decatur
or anywhere else. Who are the par
ties ? What are its laws ? What
has it done ? Let us apply that rule.
Jeffersonian democracy, he says, in
1797 and 1892 are very different. I
want to prove that early republican
ism was nothing but pure Jefferson
ian democracy. Nothing more,
nothing less. My friend is not going
to deny that. There is a text book
that will give every platform and
every vote from 1797 up to now.
The Federalists and the Republicans
were the two first original parties in
this country. The Federalists held
PEOPLE’S PARTI PAPER, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 7. 1892.
to Hamilton’s ideas of government.
The Republicans held to the Jeffer
sonian idea. In 1820, I believe, the
name was changed from the Repub
lican to the Democratic, and from
that till now the Jeffersonian party
has been known as the Democratic.
[Note —The Colonel was evidently
off in his historical knowledge. In
1820, James Monroe, Republican,
was elected over John Quincy Ad
ams, also a Republican. In 1824,
John Quincy Adams was elected
over Andrew Jackson, known as the
military prestige candidate. In 1828
the name Democratic first appears,
when Jackson was elected over John
Quincy Adams, National Republican.
In 1832 the name National Repub
lican figures for the last time, when
Henry Clay was defeated by An
drew Jackson. In 1836 the Whig
party came on the scene.—Repor
ter.]
Mr. Livingston. Who formed the
People’s party ? Well, the reform
ers themselves cannot answer.
A voice. The people formed it.
Mr. Livingston. He says that it
was formed in St. Louis. I call his
attention to the fact that it was not
formed at St. Louis, but in Cincin
nati. It was formed by a crowd, of
people hungry for office, and Weaver
was one and Post another. Antici
pating that there would be a meet
ing in St. Louis in 1892, they met in
Cincinnati in 1891 and produced the
People’s party. Next year at St.
not only the chairman of the com
mittee, but the entire committee of
the People’s party was larger, and
when the other organizations ad
journed sine die, without any action
whatever, then all who saw fit re
mained and formed .the People’s
party and formulated that system of
politics. This Mr. Watson knows
and will not deny. Therefore, the
Alliance and the Knights of Labor
did not organize the People’s party.
It had its origin in Cincinnati in May,
1891.
A voice. All the better for that.
That’s all right.
Mr. Livingston. You will always
think so till you get to the other side
of the river.
Same voice. You can’t tote me
there.
Mr. Livingston. I ain’t going to
try. I’m after brains. Mr. Watson
asked this question: “Why did the
Alliance and the Knights of Labor
come up preaching this doctrine of
reform if they did not mean it ?”
Mr. Watson knows that the consti
tution of the Knights of Labor and
the Farmers’ Alliance both forbid
any political action.
A voice. You tried to make the
Alliance Democratic.
Mr. Livingston. Shut up, or I will
make you shut up.
Same voice. Come and try it.
Mr. Livingston. Well, you come
here and sic on the side of this plank
where I can reach you.
I want to say about that Cincin
nati meeting where the People’s par
ty was brought into existence. They
adjourned there to go to St. Louis,
and went down there in a body< 1
went to say more than that, that no
Southern man helped to frame the
People’s party platform except C. C.
Post. [Laughter.] Mr. Brown was
a delegate from Douglas county, but
he had nothing to do with it.
A voice. Hurrah for Post!
Mr. Livingston. Yes, hurrah for
Post. Then the People’s party had
no representative from Georgia but
Post, and Post was not a Georgian,
or a Democrat, or a Republican—l
don’t know what in the name of God
he was. [Laughter.]
A voice. He was a People’s party
man; that’s enough.
Mr. Livingston. Speaking of the
St. Lous platform of 1889, he says
“we were all agreed upon that plat
form,” and that Livingston indorsed.
And, Mr. Watson (directing his re
marks to that gentleman), I see by
the papers that I run on it for Con
gress. Is that correct ? Is that
correct? He says that I indorsed it
and run on it in 1890.
Mr. Watson. No; 1889.
Mr. Livingston. Now, boys, if I
do not prove that I did not run on it
I will withdraw this evening.
