Question

passage 1: cross of gold by representative william jennings bryan 1 the gentleman who just preceded me governor russell spoke of the old state of massachusetts. let me assure him that not one person in all this convention entertains the least hostility to the people of the state of massachusetts. 2 but we stand here representing people who are the equals before the law of the largest cities in the state of massachusetts. when you come before us and tell us that we shall disturb your business interests, we reply that you have disturbed our business interests by your action. we say to you that you have made too limited in its application the definition of a businessman. the man who is employed for wages is as much a businessman as his employer. the attorney in a country town is as much a businessman as the corporation counsel in a great metropolis. the merchant at the crossroads store is as much a businessman as the merchant of new york. the farmer who... 27 this question has two parts. first, answer part a. then, answer part b. part a how does the compare-and-contrast structure in paragraph 5 of passage 1 help develop bryan’s claims? a it suggests that differences over bimetallism are less important than party loyalty. b it implies a belief that strong arguments can be made for and against bimetallism. c it reveals a fundamental disagreement that underlies the debate about bimetallism. d it emphasizes that the opposing sides in the bimetallism debate can easily compromise.

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option by understanding the compare - contrast structure in the relevant paragraph (even though the full paragraph 5 isn't shown, we can infer from the context of Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech and the given text):

Analyzing Option A

• The compare - contrast structure in the paragraph (from the visible text, we see comparisons of different types of businessmen) and the context of the bimetallism debate. If the structure is used to show that differences over bimetallism are less important than party loyalty, we need to check if the comparisons support this. In the given text, Bryan is talking about the equality of different people before the law and the broad definition of a businessman. If the compare - contrast is used to downplay the importance of bimetallism differences relative to party loyalty, this could be a valid interpretation. Let's check other options to be sure.

Analyzing Option B

• The text doesn't imply that there are strong arguments for and against bimetallism through the compare - contrast of businessmen. The comparisons are about the definition of a businessman, not the merits of bimetallism itself. So this option is incorrect.

Analyzing Option C

• The compare - contrast here is about the equality of different people (businessmen of different types) and not about a fundamental disagreement underlying the bimetallism debate. The focus is on the broad definition of a businessman, not the core of the bimetallism debate's disagreement. So this option is incorrect.

Analyzing Option D

• The text doesn't suggest that the opposing sides in the bimetallism debate can easily compromise. The comparisons are about the equality of different businessmen, not about the possibility of compromise in the bimetallism debate. So this option is incorrect.

Answer:

A. It suggests that differences over bimetallism are less important than party loyalty.