You may dispute over whether I have fought a good fight, you may dispute over whether I have finished my course; but you cannot deny that I have kept the faith. - William Jennings Bryan to the Democratic National Convention, 1904.1

In 1896 a young, charismatic, former congressman from Nebraska ran for the presidency on the Democratic ticket. Touching on Populist themes, condemning the moneyed interests of the East and abroad, this politician struck a chord with millions of voters across the nation. This candidate, with a thundering, revivalist style, garnered a huge number of votes. However, he was not able to recapture the White House for the Democratic party. Two more times this Nebraskan would run for president, and two more times he would lose. He would serve President Woodrow Wilson as his first Secretary of State, and he would end his career defending the theory of creationism against the theory of evolution. That man was William Jennings Bryan. 

At first glance, Bryan is a mystery. He presents the picture of a "liberal," in its late 19th and early 20th century sense. In 1896 and beyond, the "Great Commoner," as he came to be called, championed many reforms, such as free silver, female suffrage, government ownership of railroads, and other programs that are associated with the "common man." Throughout his life, and especially as Secretary of State, he was a pacifist who lobbied for peace.

However, the Commoner, near the end of his life, crusaded for some very "conservative," one might say "reactionary" causes. He crusaded against alcohol and especially against Darwinism. Fearing the consequences of the theory of evolution, Bryan used all of his powers to silence the theory of evolution in the classroom. Bryan ended his career on the witness stand in Dayton, Tennessee, locked in an ever losing argument with Clarence Darrow. How is it that this man, who at one time in his life seemed so radical, could end his life being so reactionary?

The answer is that Bryan himself never actually changed; the world changed around him. As historian Lawrence Levine commented, "In William Jennings Bryan, reform and reaction lived happily, if somewhat incongruously, side by side. The Bryan of the 1920's was essentially the Bryan of the 1890's: older in years but no less vigorous, no less optimistic, no less certain."2 He was not a man of great intelligence, and he was very often blithely indifferent to facts.3 He was always absolutely sure of his actions and beliefs. He believed in majority rule, and, throughout his life, he held an unswerving faith in the Bible.4 He did not study complex issues, he sought simple "yes-no" answers to complicated questions.

While he had read the Bible, Jefferson, and the history of the Democratic Party, he was not a well-read person. He idolized the myth of "Protestant-Yankee agrarianism," and he distrusted and sought to curb the power of the new industrial system.5 This essay will examine three periods in Bryan's life: his presidential candidacy in 1896, his brief years as Secretary of State, and his participation in the Scopes Trial of 1925. This essay will show that, even though it looks as if Bryan went through a radical change, in reality he stayed still as the world moved on.

In 1896, Bryan had risen through the Democratic ranks to become the party's candidate for the presidency. He based much of his campaign on the principles of Populism. Populism was a grass-roots political movement, which had evolved out of the Farmers Alliances of the 1880s. The Populists at their height encompassed many reform movements all around the country. Their basic principles were laid down at a Populist convention in St. Louis in 1892. Speaking to over 10,000 people, Ignatius Donnelly stated in twelve paragraphs the Populist credo. He listed the Populists' demands: a graduated income tax, unlimited coinage of gold and silver, government ownership of railroads, and several other demands. He claimed that "Wealth belongs to him who creates it...." The Populists were going to challenge the power of rich, upper class, corporate interests.6 A plan for Federal "sub-treasuries" was also part of the Populist agenda.7

The Populists, coming from their rural, Protestant traditions, also believed in a tight, rigid, moral code. This code stressed many traditional American rural beliefs, including an aversion to alcohol, and a deep fundamentalism.8 One of their important tenets was the free coinage of silver. Briefly, the silver issue was:

The question at hand was whether the government would purchase and coin silver and at what price (expressed as a ratio of silver to gold). From the founding of the Republic until 1873, both gold and silver had been theoretically part of the money supply, at a traditional ratio of 16:1. But since the 1830's the high price of silver relative to gold had encouraged silver miners to sell their product on the open market rather than present it to the mint for coining. In 1873 the little-noted Coinage Act removed silver from the list of U. S. coins, but by the mid 1870's increased silver production had dropped prices to the point where coinage was profitable. The Coinage Act was denounced as a monstrous conspiracy, and political demands were heard for the remonetariztion of silver.

"Free silver" became a standard of the Populists.9 They believed that the advocates of the gold standard were conspiring to rob the common man of his ability to achieve prosperity.

