Newspapers / The News & Observer … / Aug. 9, 1900, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The News & Observer (Raleigh, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
TWELVE PAGES. The News and Observer. VOL XLVIII. NO. in. [Load]© &00 ©shpoOoddsi GDaoOo®© om UtoftOo GBoreQflDgrGo©^ BRYAN ACCEPTS THE NOMINATION FOR PRESIDENT His Speech Before the Notifi cation Committee at Indianapolis- DISCUSSION OF THE KANSAS CITY PLATFORM eclares it is a Contest Between Demo cracy on the One Hand and Pluto cracy on the Other. THE POSITION OF THE TWO PARTIES CLEARLY DEFINED BY MR. BRYAN Imperialism is the Great and Far- Reaching Issue Now in the Arena of Politics, CIVILIZING WITH THE SWORD AND MAKING MERCHANDISED. 7 BLOOD Mr. Bryan Declares That He Favors Giving the „ Filipinos Independence and Guarding Them From Molestation From Other Nation:, as H s Been Done in Case of the Cubans. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Notification Committee: I shall, at an early day, and in a more formal manner, accept the nomination which you tender, and I shall at that time discuss the various questions cov ered by the Democratic platform. It may not be out of place, however, to submit a few observations at this time upon the general character of the contest before us, and upon the question which is de clared to be of paramount importance in this campaign. When I say that the contest of 1900 is a contest between Democracy on the one hand and plutocracy on the other, I do not mean to say that all our opponents have deliberately chosen to give to or ganized wealth a predominating influence in the affairs cf the Government, but I do assert that on the important issue of the day the Republican party is dominated by those influences which constantly tend to elevate pecuniary considerations and ignore human rights. In 1859 Lincoln said that the Republi can party believed in the man and the dollar, but that in case of conflict it be lieved in the man before the dollar. This is the proper relation which should exist between the two. Man, the handiwork of God, comes first; money, the handi work of men, is cf inferior importance. Man is the master, money the servant, but upon all important questions today, Republican legislation tends to make money the master and man the servant. The maxim of Jefferson, “equal rights to all and special privileges to none," and the doctrine of Lincoln that this should be a Government “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” are being disregarded and the instrumentalities of government are being used to advance the interests of these who are in a posi tion to secure favors from the Govern ment. POSITION OF THE TWO PARTIES. The Democratic party is not making war upon the honest acquisition of ( wealth; it has no desire to discourage industry, economy and thrift. On the contrary, it gives to every citizen the greatest possible stimulus to honest toil, when it promises him protection in the enjoyment of the proceeds of his labor. Property rights are most secure when hu man rights are respected. Democracy strives for a civilization in which every member of society will share, according to his merits. No one has a right to expect from so ciety more than a fair compensation for the service which he renders to society. If he secures more, it is at all expense of some one else. It is no injustice to him to prevent his doing injustice to another. To him who would, cither through class legislation or in the ab sence of necessary legislation, trespass upon the rights of another, the Demo cratic party says: “Thou shalt not?” Against us are arrayed a comparative ly small, but politically and financially powerful, number who really profit by Republican policies, but with them arc associated a large number who, because of their attachment to the party name, WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN. Who Yesterday, at Indianapolis, Formally Accepted the Democratic Nomination for President of the United States. are giving their support to doctrines antagonistic to the former teachings of their own party. Republicans who used to advocate bimetallism, now try to convince themselves that a gold standard is good; Republicans who were formerly attached to the greenback are now seeking an ex cuse for giving national banks control of the nation’s paper money; Republicans who used to boast that the Republican party was paying off the national debt, are now looking for reasons to support a perpetual and increasing debt; Repub licans who abhorred a trust, now beguile* themselves with the delu sion that there are good trusts and bad trusts, while, in their minds, the line between the two is becoming mere and more obscure; Republicans who, in times past, congratulated the country upon the small expense of our standing army, are now making light of the ob jections which are urged against a large increase in the permanent military es tablishment; Republicans who gloried in our indebtedness when the nation was less powerful, now look with fayor upon a foreign alliance; Republicans who, three years ago condemned “forcible an nexation” as immoral and even crim inal, are now sure that it is both im moral and criminal to oppose forcible annexation. That partisanship has al ready blinded many to present dangers ! s certain; how large a portion of the Republican party can be drawn over to he new policies remains to be seen. REPUBLICANS DODGE THE ISSUE. For a time Republican leaders were in clined to deny to opponents the right to •riticise the Philippine policy of the Ad ministration, but upon investigation they 'oundUhat both Lincoln and Clay assert 'd and exercised the right to criciisc a President during the progress of the Mexican war. Instead cf meeting the issue boldly and submitting a clear and positive plan for dealing with the Philippine question, the Republican convention adopted a plat form, Ihc larger part of which was de voted to boasting and self congratulation. In attempting to press economic ques ions upon the country to the exclusion 'f those which involve the very struc urc cf cur Government, the Republican leaders give new evidence of their ibandonmenv of the earlier ideals of the party and of their complete subserviency to pecuniary considerations. RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA, Til UtiSDAY MORNING AUGUST 9,1900. But they shall not be permitted to evade the stupendous and far-reaching issue which they have deliberately brought into the