A voice. Make room to pray.
Mr. Livingston. Now, gentlemen,
be quiet. I cannot make an argu
ment with this noise around me.
You third party men listen to it.
It is the truth.
A voice. Listen, boys ; he is go
ing to tell the truth. [Laughter.]
Mr. Livingston. I will make you
acknowledge it. I ain’t going to tell
you any stories to-day. I will give
you facts, and then if you continue
in this new party I will bkme you.
[Laughter.] In 1890, after tin St.
Louis convention of 1889, in the
early spring of 1890, the Georgia
Alliance determined they would not
abide by the St. Louis platform.
We met in Atlanta, the committee
and myself, and we formulated a
platform. That platform was known
as Livingston’s “yardstick. [Laugh
ter.] Now, men, I want to show
you that the Alliance was not in
tended to go into politics. Not only
was your constitution against it, but
your president, knowung more or less
about the Third party excitement
and that we were charged with
drifting into the movement, your
committee met. What did we do?
We asked Mr. Berner, chairman of
the Democratic committee, and Mr.
Buck, chairman of the Republican
committee, to give every Alliance
man a primary by which they could
pledge their votes, and that we
would abide by the primaries,
whether for us or against us. Here
is the agreement, signed by Mr.
Buck for the Republicans and by
Mr. Berner for the Democrats. That
is in the past. If we were Demo
crats we went into the Democratic
primaries, and if we were Republi
cans we went into the Republican
primaries. And I say, to our credit,
in Georgia we did not violate a
single promise. Wherever we voted
in the primaries we abided that
vote. Mr. Stewart and myself read
this announcement at our meetings
and Mr. Tom Watson went into the
primaries upon the same proposition
submitted to the president of the
Alliance. That ain’t all. Just let us
see. At that time we had some
trouble about the Olive bill. Olive
had introduced it before. Our peo
ple were divided on it, and we made
up our minds that the Alliance peo
ple should have a platform in Geor
gia—not a platform, but a demand.
It was called the Livingston yard
stick, and it measured Tom Watson,
too, and don’t you forget it.
‘[There was noise and confusion at
this point, and the speaker addressed
his remarks to the parties at fault.]
Now, men, there is no chance to
understand a word of these things in
1890, or where my position was, un
less you listen to this contract that I
am going to read to you. I want to
show another thing, and that is that
every single demand in the Alliance
yard-stick was incorporated in the
Chicago platform. I reckon that
will astonish you men. (Laughter.)
Y r ou will think the dead come to life.
(Renewed laughter.) We had a
Democratic State convention, friend
Watson, and you remember it, and
we shoved all those planks into it ex
cept the sub-treasury plank. Well,
I had trouble from the railroad
plank. (Reads:) “Your committee
respectfully states.” Now this was
the report of a committee • appointed
to draft resolutions that every Alli
anceman could stand upon and sup
port. Let us see if it has got owner
ship in it. “Your committee respect
fully states that inasmuch as there is
a constitutional clause.” Well, there
is an original clause to this effect, that
the powers of the Inter- state Railway
Commission be so enlarged as that
they may co-operate one with the
other for the regulation, etc., and
that this regulation shall be based on
the reasonable cost of construction,
and not upon watered; stock or high
prices paid for stock for the purpose
of consolidation. That committee
was composed of members from
Oglethorpe and Polk counties. Let
us see what the Eexecutive Commit
tee did with this thing. I want to
say to you people that the sub-Alli
ances indorsed this thing, and every
single member run upon it, pledged
upon it, and Mr. Watson had to
pledge himself to it, and that was
what he had to swallow in McDuffie
county, and not the St. Louis plat
form :
“The Executive Committee of the
Georgia State Alliance, with the Presi
dent concurring—
Now, I am going to ask my young
friend, Mr. Parker, to come along
with me to see that I read the truth.
A voice. That’s right, Parker,
watch him.
Mr. Livingston. Whero are you at,
Mr. Parker?
Mr. Parker. I stand before you.
