Lexington gazette. [volume] (Lexington, Va.) 1871-1962, 1900-10-10
THE BALTIMORE SUN
AND THE CANVASS

We clip the following editorial from
the Baltimore Sun in reply to a com
m lnication sent that paper asking thu
Sun to define its position in The pres
ent canvass. The Sun says:
Why the Sun could not take refug,
in a position of neutrality in the pres
ent crisis of our country fate we have
already endeavored to make clear
Citizenship entails duties which are moi
gotten rid of by not being performed
In the admirable language Of Mr.
Richard Olney, recently quoted by us
1pon this very point, "The obligation;
of citizenship are avoided. not per-
formed, by standing neutral in an
election. The voting power is trust
which calls fo1 use and is violated by
the neglect of use." If this be true in
the case of the individual citizen it is
doubly true in the case of public
journal which desires to be right and
to do right in regard to all public
questions. And what question can be
more momentous than that which con-
fronts the American people at this
time? Nor do we admit that the case
is such and so desperate as not to pre-
sent choice of evils. Think what we
may and say what we may, either Mr..
Mckinley or Mr.. Bryan, in the absence
of any unforeseen interposition Of
Providence, must be elected President
of the United States for the next four
years. In the one case the course OF
the Government must continue to be
dominated by the interests and policies
OF the Republican party as they have
been revealed during the four years
that are past and are comprehended
under the general term McKinleyism.
Admit that the alternative is the
ascendancy of those ideas and policies
which are comprehended under the
term Bryanism-even in that case there
must be a choice between the two.
Both cannot be equally bad. Ono or
the other must be more for the advan-
tage Of the Republic, or, at least, less
likely to be detrimental and fraught
with injury to the best interests of the
country. That is the question which
we believe every citizen has the right
and is under the obligation 10 decide
for him self according to the best OF
his judgment and his lights.
Applying this test, we have had no
difficulty in reaching a conclusion in
our own case. We know what manner
of President Mr.. Mckinley has made.
We do not know for q certainty what
manner Of President Mr.. Bryan may
make. In event of the reelection of
one there is the certainty of evil to
continue, such evil as means the very
existence of the Republic and the per-
manency of our free institutions. In
the other case there is at the most the
apprehension of disturbance of pres
ent business conditions and unsettling
of present monetary values as being
likely to result from the elevation TO
the Presidency Of man Of Mr.. Bryan's
known views upon the subject CT finance
end the currency, We believe these
apprehensions to be grossly exagger-
ated and overdrawn and largely the
invention of politicians seeking to play
upon the fears of the limCrous and the
cred-l US, or of the money sharks and
gamblers who themselves know how to
produce panics and also how to profit
by them. Even concedng the worst
of these apprehensions to be we'll set
we should still-again in the vigorous
language of Mr.. Onley-esteem their
realization as "dust in the balance"
compared with the certain evils to
follow from continuance of Mr.. Nc
Kinley's expensive and bloody policy
OF forcible expansion or colonization
call it which you will and from
the consequent growth and practice OF
imperialistic ideas among our country
men.
But while we have thus made clear,
we hope, the grounds upon which we
base our position in the present con.
test, we have not fully answered all the
suggestions in the letter we have
quoted. With great respect we must
except TO the conclusion on the part of
the writer that because the Sun prefers
the election of Mr.. Bryan to the re-
election of Mr.. McKinley--knowlng
that the election of one or the other is
inevitable the Sun, therefore, advo-
Gates "the cause of the Nebraskan
demagogue, with his financial heresy,
his populistic fallacies and his attacks