arena of politics. When the President, supported by a practically unanimous vote cf the House and Sen ate, entered upon a war with Spain for the purpose of aiding the struggling pa triots of Cuba, the country, without re gard to party, applauded. Although the Democrats recognized that the Adminis tration would necessarily gain a political advantage from the conduct of a war which, iu the very nature of the rase, must soon end in a complete victory, they vied with the Republicans in the support which they gave to the President. When the war was over and the Republi can leaders begean to suggest the pro priety cf a colonial policy, opposition at once manifested itself. When the Presi dent finally laid before the Senate a treaty which recognized the independence cf Cuba, but provided for the cession of the Philippine Islands to the United States, the menace cf imperialism became so apparent that many preferred to re ject the treaty and risk the ills that might follow rather than take the chance of correcting the errors of the treaty by the independent action cf this country. RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY. I was among the number of these who believed it better to ratify the treaty and end the war, release the volunteers, remove the excuse for war expenditures, and then g've to the Filipinos the inde pendence which might be forced f rom Spain by a new treaty. In view cf the criticism which my ac tion aroused in some quarters I take tbis occasion to re-state the reasons atven at that time. I thought i: safer to trust the American people to give iu - M'eJHience to the Fnimpos than to trust the accomplishment of that purpose to atpiomacy with an unfriendly nation. Lincoln embodied an argument in the question, when he asked, "Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws?” I believe that we arc now in a better position to wage a successful contest against imperialism than we would have been had the treaty been re jected. With the treaty ratified, a clean cut issue is presented between a Gov ernment by consent and a Government by force, and imperialists must bear the responsibility for all that happens until the question is settled. If the treaty had been rejected, the opponents of im perialism would have been held respon sible for any international complications which might have arisen before the rat ification of another treaty. But whatever differences of opinion may have existed as to the j>est method of opposing the colonial policy, there never was any dif ference as to the great importance of the question, and there is no difference now as to the course to be pursued. The title of Spain being extinguished, wc were at liberty to deal with the Fili pinos according to American principles. The Bacon resolution, introduced a month before hostilities broke out at Manila, promised independence to the Filipinos on the same terms that it was '.nomtlsjd to the Cutans. 1 supported this resolution and believe that its adop tion prior to the breaking out of hostili ties would have prevented bloodshed, and that its adoption at any subsequent time would have ended hostilities. If the treaty had been rejected, con siderable time would have necessarily elapsed before a new treaty could have been agreed upon and ratified, and dur ing that time (he question would have been agitating the public mind. If the Bacon resolution had been adopted by Ihc Senate and carried out by the Presi dent, either at the time of the ratifica tion of the treaty or at any time after wards, it would have taken the question of imperialism out of politics and left the American people free to deal with their domestic problems. But the reso lution was defeated by the vote of the Republican Vice President, and from M:at time to this a Republican Congress has refused to take any action whatever in the matter. an EVASION OF RESPONSIBILITY. When hostilities broke out at Manila, Republican speakers and Republican editors at once sought to lay the blame upon these who had delayed the ratifi cation of the treaty, and during the prog ress of the war, the same Republicans have accused the opponents of imperial ism of giving encouragement to the Fili pinos. This is a cowardly evasion of re sponsibility. If it is right for the United States to boll the Philippine Islands permanently and imitate the European empires in the government of the colonies, the Republi can party ought to state its position and | defend it, but it must expect the sub- Lject races to protest against such a policy I and to resist to the extent of their ability. The Filipinos do not need any encourage ment from Americans now living. Our whole history has been an encourage ment, not only to the Filipinos but to all who are denied a voice in their own government. If the Republicans are pre pared to censure all who have used lan guage calculated to make Filipinos bate toreign domination, let them condemn the speech of Patrick Henry. When he uttered that passionate appeal, “Give me liberty or give me death,” he expressed a sentiment which still echoes in the hearts of men. Let them censure Jeffer son; of all the statesmen of history, none have used words so offensive to those who would hold their fellows in political bondage. Let them censure Washington, who declared that the colonies must choose between liberty and slavery. Or, if the statute of limitations has ruu against the sins of Henry and Jefferson and Washington, let them censure Lin coln, whose Gettysburg speech will be quoted in defense cf popular government when the present advocates of force and conquest are forgotten. Someone has said that a truth once spoken can never be recalled. It is true. It goes on and on, and no one can set a limit to the ever-widening influ ence. But if it were possible to obliter ate every word written or spoken in de fense of the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, a war of conquest would still leave its legacy of perpetual hatred, for it was God himself who placed in every human heart the love of liberty. He never made a race of people so low in the scale of civilization or intelligence that it would welcome a foreign master. PI ANTING SEEDS OF DESPOTISM. Lincoln said that the safety of this na tion was not in its fleets, its armies or its force, but in the spirit which prises liberty and the heritage of all men, In all lands, everywhere; and he warned his countrymen that they could not destroy this spirit without planting the seeds of despotism at