Mr. Livingston. Here ! you have
got to read those. Now gentlemen,
listen and see if every single item in
your Alliance platform is not in the
Chicago platform, and yet Mr. Wat
son tells you that the Democratic
party proposes to give you nothing.
Here, Mr. Parker read.
Mr. Parker. Fellow citizens
Mr. Livingston. Oh, I do not ex
pect you to make a speech.
Mr. Parker. If he wants anything
read about the St. Louis conference
I will read it cheerfully. I had noth
ing to do with the Chicago platform.
Mr. Livingston. Now gentlemen,
now gentlemen, see when I ask s third
party man to read from the Demo
cratic party he is afraid to do it.
Mr. Watson. I want to arise to a
point of order.
Mr. Livingston. What is it ? may
be I will admit it.
Mr. Watson. lam here to do the
talking for this side, and I object
to your calling help.
Mr. Livingston. Mr. Watson says
that 1 have no right to call in the
aid of a reader. I now ask Mr. Wat
son to read it.
Mr. Watson. I meet you in my re
ply-
Mr. Livingston. I want you color
ed men to hear the first plank in this
platform and the first plank in the
Chicago platform. I will read it
again.
At this point a remark was made
out in the crowd, which I could not
hear, to which Mr. Livingston replied.
I know boys, that it is like putting
turpentine on a sore, but I cannot
help it, you have brought it on your
selves. (Laughter.)
The Alliance people in 1890, with
the Livingston yardstick, ask a revis
ion of the present school system,
thereby extending the facilities for
common education. Let us see what
the Democrats did in Chicago :
Section 17. Popular education being
the only safe basis of popular suffrage,
we recommend to the several States
most liberal appropriations for the pub
lic schools. Free schools are the nur
series of good government, and they
have always received the fostering care
of the Democratic party.
Then the Democratic party m
Chicago put our first plank in. Let
us see whether they have put it in
or not. The next plank in the Alli
ance platform says this :
We demand such changes in the peni
tentiary system as will ameliorate the
condition of convicts, especially on the
public highways, and that such provision
be made as will secure the separation of
males and females, giving the former
outdoor and the latter indoor work.
Let us see if the Chicago Demo-
cratic platform has any such a pro
vision :
We are in favor of enactment by the
States of laws for abolishing the noto
rious sweating system; for abolishing
contract "convict labor and for prohibit
ing the employment in factories of chil
dren under fifteen years of age.
Then, the Democrats put that in
there also at Chicago!
You have been told that the Dem
ocratic party was the enemy of the
country. Let us go on that:
The reduction of State and national
tax, and that economy and judicial ex
penditure shall be observed.
That was Livingston’s yardstick.
Let us see wffiat the Chicago plat
form says:
We denounce Republican protection
as a fraud—
Why did not the Omaha platform
denounce it as a fraud ?
A robbery of a great majority of the
American people for the benefit of the
few.
That is the way the Alliance plat
form started out. Let us further.
We will come down to something
rich directly. Here it further de
mands that the burdens resting on
the people shall be lessened to the
greatest extent. That was the Liv
ingston yardstick. Let us see what
the Chicago platform says about it:
We denounce the McKinley law en
acted by the Fifty-first Congress as the
culminating atrocity of class legislation.
We endorse the efforts made by the
Democrats of the present Congress to
modify its most oppressive features in
the direction of raw materials and
cheaper manufactured goods that enter
into the general consumption, and we
promise its repeal as one of the beneficent
results that will follow the action of the
people intrusting power to the Demo
cratic party. We deny that there has
been any increase of prosperity to the
country since the tariff went into opera
tion, and we point to the dullness and
distress, to the wage reductions and
strikes in the iron trade as the best possi
ble evidence that no such prosperity has
resulted from the McKinly bill.
We ask that our representatives
in the national legislature will advo
cate the passage of such laws as will
prevent the formation of trusts, mo
nopolies, combines, etc. That is the
Alliance yardstick. What do you
think the Chicago platform says
about that ?
