LAD #24 Bryan's Cross of Gold Speech

William Jennings Bryan delivered his famous "Cross of Gold" speech in 1896 at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, as he was trying to be the party's nominee. This speech regarded his opinion of the silver to gold ratio of 16 to 1 in the American economy. By doing this, farmers in debt would be aided because of an increase of currency in circulation. Bryan considered this to be a humane and just cause for Americans. He prefers to clear the waters rather than fight. He argued that America is a country for the people, and believes that he is representing the general people when he states his goal for the coinage of silver. He also supports distributing wealth and an income tax. He conceded that many city people support the gold standard, but reminded them that wealth comes from the poor.




President McKinley supported the gold standard, which Bryan opposed, saying "they will crucify us on a golden cross"

LAD #23 Populist Party Platform

The Populist Party was created in reaction to industrialization and big business abuses. It emerged from the Farmers Alliance in the 1800s, and was a third independent party, separate from Democrats and Republicans. They were primarily Southern farmers that struggled to compete with massive businesses. Populists believed that the working class was being denied basic rights and liberties, and supported the formation of workers unions. They opposed immigration because incoming immigrants took jobs that would have been available for Americans. They also believed in an increase in the power of the government and the free coinage of silver and gold in the ratio of 16 to 1. They supported an income tax, and increase in the circulation of wealth, and the formation of a permanent union of workers to oppose unfair business practices. All in all, they were fighting for more power to the working man.
Working unions across America found aligned political views with the Populist Party, such as the Utility Workers Union of America.

LAD #25 The Dawes Act

The Dawes Act, otherwise known as the Dawes General Allotment Act, was passed by Congress in 1887, regarding the Indian Policy. The law focused on how reservations would be divided into sections of land assigned to individuals. Each head of the family was fiven one quarter of a section. Each individual person over the age of eighteen, as well as an orphaned child under the age of eighteen was assigned one sixth of a section. Lands that werenot given to Indians were open to settlement by others, as well as the continued development of the railroad. Evem of a Native American did not live on a reservation, they were still entitled to their allotted plot of land, and would receive a patent for it, protected by the government. The act emphasized individual land ownership, which contrasted the unity and culture previously held by many Indians living in communal villages. In a way, The Dawes Act can be seen as an attempt to assimilate and further deprive the Native Americans of their land, and put it to use for infrastructure, roads, bridges, and railroads.



This is similar to the Indian Removal Act, because both were created in attempt to move Native Americans away from the land where they had currently resided to land that was convenient for the government, so that they could expand to land previously occuppied by Indians.

LAD#22 McKinley's War Message

McKinley originally sent a message to Spain begging that they cease war with Cuba. The American Ambassador in Spain replied with a message that Spain had accepted this. However, this did not last long, and the United States ended up plunging into the war on the side of the Cubans. Addressing Congress, McKinley said that the conflicts between Cuba and Spain had caused the US great annoyance and effort. Their trade and investments in Cuba had been lost as well. He recalled a previous address that he had made, and said that he understands now that a proclamation of neutrality in all worldly affairs may not be always the best choice. He asked to propose a "rational compromise" to both sides, then said that United States intervention on no particular side would be justified. He summarized the grounds of intervention in four points: First, to end war for the sake of humanity, and that it is, in fact, our business because it is our neighbors. Second, we owe it to Cuban citizens to grant them the freedoms enjoyed in America. Third, the halt of commerce, trade, and business is harmful to both the US and the people of Cuba. Fourth, conflict in Cuba directly affects US peace and is a threat to the protection of American citizens. He gave an example of this by reflecting on the tragedy of the battleship Maine in the Port of Havana. He concludes by saying that this conflict cannot be solved through present methods, and he asks Congress to authorize the President to take measures to stop the hostilities between Spain and Cuba.


The Cuban Missile Crisis is similar to McKinleys War Message because the United States was affected by the activities of Cuba, its close neighbor. However, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the US and Cuba were distinctly against each other.

LAD #21 Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth

Carnegie begins by addressing how civilization has changed from there not being a huge difference between the "chief" and his "retainers", but how the castles of todays billionaires versus the cottage of the laborer is vastly different. He considers this essential for humanity. He poses the question of "why is the wealth of few a good plan?" and promises to answer that, saying that it should be competence, not wealth, that people should want to acquire. A surplus of wealth can be acquired in three ways: left to the family, used for public works, or administered during the lives by the wealthy. He believed the first way was unjust and not beneficial to the family. He is not entirely supportive of the second either, because the wealth could be used in a way the giver did not intend, he has no power over it. However, he does support the taxation of a wealthy estate after death. This encourages the rich to distribute their wealth in their lifetime as opposed to leaving it to the state. This was Carnegie's preferred method of money management. He also supported the unequal distribution of wealth. The wealth of all the minority spread to the majority, which is beneficial for the masses. Overall, Carnegie believed that the duty of the wealthy was to distribute his wealth for the common welfare and set an example for his dependents.




Mark Zuckerberg is similar to Carnegie in that he made a fortune, but was very generous with his wealth, and is a known philanthropist.