The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1900-08-16
Mr.. Bryan at Indianapolis.

After reading Mr.. Bryan's speech OF
acceptance at Indianapolis we are
almost convinced that the candidate
put the wrong grafton in his pocket
when he left the hotel. This address
must have been intended as response
to the overtures of the New England
Anti-Imperia1ist league. "Anti-lm-
peria1isn1" was declared by the Kan
sas City convention to be the para
mount issue. But is it the only issue!
What about the coinage of silver and
the trusts? Are they not issues also!
OF the latter Mr.. Bryan says nothing,
and he a11udes to the former IN tone
that shows his indisposition to discuss
free coinage. This gentleman, who be-
lieved four years ago that the gold stan
dard was the cross and crown of thorns
for labor, and a month ago insisted
upon radical reiteration of the silver
plank of the Chicago platform, now
objects to the attempt of the wicked
Republicans to ''press economic ques-
tons upon the country
The protest against expansion, for
this is all the speech of acceptance
amounts to, is good enough, as far as
it goes. and there is enough of it, The
Lord knows, such as it is. All the
familiar arguments, including vast
draughts on the wisdom of the an
clients, are presented by Mr.. Bryan,
and we must admit that he makes the
best case that can be made against the
administration. He has an excellent
retort to his critics who denounce him
for his share in the ratification of the
treaty of Paris. He says he favored
the treaty because he thought it would
be better to thus release the volunteers
and remove the excuse for war expen-
ditures, than to prolong negotiations
and invite complications with foreign
powers. That is a ski11fu1 retort.
He calls his own solution of the
Philippine question ''easy, honest and
honorable which is high praise from
such a source. If elected he will con-
vene (he means couvoke) Congress in
extraordinary session as soon as he is
inaugurated and recommend dec1ara-
ton of the nations purpose to estab-
1ish a stable form of government in
the islands, give independence to the
Fi1ipinos, and protect the Fi1ipinos
from outside interference. The fault
with this solution is that it does not
solve. It is liable to the same criti-
cisms that are directed against the
equally vague and more glittering
>genera1ities delivered with less author
~ity by Irving Wins1ow. The questions
that arise at once are: How will we
give the Philippines a stable form of
government, suitable to the people of
Manila, the former subjects of Spain,
the insurgents in the field, and all the
tribes, races and religions now nomin-
ally, at least, under our government?
Does Mr.. Bryan mean by "the Philip
pines'' the island of Luzon alone, or
all the islands of the archipelago?
Can he give independence is,
control of an independent government
G-to the Aguina1dists while insuring
the independence of all other parties
and factions? Can he protect the in
dependent Philippines government
against foreign interference unless he
is able to guarantee the fair dealings
of the Philippine government with for
eigners and foreign powers?
Other questions will be asked, but
they will come from members of Mr..
Bryan's own party. They will want
to know whether the cross of thorns is
not still pressing on the brow of labor.
whether the trust octopus no longer is
strang1ing a free people, whether the
cause of the Beers has become indie.
feasible because the Boer armies are
surrendering. Has he sunk all these
issues? Is his policy toward free sill
yer and antitrust laws a "policy Of
e?'-Chicago Journal.