Section 5. We recognize in the trusts
and combinations which are designed to
enable capital to secure more than its
just share of the joint product of capital
and labor, a natural consequence of the
prohibitive taxes which prevent free
competition which is the life honest
trade.
Now, there is the same plank al
most yord for word.
Now let us go further. There is
something mighty good here: “The
abolition of the national bank sys
tem —” I am reading from the yard
stick.
Voices. We know what you are
reading.
Col. Livingston. There is the Al
liance plank that every Allianceman
pledged himselfotO. What part of
that is in the national platform now ?
“We recommend that the ton per cent,
tax on State bank issues be repealed.”
And the silver plank in that plat
form. We recognized silver as cur
rency. I am going to discuss the
silver plank directly’in answer to his
objections.
Now listen. The Chicago Demo
crats knew very well that they could
not repeal the national bank system
for two reasons. First, they could
not, until there was something put in
the place of it. Second, under the
act which rechartered them for ten
years, they had an absolute right to
run that time, and no act, State or
national, could repeal that charter
until the time expired. Even the
Supreme Couit of the United States
would not declare them unconstitu
tional, for they would not attempt
anything that could not be accom
plished. Well, the congress did not
go there and gas, and then go away.
They recommended that until that
time you should have State banks.
State banks, solid and good. Tom
Watson and myself went to Wash
ington pledged to vote for these
State banks. Maybe he has forgot
ten it.
A voice. Shake him up.
Mr. Livingston. lam shaking him.
Who pledged Tom Watson and Liv
ingston to go there and vote for State
banks ? Have you thought who ? I
reckon you will say some would-be
banker. Is McDonald, your latest
representative, here ? Every man in
the legislature, both in the house and
Senate, voted for this resolution, and
that legislature was Alliance, sent
there to do your bidding. You tied
our hands.
A voice: We are going to tie
your hands to-day.
Mr. Livingston: Tom tied his own
hands. I did not.
Y r ou will find in acts of the legis
lature, page 523, this:
Whereas, The statute of the United
States levying a tax of ten per cent, on
on State banks of issue, which was en
acted in the interest of the national
banks, which is unjust and injurious to
the people of this country, m that said
State banks, by the exorbitant tax, are
prohibited from doing business, and are
prevented from issuing a good local cur
rency, which properly guarded by State
laws would be safe and greatly promo
tive of the prosperity of the people, they
are hereby requested—
No, no ! that is not ths word :
are hereby instructed to urge the
passage at the ensuing session of an act
repealing the law imposing said tax.
The Democratic party at Chicago
was told that the legislature of Geor
gia demanded this repeal, and Mr.
Louis Garrard himself gave that no
tice.that the Alliance demanded this
repeal.
Now listen ! Is Mr. Charles Phin
izy— Is Mr. Phinizy here? Mr.
Charles Phinizy told me in Washing
ton: “Livingston, if we could get
that act repealed, the Georgia rail
road will put one million and a half
dollars in circulation within thirty
days.” There is not a man in the
State of Georgia that would not take
Georgia railroad bills. There was a
a chance for the people of Georgia
to have one million and a half of
money. Why did not the People’s
party of Georgia accept that ? Why
did they do the boy’s act? They
remind me of a boy who went to his
mamma and said, “give me a biscuit.”
He got it and then he said, “put some
butter on it.” Well, the indulgent
mother gave him the butter, and then
he insisted on having some jelly, and
she could not give that because there
was none in the house, and the young
scamp threw it away because he could
not get all he wanted. Just so it is
with you People’s party men, you
throw away what you cannot get be
cause you caunot have all you want.
There is the bill and you and your
leaders say you do not want it be
cause you cannot have the jelly.
Livingston said everywhere in
Georgia, and I never heard Mr.
Watson make but one speech on
the—
[So much derisive laughter greet
ed this, the people anticipating what
was coming, that I failed to hear the
exact words, and will not supply].
Mr. Livingston. [Mockingly].
Ha, ha! ha! You Third party
people know that I took the position,
and I dare you to deny it. And
now when your own State Legisla
ture passed that resolution and we
put the bill in the House your Peo
ple’s party put their veto on it. Now
do you want good money?
