The times., 1899-03-25
SATURDAY. MARCH Is, 1899.
Criticism of Bryan. Letter.


The more the letter of Mr.. Bryan in
reply TO an invitation TO the ten-doilar-a-
plate dinner is discussed by those who
stand with Mr.. Belmont, the President of
the Democratic Club the more clearly the
soundness of its argument appears. The
most ambitious attempt to dispute its
conclusions receives attention because 1t
is ascribed to former Senator Hill. though
il is not positive that he wrote it. The
fact that it appears in the Albany Argus
where il fills two columns is the only rea-
son why it is charged to him. the Argus
being regarded as his newspaper. Probably
Mr. Hill could not have made it stronger.
ii he is not its author, simply because the
more the issue is studied the more unan-
swerable is Mr.. Bryan's proposition.
Indeed. he is so obviously right and the
Belmont pretenders are SO. desperate, that
they do not accept the question as he offers
it, but invent propositions. one of which he
has not made Thus. the Argus article,
urges that Mr.. Bryan affirms only two
things which it proceeds TO deny 1t says
he assumes that he is again TO be the
Democratic nominee for President next
year. and that the Chicago platform will
be reaffirmed. It then charges him with
narrowness and prescription and purpose
to exclude men who want to be Democrats.
1t clearly evades the real principle involved
in his letter.
The occasion of the controversy was a
professedly party celebration of the birth
day of Jefferson. He was invited
of
oerat by club which calls itself Demo-
cratic The man who. as president of the
club, signed the invitation had left the
last national convention, declaring that the
success of the party would be source OF
danger TO the country. and he did what he
could to defeat it and elect Mr.. Mckinley.
The contention of the Argus is that
Mr.. Belmont is Democrat in spite of this,
and although he would certainly oppose
the Democratic party in the next election
if il should not abandon the principles
which il proclaimed then; and that as
Democrat he has a right TO take an active
part in the affairs OF the party until IL is
determined whether 1t shall adhere to its
principles or adopt his. That is all there
fs TO it.
Under such a rule any Republican would
have the same right TO assist in the trans
action of Democratic party affairs. He
could safely pledge himself to support the
party il it would adopt his principles and
name his candidate.
II is a mistake, and an intentional one,
10 assume that a great party exists only
during the time between the convention
and the election, and that the principles it
proclaims are abolished by defeat. Until
a national convention formally abandons
the doctrines adopted in national eonven-
fion. their support is the sole test OF De-
mocracy. Mr.. Bryan has every right 10
assume that the Chicago platform will be
endorsed by the next convention. Nothing
has happened TO show there is any error
in it, The Argus" maintains that the
election OF Mr.. Mckinley is reason why
that platform should be abandoned. but
such proposition it not worth serious at
tention The party has a right and is
bound TO protect itself from men who were
able to injure il because they claimed to
be Democrats and who virtually declare
their purpose to fight it again next year II
il does not come to their views.
The Democratic party has nothing to lose
by the course of Mr.. Bryan. II it reaflrms
the Chicago platform these men will op-
pose il, only they will have less in
fiuence If they are restrained from partic-
patton in its affairs. II it abandons the
Chicago platform there is as much chance
of these men supporting it as though they
should be recognized now as Democrats.