Cañon City record., 1900-09-13

Mr. Brya.i's unqualified exposition OF
the ioctI Inc OF the right Of Self-goyern-
ment goes Infinitely farther than the
state'r rights doctrines entertained by
the most extreme OF the Calhoun and
Jeffei son Davis school before the war.
For Mr.. BryaD's doctrine would allow
any group Of men. whether IN county.
la town. or In school district TO set
thefnseives up as nm independent gov
crnnent. The state rights men at least
understood the fact that sovereignty
had to reside somewhere. IL there was
TO be any government at all; and they
went no farther back In their analysis
than the states which were the constit-
uent members OF the Federal Union.
IL does not seem to US necessary to at
trmpt to set the American people into
contending camps over the mere meta
physics OF the Inherent rights of man.
When one takes individunis and cross
examines them. one finds that there Is
not shade OF difference between Re
pubicans and Derlocrats on the theo-
reticai question OF the desirabIlity OF
Intelligent seif-government every
where. II just happens, however. that
at the present moment Mr. Bryan's
Democratic friends throughout the
south are engag ged In the practical task
OF depriving OF self f-goyernInent nearly
half OF the entire Southern population.
on the ground that participation IN
government lis not. In fact. an inherent
human right. bat that the object OF
government IL the high and true wei
fare OF the community. and that only
those people should participate In the
tasks OF government who are sufficient
Iy inteIligen, and responsible II does
not se~m 20 us that the real question at
stake in the Philippines Is met or even
Apprpnchcd. by eloquent cxpositions
based upon glitter Ing generuiities about
the innlienable rights OF man
Mr.. Brysa's sesssis~-
Toward the end OF his speech Mr..
Bryan comes to hat he calls IAN easy.
honest. honorable solution OF the Phil
ipplne question II Involves three
points.
First. to establish stable form OF
government IN the Philippine islands.
-'Hecord. to give Independence To the
riiipinos.
Third. to protect the Fiiiplnos from
outside interference while they work
out their destiny"
The first OF these propositions goes
0nsly counter To the elaborate theo-
rrticnl argument which occupies nearly
an the stace OF Mr.. Bryan's speech. II.
indeed. the Filipino- pa~<c->. ns he nf-
nrns. the absolute right to govern
themselves. then We can have no busi-
nees to establish a stable government.
or any other Kind OF government.
among thetn. Aguinaldo and his sup
porter< have asserted all along that
they are rmineutly capable OF estab-
ilshing their own government. and that
our business H. simply 10 clear out The
administration at Washington. and
Indge Tart's commission now In the
Ishiiippines. made up OF Democrnts and
Republicans alike. are nj this moment
doing everything in their power TO es-
tahiish "A stable government In the
archipelago. Human motives eau never
be wholly free from some taint or nj
10y OF earthly impcrfection; but II does
not seem to Us that anybody can very
well question the upriehtness and sin
ccrity OF The motives OF the Philippine
commission In attempting TO frame and
establish a government that shall be
the best possible for the natives. and
that shall train and develop them In
thc practice of self-goSsrnmcnt
A. q. Ge,tlnr = rhiiippin~ u.rber.
The real and practical question is.
What l. hes, 60 do. for everybody con-
csrncsi In a serious aud critical situa-
tiou? Mr.. Bryan deyotes many columns
TO abstract and lofty argument. with
impressive quotations from American
statesmen OF mn earlier day and from
tbc holy Scriptures. He gives enly a
few lines to telling MS what he would
really have done In the Philippine mat
ter II hc had been In authority. In the
first place. he says: "A hnrbor and
coaling station In the Philippines would
answer every trade and military neccs-
sity: and such concession could have
been secured. at any time, without DIFF
ficuliy- This could hardly mean any
thing else except the hnrbor OF Manila. |
the one important center OF the Phil
lppinc tryide. II we could. without
tiiliicn,ty'' have secured this from the
Fniplnos. II surely would not have |
been because the Filiplnos were nj /
heart willing to give away their best
possession. III they were to be allowed
a real freedom OF action as an inde-
pendent government. who Is there that |
supposcs for moment thar they would
have given us the hnrbor OF Manila?
Mr.. Bryan. In this speech. rs we'll as
fn others. constantly likens the attitude |
OF the American people toward the |
FilIpinos to that OF n highwayman |
committing robbery with violence. But !
his. descent from the ideal to the prae- |
tical is not altogether fclicitous. His |
suggcstion is. 10 quote his exact words, |
TINT IN war of conquest ls ms unwise
as Il II unrightcous." The unwisdom |
Hes In the fact that we do not need the |
whole thing. and VIC might have got |
the valuable harbor. which Il all we
need FOR commercial and naval pur.
poses, without entering upon war OF |
conquest. In other words, the wise \
highwaymnn would make gentleman.
iy compromise with his grateful victim |
by accepting his guld watch as pres
cnt, and would nilow the traveller 10 |
PASS on with his horse. his pocket. |
book and his loose change. II Mr..
Isryan'S puggcstiou means auy thing at |
nothing else.
r~mtnx stahss 0cverr~sse
instead cf too much arbitrary rule
On the pntt OF the Americana In thaee |