A voice. That is just like you
did at the World’s Fair.
Mr. Livingston. Yes, if you know
no more about money than you do
about the World’s Fair, you may get
home, but you will never have sense
enough to get to Chicago. Now let
us see whether the Democratic party
paid any attention or not to your de
mands. Listen. There is one other
plank in your Alliance platform—
Livingston’s yard-stick.
That the sub-treasury bill now
pending in Congress, or some better
measure should be passed. And
when the Democratic party dis
covered that there was a constitu
tional provision against the repeal,
they offered you something in lieu
of it and you spurn it.
Scott! You remember the Geor
gia railroad bills, and you are a
Third party man?
A voice. Yes, but my name is
not Scott.
Col. Livingston. Well, it does not
make any difference, You have
never seen a Georgia railroad bill
that was not as good as gold.
The voiee evidently replied, but
your reporter could not hear him.
Neither did the speaker, for he
said:
I cannot hear you.
A voice. Y'ou’d better not.
Mr. Livingston. Who do you
suppose this platform was signed by?
Felix Corput, W. L. Peek, Ivey,
Stevenson and Taylor, myself con
curring, as president of the Alli
ance.
A voice. Black or white?
Col. Livingston. I’ll tell you what
is so. You will come to an honest
confession one of these days, if you
ever get so that you can make an
honest confession. You are very
much like the man who had a ranch
out in Texas, and he went one day,
to cross a stream, and the water was
so clear that he thought it was shal
low, but it was deeper than he bar
gained for and he went ca-chug, to
the bottom, and as he came up
he caught the grass on the side of the
bank and said: “Oh Lord,you know
that I have never bean in anybody
else’s cotton patch.” Well, the
effort was too him, and he
slipped his hold and went down
again. Coming up again he made a
desperate attempt and said: “Oh,
Lord, you know that I never stole
anybody’s cows or branded their cat
tle.” His hold slipped and he went
down the third time, and it began to
look very serious when he came up
the third time, and he blurted out:
“Oh, Lord, you know that I have
been the dangdest liar in the world.”
(Laughter.)
(Addressing a gentleman in the
audience who moved.) Sit down,
there; I aint going to rub it in on
you if you be quiet. (Laughter.)
I want to say this, my dear friends,
that I have shown you that the
platform I ran on for Congress was
that Alliance platform—the Living
ston yard-stick. My friend in one
of his speeches, if he was quoted
correctly, says that I ran on the
Ocafa platform. 1 do not know
whether he was or not, but the
Ocala platform was formulated after
I was elected. I was elected in
November and the Ocala platform
was formulated the following month.
Nowjthen, he either ran as an Al
lianceman on the St. Louis platform,
or he ran on the Livingston yard
stick, and there is not an Alliance
man can put his hand on his heart
and say that I ran on the Ocala
platform. I say furthermore that
there was no ownership of railroads
in that platform that I ran on.
He says that the Omaha platform
is the same as the St. Louis. Well,
I want to «ay that the Omaha plat
form has got a great deal in it and I
am going to discuss it directly.
He asks why did not Northen stand
on the St. Louis platform on which
he was elected. I only have to say
that Governor Northen has got to de
fend himself, but I want to say this,
in justice to Gov. Northen, that he
and Peek made no race on the St.
Louis platform. They made it on
the Livingston yardstick, so far as
the St. Louis convention was con
cerned. I know what Northen said
in his own county. It was standing
in your Alliance paper every issue,
and Northen was pressed from time
to time to endorse it.
A voice. Except the Sub-Treas
ury bill.
Mr. Livingston. Don’t you fret
yourself about the Sub-Treasury. I
have got you spotted.
Same voice. My friend, I have
you spotted for November.
