The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-10-06
The ADVICE of John BulI.

Lord Salisbury has Appealed most sue
cessfully TO his country for an endorse
ment OF his course in South Africa, and
he will appear in the next Parlia-
ment backed by a larger and more SUD-
servient majority than he has ever COM
manded previously. The home situation
thus being rendered secure, the British
Government is now attending to the next
most important thing in its politics, and
is devoting attention to the American
Presidential election, which means a
great deal to Great Britain. For in
stance, If Lord Salisbury's friend Mr..
Mckinley should be elected President of
the United States, there is every reason
to believe that the Hay-Pauncefote Trel-
~ would be ratified. In that case, the
scheme for an exclusively American wa
terway tc connect the Atlantic and Pa
cific Oceans across Central America
would be finally defeated, and the Mon
roe Doctrine would be abandoned. AL
most as important, the defeat of Mr..
Bryan would make the surrender of two
thousand square miles of American terri
tory in Alaska to England a fnality. So
Ii will be seen that the interest of the
British Government in the reelection Of
William Mckinley as President is a sub
stantial one Indeed, Lord Salisbury
could not well afford to see our quad
rennial campaign terminate in any other
way
Mr.. Bryan, if elected. would immediate
ly withdraw the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty,
II 1t had not been acted upon beforehand.
1t is certain that he would take the earliest
possible moment to reaffirm the Monroe
Doctrine; and there is no sort of doubt
that he would order England out of the
Alaskan territory she has invaded and
seized before he had been in the White
House twenty-four hours.
In these circumstances one can easily
understand that the Queens Ministers
have a vital stake in the American cleo
ton. The London Times lifelong and
able, II ponderous. Tory organ, through
its New York correspondent, says that
ION the whole, there is little reason to
believe the majority Ct the American peo-
pie desire to overthrow the Administra-
ton which has brought them renown
abroad and afiuence at home" This cor
respondent evidently is earning mis- bread
by the perspiration of his eyebrow. Only
a visit to Marcus A. Hanna, and chance
at his check book could have produced
such an opinion. Where is the ''renown
abroad" to which the London Times"
correspondent so feelingly refers? Have
we gained it in China, where we went with
sound OF trumpets and likewise OF shawms,
determined TO protect the last fellow
countryman in the Empire; and then cut
and ran like a scared deer? And where
is the ''affiuence at home? Is 1t in the
coal mining regions? Is it anywhere save
among a very limited number OF people
who, being millionaires a few years ago,
are multi-millionaires now, because of
Republican legislation in their direct in
terest? There is the NEST ample "afiu-
enee at home" among the Rockefeilers,
Havemeyers, Carnegies, Flints, Dukes.
and such people. Some Of them count
their incomes in millions and could squan
der GOLD by the bucket every day without
being sensibly poorer. But the blessing
of Mckinley prosperity has stopped with
such fortunate ones, and few others
like Eagan and Abner concerning whom
the less said the better.