v their cwn doors. These who would have this nation eater upon a career of empire must consider not cnly the effect of imperialism on the Filipinos, but they must also calculate its effect upon our own nation. We can not repudiate the principles cf self-gov ernment in the Philippines without weakening that principle here. Even now we are beginning to see the paralyzing influeqce of imperialism. Heretofore, this nation has been prompt SECTION ONE—Pages 1 to 4. PRICE FIVE CENTS. to express its sympathy with those who were fighting for civil liberty. While our sphere of activity has been limited to the Western Hemisphere, our sympathies have not been bounded by the seas. We have felt it due to ourselves and to the world, as well ns to those who were struggling for the right to govern them selves, to proclaim the interest which cur people have, from the date of their own independence, felt in every contest between human rights and arbitrary power. Three-quarters of a century ago, wheu our nation was small, the struggle of Greece aroused our people, and Web ster and Clay gave eloquent expression *"*• u, \,pniversal desire for Grecian inde » ‘*'ln 1896, all parties manifeßt f interest in the success of the F/ now when a war is in prog ress * Aouth Africa, which must result’ in the extension of the monarchial idea cr in the triumph of a Republic, the ad vocates of imperialism in this country dare not say a word in behalf of the Peers. Sympathy for the Boers does not arise from any unfriendliness toward England; the American people are not unfriendly toward the people of any nation. This sympathy is due to the fact that, as stated in our platform, we believe in the principle of self government and reject, as did our forefathers, the claims of monarchy. If this nation surrenders its belief in the universal application of the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, it will lose the prestige and influence which it has enjoyed among the nations es an exponent of popular government. IMPERIALISM AND EXPANSION. Our opponents, conscious of the weak ness of their cause, seek to confuse im perialism with expansion, and have even dared to claim Jefferson as a supporter cf their policy. Jefferson spoke so freely and U3ed language with such precision that no one can be ignorant of his views. On cne occasion he declared: "If there be one principle more deeply rooted than any other in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest.” And again he said: “Conquest is not in our principles; it is inconsistent with our Government.” The forcible annexation of territory, to be governed by arbitrary power, differs as much from the acquisition of terri tory to be built up into States as a monarchy differs from a democracy. The Democratic party does not oppose expan sion, when expansion enlarges the area cf the republic and incorporates land, which can be settled by American citi zens, or adds to our population people who are willing to become citizens and are capable of discharging their duties as such. The acquisition of the Louis iana territory. Florida, Texas and other tracts which have been secured from time to tima enlarged the republic, attd the constitution followed the flag into the new territory. It is now proposed to seize upon distant territory already more densely populated than our cwn country, and to force upon the people a govern ment, for which there is no warrant in our constitution or in our laws. Even the argument that this earth belongs to those who desire to cultivate it and have the physical power to acquire it cannot be invoked to justify the appro priation of the Philippine Islands by the United States. If the islands were un inhabited American citizens would not be willing to go there and till the soil. The white race will not live so near the equator. Other nations have tried to colonize in the same latitude. The Neth erlands have controlled Java for 300 years, and yet today there are less than 60,000 people of European birth scattered among 25,000,000 natives. After a cen tury and a half of English domination in India, less than one-twentieth of one one per cent of the people of India are of English birth, and it requires an army of 70,000 British soldiers to take care of the tax collectors. Spain has as serted title to the Philippine Islands for three centuries, and yet, when our fleet entered Manila Bay, there were less 'than 10,000 Spaniards retf.dlng in the Philippines. MEANING OF COLONIAL POLICY. A colonial policy means that wc shall send to the Philippines a few traders, a few masters and a few office-holders, and an army large enough to support the authority of a small fraction of the peo ple while they rule the natives. If we have an imperial policy wo must have a large standing army as its natu ral and necessary complement. The spirit which will justify the forcible an nexation cf the Philippine Islands will justify the seizure of other islands and the domination cf other people, and with wars cf conquest we can expect a cer tain, if not rapid growth of our military establishment. That a large perma nent increase in cur regular army Is in tended by the Republican leaders is not a mere matter of conjecture but a mat ter of fact. In bis message of Decem ber sth, IS9B, the President asked for authority to increase the standing army to 100,000. In 1896 the army contained about 25.000 men. Within two years the President asked for four times that many, and a Republican House of Rep resentatives complied with the request after the Spanish treaty had been signed and no »'ountry was at war with the United STates. If such an army is demanded when an imperial policy is contemplated, but not rpcnly avowed, what may be expected if the people encourage the Republican party by endorsing its policy at the pelts? A largo standing army is not only a heavy burden to the people and. if accompanied by compulsory ser vice. a constant source of irritation, but it is ever a menace to a republican form of government. The army is the person ification of force, and militarism will in evitably change the ideals cf the people and turn the thoughts, cf our young men frem the arts of peace to the science cf war. The government which relies for its defence upon its citizens, is more likely to be just than one which has at call u large body of professional
The News & Observer (Raleigh, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Aug. 9, 1900, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75