Col. Livingston. Mr. Watson asks,
“is not Col. Peek standing where
Col Peek stood in 1890?” He says
also, that Gov. Northen stood on the
same platform with Col. Peek in
1890, against the national banks, and
on the railroad plank, etc. Now,
Gov. Northen was in favor of the re
gulation of railroads by State and
Interstate Commissions, but not in
favor of ownership. I am not going
to advise you to vote either for
Gov. Northen or Col. Peek. lam
not here for that purpose. But, I
will tell you what I am here for. I
am here to answer this speech of Mr.
Watson’s.
A voice. It is time you were get
ting at it.
Col. Livingston. You shut up.
You have not got sense enough to
know what anyone is getting at.
He says that Livingston favored
the St. Louis platform, land plank
and all, and he gave you the votes
by States. (Looking for the refer
ence.)
A voice. Mr. Watson, tall him
where he is at.
Another voice. He is looking for
his place.
Col. Livingston. In the sixth day
the meeting was called to order. Re
port of the committee. The demand.
Section 1. They demanded the abo
lition of national banks. The follow
ing substitute was adopted :
We demand that the goods shall
be deposited in the sub-treasuries,
etc. And that money shall issue
upon non-perishable products, and
also upon real estate with proper
limitations. Now, on that, the vote
was taken by States, and it is the
only vote taken by States. And if
my friend Watson can put his finger
on any other, he can do more than I
can. That was just the bother he
was over in the sab-treasury. That
vote was not a vote on the St. Louis
platform at all, but on the Ocala
platform. I want to say this, that I
fought the land question on the Ocala
demand and made a speech against
giving money on land. There is not
one man in a thousand that does not
borrow on a mortgage and then lose
his land.
A voice. There is a great differ
ence between borrowing on two per
cent, and a hundred.
Mr. Livingston. You would lose
it just as quick on two per cent, as on
eight. There is no truth so well
fixed among farmers as well as law
yers and doctors, as that ninety-five
out of every hundred men who bor
row money on land, at any rate of
interest, finally go into the hands of
the sheriff.
[At this point another beautiful
shield of flowers were forwarded to
the stand to Mr. Watson. This
seemed to have the same effect on
the Augusta gang and the Atlanta
crowd that a red rag would have on
a bull. In the neighborhood of the
ladies they were particularly offen
sive.]
Mr. Livingston. Boys, you can
have the flowers. We will get the
votes while you get the flowers.
[Note. —This was a paraphrase
from Mr. Watson’s first speech at
Sparta.]
Mr. Livingston. He says that the
hearts of the people are with the
People’s Party. I want to see how
that is, and I want to see right now.
I want you reporters to stand up and
count. lam going to take a vote of
this crowd. Every single third party
man in this crowd hold up your
hands right now. Quick! Now,
every single man in |this crowd who
is for the the third party hold up
your hand.
THE GAMBLER’S ARGUMENT.
Now I’ll bet a thousand dollars
we’ve got you four to one.
A voice. I’ll take the bet.
Mr. Livingston. I’ll bet you now
that you have not got a thousand
cents. (Laughter and derision.)
[As a matter of fact, the the Dem
ocrats were ready to hold up their
hands for anything that the speaker
suggested, although not one out of
a half dozen could hear his words.
They not only held up their hands
but each held up both hands. On
the other hand the People, who could
not distinctly hear his proposition
■would not hold up their hands at all.
Still the crowd was about equally
divided, notwithstanding the fact
that about twelve hundred were im
ported from Atlanta and Augusta
and intermediate points by the Geor
gia road.
He says: “Northen has been in
my district denouncing me.” My
friends, I know nothing about that,
and lam not responsible for it. If
that is true, I am with Mr. Watson.
Ido not believe in abuse. It will
do no good. (To some person in
the audience), Oh, sit down and
hush. I want to afford all these
fellows an opportunity to hear my
argument, and then they will hold
up their hands with us. Now I w’ill
settle one question, who has desert
ed us and who has not? I say that
you Third party people have gone
back on your platform in toto. You
made a solemn vow that you would
stand on the platform that I wrote.
(Laughter.)
A voice. I thought that Harry
Brown wrote that. [Renewed laugh
ter. ]
Col. Livingston. You put it to
[CONTINUED ON FIFTH PAGE.]
3