Broad support existed for free silver. Clarence Darrow, the man who would become Bryan's adversary in 1925, in the 1890s supported free silver. He once said, "Up to 1873, gold and silver were coined on a ratio of sixteen to one; they should be restored to that basis."10 In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, former congressman from Nebraska, took up free silver as his key issue in his bid for the presidency. It would be during this campaign that Bryan would become the champion of the "common man," and when he would rise as one of the most important powers in the Democratic Party.

At best, Bryan had a limited understanding of the silver issue. He claimed that the supply of silver had not exceeded the supply of gold from 1870 to 1896, which was wrong. He was wrong about many details of the silver issue, but on the whole he grasped its concepts.11 In spite of his limited knowledge of the issue, Bryan seized upon it as his own. Utilizing this issue, Bryan, in July of 1896, became the standard bearer of Populism and the Democratic Party.

July 9, 1896 was the day William Jennings Bryan addressed the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. On that day, many speakers addressed the convention, with no clear front-runner emerging. Benjamin Tillman had represented the Populist sentiment, but his speech had been ineffective. The silver advocates felt cheated as the Eastern moneyed interests seemed to be taking charge of the convention. It was with this sense that Bryan took to the speaker's podium.12 This speech was to become the clarion call for the Democratic Party. When his turn came, Bryan leapt from his seat, quickly walked down the aisle and ran up the steps two at a time. As he arrived at the podium strong cheers began to spread throughout the audience. "He reached the speaker's stand, and the applause grew like a forest fire in fury and swept beyond the galleries into the lobby and out into the street."13 Bryan gazed out upon the audience and began his speech.

His address was an ode to the common man. Bryan said:

We say that you [supporters of the gold standard] have made the definition of a business man too limited in its application. The man who is employed for wages is as much a business man as his employer, the attorney in a country town is as much a business man as the corporation counsel in a great metropolis; the merchant at the cross-roads store is as much a business man as the merchant of New York; the farmer who goes forth in the morning and toils all day- who begins in the spring and toils all summer- and who by the application of brain and muscle to the natural resources of the country creates wealth, is as much a business man as the man who goes upon the board of trade and bets upon the price of grain; the miners who go down a thousand feet into the earth, or climb two thousand feet upon the cliffs and bring forth from their hiding places the precious metals to be poured into the channels of trade are as much business men as the few financial magnates who, in a back room, corner the money of the world. We come to speak for this broader class of business men.14

Continuing on, Bryan contrasted his rural ideal with what he believed to be the corruption of the cities. "Burn your cities," he said, "and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country." Drawing to his conclusion, Bryan said to his spellbound audience, "Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests, and the toilers, everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns...." At this point, Bryan raised his fingers to his temples, slowly moving them down as to indicate blood dripping down his head. He continued, "you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold." Here, he stepped back from the podium, and stood in a position resembling a crucifixion. He stayed like this for a few seconds, then left the stage.15

At the conclusion of this electrifying address, the convention "went mad. Here at last was their defender. Here was the gallant fighter who feared no one, who knew no compromise. After years of being trod upon, ignored, despised, ridiculed, here at last they had their champion- The Great Commoner!"16 Bryan's epic oration skills and his revivalist style won him the nomination of the Party, and an admiration that would last him for the rest of his life.

Bryan, speaking for a cause which he believed in all his life until it became a non-issue, showed a pattern which he would exhibit all his life: speaking poignantly and passionately about his beliefs. The fact of Bryan's life is that his beliefs never changed throughout his life. In these early days, he was only 36 years old, Bryan spoke for what he believed to be the common man, and, in supporting Populist reforms, projected the image of a midwestern radical. Bryan lost the election of 1896 to William McKinley, due a great deal to superior finances and the impressive political skills of Mark Hanna, McKinley's campaign manager.17 Nevertheless, through the election of 1896, Bryan established himself as a great crusader for, in his estimation, the rights of the common man.

The years between the 1896 election and his appointment as Secretary of State were busy ones for Bryan. He ran for president two more times, in 1900 and 1908,18 and spent much of his time lecturing across the country. By 1912 and the election of Woodrow Wilson, Bryan was a major power within the Democratic Party. The first Democrat in the White House since Grover Cleveland wanted the Great Commoner as his secretary of state. Bryan was an "indispensable" link between the old Democrats and the new, Wilson Democrats.19 Throughout his short tenure as Secretary, Bryan advocated peace at all costs. He ended up resigning as Secretary of State rather than sign a belligerent note to Germany. The Great Commoner saw his duties as Secretary of State as another moral Crusade.

