In 1896, and to a lesser extent 1900, coins played a major role in the presidential election campaigns. The major issue was what role would silver play in our nation’s monetary system? The Democrats, lead by William Jennings Bryan, advocated the free coinage of silver, in unlimited quantities, at a ratio of 16 parts silver to one part gold. The Republicans, with William McKinley carrying their banner, pushed to have the country remain on the Gold Standard. These two campaign pieces illustrated the kind of money that each side wanted. For the Democrats, it was a Morgan Dollar and for the Republicans it was a gold dollar. As coins, it’s much easier to find a Morgan Dollar than a gold dollar, but between these two political pieces, the Morgan Dollar stud is much scarcer. Outgoing president, Grover Cleveland, who was a Democrat, was a strong supporter of the Gold Standard. Although the two parties were fairly well united, each of them had splinter groups that did not agree with the monetary policies of their central committees. Outgoing president, Grover Cleveland, supported the Gold Standard and was appalled at the direction his party had taken. A small faction, who called themselves “The National Democratic Party” agreed with him. They were informally known as the “Gold Democrats.” The Gold Democrats supported the Gold Standard, but they did not agree with the protectionist tariff policies that the Republicans had supported for many years. They called for smaller government and a sound currency. They labeled the free silver position that the main Democratic Party had taken as reckless and irresponsible. The National Democratic Party Nominates Their Candidates The National Democrats held a convention in Indianapolis, Indiana. There were delegates from 41 of the 45 states and three territories. They nominated John M. Palmer of Illinois for president and Simon P. Buckner from Kentucky for vice president. Palmer was a most interesting 19th century political gadfly. He began his political career as a Democrat, but switched to the Republican Party when it was formed to oppose admission of Kansas and Nebraska as slave states. During the Civil War he served in the Army raising to the rank of brigadier general in the regular Army and a major general in the volunteer service. He returned to politics after the war and was elected Governor of Illinois. In 1872 he opposed the nomination of U.S. Grant for a second presidential term and joined the ranks of the Liberal Republicans who supported Horace Greeley for president. Ultimately, he returned to the Democratic Party and served one term in the Senate from 1891 to 1897. He died in 1900 at the age of 83. His running mate, Simon Buckner, was also a general during the Civil War, but for the Confederacy. He also served as Governor of Kentucky after the war. In the general election, the National Democrats polled only 134,635 votes, which was less than 1% of the total. They had an influence in the outcome of the election, however. Between their votes and the disaffected Democrats who stayed home, the total might well have cost Bryan the 1896 presidential election. An attractive campaign ribbon, issued by the Silver Republicans, endorsed William Jennings Bryan. A small stud lapel button, issued by the Colorado Silver Republicans, endorsed the concept of 16 to 1 and showed a symbol of Bryan's "cross of gold" against what might Pile's Peek. This rare piece is made of sterling silver. The Silver Republican Party Although they were far rarer birds, there was also a silver faction in the Republican Party. At 1896 Republican Convention, the party platform called for the Gold Standard. It could only be modified if there were an international agreement to change it. That agreement, which would have to be among the leading industrial nations of the world, would have called for the adoption of the bimetallic monetary system. While the Republicans stated that enacting such an agreement would be a priority, they knew that there was no chance that the other industrial powers would agree to it. Therefore, it was a hollow pledge. Senator Henry Teller of Colorado offered an amendment. It called for the unrestricted and independent coinage of gold and silver at the U.S. mints at the ratio of 16 parts silver to one part of gold. The platform committee leadership moved to table Teller’s motion which, in reality, killed it. The convention nominated William McKinley for president. William Jennings Bryan received the presidential nomination from the Democratic and Progressive Parties. The Progressives could not stand his Democratic running mate, Arthur Sewall, who was a Maine ship builder and very successful business man. They nominated Thomas Watson, a radical newspaper publisher, instead. Teller and 33 others bolted the Republican Convention and formed their own party. At first the Silver Republicans nominated Teller for president, but he refused to embrace the offer. At the Silver Republican Convention, which run simultaneously with Populist Party Convention, the Silver Republicans nominated William Jennings Bryan for president. The Populists, who had first come on the scene in 1891, also nominated Bryan, but they offered an alternative candidate for vice president. The Democrats had selected company owner and Maine shipbuilder, Arthur Sewell, for the second spot. The Populists rejected the business man and nominated former congressman, lawyer and radical newspaper publisher, Thomas Watson, instead. Bryan had the endorsement of three parties and two running mates. In the general election, William McKinley won the presidency with 7.1 million popular votes and 271 votes in the Electoral College. Bryan received 6.5 million popular votes and 176 votes in the Electoral College. People who supported William McKinley and the Gold Standard were called "gold bugs." Those who supported William Jennings Bryan and the call for the bimetallic 16 to 1 policy were called "silver bugs." The two images were commonly seen on 1896 campaign items. These "bugs" had mechanical wings that flew out when a button was pushed. The gold bug featured William McKinley and his running mate, Garret Hobart. The silver bug only has a picture of Bryan and “16 to 1” on the other wing because Bryan had two different running mates. The "silver bug" is a much scarcer piece.
I will be surprised (Happily) if this thread lasts for more than a day. Although I like your thread, there is too much info which will generate warring factions to weigh in.
Here are both sides of the McKinley medal I posted in the OP. The reverse is based upon the Ohio State Seal. This piece was made during the last great years of political numismatics. The pinback button was destined to replace them.
Very educational write up. Thank you as always @johnmilton ...... On of my desires is to find a nice Jennings “so-called-dollar” to add to my collection one day.
I can't understand that. This was from an election that was held 124 years ago. The bi-metalic issue has long been settled. We are now on the computer entry money standard, not even the paper money standard.
Which one? There are number of them. This one by Spaulding and Co. is somewhat common. The most common examples were made by Gorham. The Gorham are usually available at the big shows (If we ever get to go to any big shows again.) for around $325. They might be cheaper now. Don't bother with a certified one unless it's one the rarities. They cost more and take up a lot of room in your safe deposit box if that's were you store them. The political argument here was that a silver dollar needed to be this big to be worth a dollar in terms of gold. These were really "anti-Bryan dollars."
Suffice it to say, my comment is self-explanatory which is a redundancy. I, for one, would like a Forum addressing politics, but due to the partisan beliefs of those who would post, the powers to be are smart enough to not allow this kind of expression within the confines of CoinTalk.
This is absolutely not true. The thread is based on coins and medals. Not politics. Unless it is your intent to ruin the information posted, and the history associated with it. It is beat that you remove yourself from the great thread John posted.
I would be satisfied with any example, really. I haven’t put any real effort into sourcing one quite yet. I just find them to be a very intriguing part of American/political/numismatic history. I will get around to filling that desire one day sooner rather than later.
I find it ironical that they said in the So-Called-Dollars book that they would not include political pieces, and yet this series is. The tough and popular pieces were sold by Tiffany & Co., the famous jewelry store. I have seen some fancy prices, like $600+ on examples of this piece, which had bad rim damage. Nice one like this or two to three times more. The less expensive examples have a blank reverse. Tiffany restruck these pieces in 1908. The only way you can tell the difference is on the edge, which get complicated. The word "Tiffany" is on the edge and the size of the letters is supposed to be the deciding factor. Some of these pieces have been dipped or cleaned with silver polish. Those pieces are worth less. The REALLY tough ones were issued by coin dealer Thomas Elder in 1908. Elder was a conservative, and really didn't like Bryan. Elder issued these pieces in various metals. I have bid on them in auctions, but never been successful.
Always wondered where the term gold-bug started but never looked it up. Is this a picture of another type of gold-bug pin?
