are to be the magic words by which
presidents are made ?
Bryanisin , united with Orokerism , is
the plain , undisguised issue before the
American people.
Quibbling .
:
Mr. Bryan has
sought to cloak his designs and purposes
by evasive answers to questions as to
the means he will employ to wreck na
tional credit and destroy the basis of
present prosperity. He quibbles over
nothing. He is pledged to do it. It is
not worth while to talk about the means
ho will employ. If an incendiary should
threaten to burn your house you would
not debate with him about the way in
which he expected to start the fire but
would do your best to see that he did
not get a chance. Mr. Bryan has
threatened to destroy the gold standard.
Use the same good sense in dealing
with him.
He has also sought to decoy voters by
denouncing , with almost seeming sin
cerity , the iniquity
Iiiiporlallflin.
" "
of "imperialism.
By imperialism he means the acquisition
and present control of the Philippines
by this government , a condition for
which no man in this country is more
responsible than he. When the sugges
tion was first made that we assume a
part in the affairs of the Orient THE
CONSERVATIVE opposed it. "When the
treaty of peace with Spain came before
the senate of the United States , THE
CONSERVATIVE opposed its ratification
for the reason that it contained a pro
vision whereby we acquired sovereignty
to the islands of the Philippines. THE
CONSERVATIVE was not alone in this
opposition. Many senators of the United
States , of both political parties , seriously
questioned the wisdom and propriety of
the acquisition by this government of
remote territory. So strong was this
feeling that the defeat of the treaty was
assured and an amendment agreed upon
whereby we would relinquish our re
sponsibilities in the Philippines. But
unhappily for the consummation of this
arrangement , Mr. Bryan thrust his
personality into the debate and urged
immediate ratification of the treaty as it
was written , without amendment. He
used the influence of his personality and
the strength of his position , as leader of
the party opposed to the republicans , to
force seventeen democratic senators into
line , and ratified the treaty , thereby
defeating all efforts to amend. As the
one responsible for the ratification of the
treaty , Mr. Bryan must assume the re
sponsibility for all that treaty contained.
He must assume the responsibility for
the payment of $20,000,000 to Spain for
sovereignty to the Philippines and all
the complications resulting from our
attempt to maintain that sovereignty.
According to the constitution of the
United States a treaty once ratified
becomes the supreme law of the land.
This treaty made the president of the
United States responsible for the main
tenance of law and order in the Philip
pines. In the case of rebellion or
insurrection he must suppress it and , if
necessary , use the army and navy of the
United States to do so. This responsi
bility will cling to the president until
congress takes it away by making other
arrangements for the government of the
Filipinos , either by recognizing their
independence or disposing of the islands
to foreign powers. It should not be
forgotten that the granting of Philippine
independence is a congressional right ,
and not a privilege of the president.
Neither Mr. Bryan nor Mr. McKinley ,
alone , will be able to effect the slightest
change in the relations existing between
the Filipinos and the people of the
United States.
Mr. Bryan has announced , as a part of
his Philippine program , that he would
_ , _ , , recommend to con-
Bryan's Policy. . , . .
gress the granting
of independence to the Filipinos under
an American protectorate. He proposes
that we become responsible to the nations
of the world for the government of this
primitive people and at the same time
resign all right of control over them.
He proposes that we permit the people
of the Philippines to do what they will
and we will guarantee to protect them.
Is it possible to conceive of a policy that
would necessitate the use of a larger
army ; that would mean more embar
rassing entanglements than this proposi
tion of wholesale responsibility and no
control ? As long as our responsibilities
remain in the Philippines there should
remain also the right of control.
"Why then should anyone who opposes
imperialism as a matter of principle ,
rather than mere party expediency , favor
the election of Mr. Bryan , either from
the standpoint of his past record upon
this question or the plan of government
he proposes for the Filipinos ? THE
CONSERVATIVE believes that the people
of the Philippine islands will enjoy as
large a measure of civil liberty under
the government to be devised by the
commission headed by Judge Taft as
they would if Tammany methods of
administration were extended to them.
BRYAN SHIES.
SHIES.about concluded
his speech at Washington Park last
week when one of his audience very
impertinently and suggestively held up
a silver dollar. The incident called
forth the following speechlet from Mr.
Croker's candidate :
1 'I notice a gentleman over there held
up a silver dollar and he evidently wants
to know something about silver , and I
will remind him that his desire to hear
something about money and nothing
about human rights illustrates the sordid
level on which the republican party is
fighting this campaign. "
Can this be the same Bryan who thus
answered an interruption in 1806 , while
speaking at Syracuse , New York :
"In this campaign for the first time in
the history of this government , a great
party proposes to surrender the right of
self-government and invest in foreign
legislative bodies the power to legislate
for the people of the United States. If
they ask us , 'what about other ques
tions , ' we tell them that so long as the
right of self-government is endangered
there is no other question. "
If Bryan spoke the truth then , if , in
the money question , was involved the
_ right of self gov-
. ° °
Not True. , ,
ernment for the
American people , the same issue must be
at stake in determining the money ques
tion this year. Is not then the question
of self government or human rights
for the American people of infinitely
greater importance to them than the
question of self government or human
rights for any other people ? The elec
tion in 1896 turned against Mr. Bryan.
If his political diagnosis was correct ,
the American people then "surrendered
the right of self government. " If this
be true ; if in 1896 we lost the right to
govern ourselves , how can we again
lose that which we lost then ? But in
the meantime is any American citizen
conscious of the loss of any of his poli-
.tical rights ? Has a single liberty or
privilege , previously enjoyed , been
taken from him ? Is he aware of the
slightest change in his status as a citi
zen of this great republic ? If not , self
government was not surrendered and
was not at issue in determining the
money question four years ago. Since
Mr. Bryan used falsehood and deception
to mislead the voters in 1896 ought he
to be trusted now ? Ought he to betaken
seriously when he again declares that
human rights and self government will
be lost to the American people if they
do not elect him president ?
The most effective
VOTE * _ _
and sure way of
injuring Nebraska workingmen is to de
stroy the industries which employ them.
A vote for the Croker-Bryan ticket is a
vote to uphold the action of Bryan in
attempting to close the starch factory
at Nebraske City and throw several
hundred men out of employment. What
has been attempted at Nebraska City
will be tried elsewhere in this state and
throughout the country in the event of
the success of the fusion combine.
If the scriptures
shall be fulfilled
and if it shall be meted out unto evil
doers as it is written , what a world of
woe is in store for the false prophet of
1896 ! For it is written "woe unto the
foolish prophets that follow their own
spirits and have seen nothing. "