As with many other facets in Bryan's life, his convictions for peace were lifelong. Although he was briefly a colonel during the Spanish-American War,20 he believed firmly in peace. At age 19 he wrote to his cousin Thomas Marshall, "The sound of glittering steel and the gory fields of battle have no claims for me!... Tom, do you know that the time is swiftly passing by when armies rule? The dawn of a better day is at hand. Right is beginning to rule in the place of might. I rejoice that in a few years it will not be necessary to shoot a man to convince him that you are right and to blot out a nation to prove to them that their principles are false."21 His pacifistic thoughts were reinforced in his trip around the world when he met Count Leo Tolstoy.22 Tolstoy's own pacifism had a deep and lasting effect on Bryan, who took pacifism to heart. Pacifism guided his steps as Secretary of State.23 In keeping with his populist heritage, he believed that most wars were simply caused by special interests, against the desires of the common people.24 As Secretary of State, the Commoner believed that he could "banish the scourge of war from the face of the earth."25 Bryan was an optimist all his life, and that optimism was demonstrated when he said to his friend Josephus Daniels, who would become Secretary of War under Wilson, "There will be no war while I am Secretary of State."26

As Secretary of State, Bryan's crusading nature sometimes overcame his abilities. He was not cut from a "realistic" cloth. He moralized, he gave many "platitudinous speeches," and he believed that his brand of Christian pacifism could sweep the world and end wars everywhere.27 Unlike many of his predecessors, Bryan instituted a policy of strict secrecy that greatly annoyed the press. He and his wife, Mary, were lifelong teetotalers, and so he never served alcohol in diplomatic functions. Diplomatic channels buzzed with gossip about the uncharacteristic practices of the new Secretary of State.28

Secretary Bryan's goals of peace were not often realized. In fact, in his dealings with Latin America, Bryan for once compromised his staunchly held principles. Ever since the U. S. invasions of Cuba and the Philippines, Bryan had been a staunch anti-imperialist. When he came to office, Bryan hoped to right all of the imperialistic wrongs that had been committed upon Latin America. Sadly, he knew almost nothing about Latin America. He had to rely on the information sent to him by officials in the Latin-American Division, who believed that interventionism was the only way to effectively stabilize Latin America. Bryan, who in addition to being a pacifist was also a patriot, was very much aware of the need to protect the Panama Canal. He ended up supporting U. S. intervention in Latin America. He was able to justify this to himself with a belief, shared by Wilson, that the U. S. was bringing its benefits to the backward peoples of Latin America.29 Although he had to abandon his anti-imperialistic beliefs in this case, the Commoner convinced himself that he and Wilson were helping the population of Latin America take its rightful place in the world.

Throughout his tenure as Secretary of State Bryan relied on peace treaties as a means to remake the world. He believed that if disputes between nations could be submitted to an international board, and if those nations would wait for a year before beginning hostilities, lasting peace could be achieved. In a letter to the President on May 12, 1915, Bryan described the basis for his idea: "In individual matters friends some times find it wise to postpone the settlement of disputes until such differences can be considered calmly and on their merits. So it may be with nations."30 On April 24, 1913, Bryan submitted to officials from France, Great Britain, Germany, and Japan a proposal for peace treaties which would stipulate that each nation, when conflicts arose, would wait for a year before beginning war, and would submit the said conflict to an international board of review.31 Most nations of the world ended up signing Bryan's treaties, with the important exceptions of Belgium, Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Japan.32 Symbolizing his desire for peace, Bryan obtained a surplus sword from the War Department, and had it melted down into miniature plowshares. He personally gave them to colleagues at State Department functions. Inscribed upon these plowshares was the Biblical quotation about beating swords into plowshares, and also two Bryan maxims, "Nothing is final between friends," and "Diplomacy is the art of keeping cool."33

The tragedy of World War I thwarted Bryan's dreams of a world without war. Before the war began, Bryan was very insistent that the United States maintain its neutrality. He even opposed the lending of money to belligerents. In a letter to the president, dated August 10, 1914, Bryan explained his opposition. "I know of nothing that would do more to prevent war than an international agreement that neutral nations would not loan to belligerents. While such an agreement would be of great advantage, could we not by our example hasten the reaching of such an agreement?" He went on to say that if someone loaned money to one nation, then others could loan money to other hostile nations, thereby dividing the population. He also believed that the great financial interests in the nation would begin warring with each other in the newspapers, making it extremely difficult for the United States to appear neutral.34

