Marietta daily leader. (Marietta, Ohio) 1895-1906, 1900-10-11

Nebraska DE DemiEpsue-brbhu has Made
No Reply.
Hon. William H. West, the bli.d
man eloquent of Dellefontaine, just
previous to Mr.. Bryan's recent visit -
Ohio, dictated an open letter to that
gentleman, which is excellent both IS
20 matter and to manner. 1t Is entire
ly too long to handle in these col
umns, but a brief recapitulat!on OF
Judge Vests argument will afford ma
terial for thought to every voter who
may be in danger Of being misled BY
Mr.. Bryan's arguments.
Judge West first calls attention to
the historic fact that the assertion OF
the doctrine of the Declaration OF In
dependence, governments are insti-
tuted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the gov
erned," was the position on which the
southern states based their resistance
to the national authority from 1851 to
'65, and that this conflict cost innum-
cradle lives and billions of money be-
fore the principle was settled by the
arbitrament of the sword that the
Union is indivisible and indissoluble.
Then the judge calls attention to the
fact that: THE continued utterance
of these and kindred sentiments by
you and your followers from the mo-
ment the treaty was ratified, has en-
couraged and prolonged that unhappy
conflict in these islands until it has
already resulted in shedding the blood
and sacrificing the lives of thousands
of our fellow-countrymen and many
more thousands of Filip!nos."
Then he calls Mr.. Bryan's attention
to the indisputable fact that: THE
laws Of the United States which shall
be made in pursuance thereof, and all
treaties made, or which shall be made
under the authority of the United
States, shall be the supreme law of the
land;" that the president shall take
an oath that lie will faithfully exc
cute the office of president of the
United States" and shall take care
that the laws be faithfully executed"
whether they do or do not meet his
appreciation A law of congress ap-
proved by President Washington and
another approved by President Lin
coin, both still in force, makes it the
duty of the president to employ the
land and naval forces in suppressing
revolt against the authority OF the
United States, wherever it may arise
or exist in any state or territory with
IN the jurisdiction thereof. On the
9Th of February. 1899, by your pro-
curement, the treaty with Spain was
ratified and on the 11th of April, 1889,
the ratifications were exchanged,
whereby it became the supreme law of
the land and the Philippine islands
territories of the United States. Pres
ident Mckinley has registered an oath
to take care that this treaty and these
laws be faithfully executed you will
take and have registered against you
the same oath il elevated to that great
office. Whether the treaty be valid or
void whether it does or does not in
fringe the declaration of independence,
is not within the province of the pres
ident to determine. While it is on the
statute book the duty is imposed on
him to respect its terms and stipula-
tions, to treat these islands as terri
tories under his official protection, and
enforce in them the laws for sup
pressing insurrection or rebellion
therein against the authority of the
United States, by the employment of
military force if necessary. In employ
ing military power to quell the insur-
rection in these islands, President Nc
Kinley has done nothing but discharge
the official duty imposed on him by
the ratification of the treaty, the neg
lect or refusal to discharge which
would have made him liable to i'm
peachment for official misconduct"
Judge West then goes into a long
discussion Of the responsibility OF Mr.
Bryan for the ratification of the treaty
and, consequently, the moral duty that
against the rebellion in the Philip
pines. 1t ia a matter Of regret that
space will not allow rull elucidation
of the mastery argument by which the
Judge simply pulverzes the Nebraska
demagogue. He shows up the dou.
bling of Mr. Bryan in the following
way;
Having procured the treaty to be
ratified, without exacting Filipino in
dependence as the condition OF your
supporting it, you try to justify youl
action on the plea that you are in {
better position to secure it to then
than you would have been If you hat
not procured its ratification. Yol
state it in different language by say
| ing that you are in a better posi-
tion to wage successful conflic
| against Imperialism; but what yol
call imperialism" could have no ex
istence il the treaty had not been rat
flied, for only by its ratification die
the islands become territorial posses
sions of the United States, over, or il
the government of which, imperia
power could be exercised; nor coult
imperialism have existence if, whel
you procured its ratification, you ha,
exacted insular independence as tn
condition thereof. You say
o., 10