The United States' move toward war eventually moved Bryan out of his position as Secretary of State. The Lusitania crisis, and the Wilson Administration's response to it, forced Bryan into a choice over whether to sign a belligerent note to Germany, or to be true to his pacifistic principles. The British liner Lusitania was a passenger ship that secretly was carrying munitions. A German U-boat torpedoed it and it sank, killing over one thousand people, including 128 Americans. President Wilson had to officially respond to this German action. Preparedness activists such as Theodore Roosevelt advocated an immediate declaration of war, while Bryan advised a moderate response.

At first, the message Wilson drafted, with the help of Bryan and his advisor Robert Lansing, was fairly subdued. However, Lansing advocated a very strong response, including a demand for an official apology from Germany and financial reparations. Bryan, who was concerned about passenger ships secretly transporting munitions, advocated a warning to Americans about traveling on board hostile ships. In the end, Wilson took Lansing's advice and sent a very stern letter to Berlin. Although it went out under the auspices of the State Department, Bryan's heart was heavy over it. On June 8, 1915, William Jennings Bryan's resignation was announced at a presidential cabinet meeting.35 Once he left the administration, Bryan attempted to take his case for peace to the American people, through speaking engagements and newspaper articles.36 However, once the war began, Bryan remained intensely loyal to the Wilson Administration.37

As Secretary of State, Bryan was again crusading, this time for peace. His dreams for world peace were never realized, but he never gave up hope. Bryan's optimism blinded him to certain realities; peace treaties alone could not stop the traditional European rivalries. His near obsessive desire for peace slowly alienated him from the policy makers in the Wilson Administration. He did not come to office with a very realistic conception of early twentieth century diplomacy. He believed that he and the United States could remake the world into a world full of Christian harmony and peace. His goals as Secretary of State were based upon his lifelong pacifist beliefs, and he did not swerve from them. His beliefs in peace had not changed, but the world around him had become an extremely violent and complex place. Bryan's black-white solutions could not be applied to the constantly shifting face of international diplomacy. In the end, due to his deeply held principles, Bryan appeared once again as a kind of radical, who advocated peace in the face of the darkest war imagined up to that time.

1 Lawrence W. Levine, Defender of the Faith: William Jennings Bryan: The Last Decade, 1915-1925 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), 365.

2 Ibid., vii.

3 Ray Ginger, ed., William Jennings Bryan, Selections (Indianapolis: The Bobbs, Merrill Company, Inc., 1967) xiii.

4 Ibid., xvi.

5 Paolo E. Coletta, "The Bryan Campaign of 1896," in William Jennings Bryan: A Profile, edited by Paul W. Glad (New York: Hill and Wang, 1968), 32-33.

6 Michael Kazin, The Populist Persuasion: An American History (New York: BasicBooks, a division of HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1995), 28-29.

7 Robert C. McMath, Jr., American Populism, A Social History, 1877-1898 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1993), 109.

8 Kazin, 38-39.

9 McMath, 183.

10 J. C. Long, Bryan: The Great Commoner (New York: D. Appleton & Company, 1928), 80.

11 Coletta, 29-30.

12 Louis W. Koenig, Bryan: A Political Biography of William Jennings Bryan (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1971), 191-194.

13 Ibid., 195.

14 Ginger, 40.

15 Ibid.: Koenig, 197-198.

16 Long, 88.

17 Coletta, 22-25.

18 Ginger, xlix-l.

19 Richard Challenger, "Secretary of State" in William Jennings Bryan: A Profile, edited by Paul W. Glad (New York: Hill and Wang, 1968), 163.

20 Ginger, xlix.

21 Levine, 5.

22 Ginger, l.

23 Long, 178-179.

24 Ibid., 298.

25 Koenig, 503.

26 Levine, 4.

27 Challenger, 162.

28 Koenig, 506-507.

29 Challenger. 175-177.

30 Ginger, 180.

31 Long, 298-300.

32 Ibid., 304.

33 Challenger, 180-181.

34 Ginger, 169.

35 Koenig, 541-543, 549.

36 Ibid., 552-553.

37 Long, 344.