Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-09-02
For President.
WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN
'oF NEBRASKA.
For vice-President,
ADLAI E. STEVENSON
OF ILLINOIS.
THE SUN STILL PARAMOUNTING
TREASON"

Some days ago the Virginian- Pilot
referred to the New York SUMS charge
that Mr.. Bryans indianapolis speech
was reasonable. The Sun in reply
says it does not impute technical
treason to Mr.. Bryan; it has merely
inquired 'how near Mr.. Bryan is get
ting to treason" which Shades from
high treason. overly committed. down
through various grades of minor turpi-
tude." AS the Sun specifically acquits
Mr.. Bryan of treason and of all intent
to commit treason, it is little difficult
to determine just what is left of its
charge against him. Presumably
however, it Is the minor turpitude" of
having expressed views touching the
duty OF this nation that the Sun thinks
encouraged the Flipinos to continue
their resistance to the forces OF the
United States.
The Sun quotes the following from
the Revised Statutes OF the United
States:
Section 5,3S4.-Every person who in
cites, sets on foot, assists, or engages
III any rebellion or insurrection against
lut VI lilS tiiiNCb t,tul VI
the laws thereof, or gives aid and COM
fort thereto, shall be punished by i'm
prisonment not more than ten years.
or by fine of not more than ten thou
sand dollars or by both of such pun
ishments; and SHALL moreover. be in
capable of holding any office under the
United States"
Remarking that the statute knows
no exceptions, the Sun says:
1--WE shall now, in our turn, ask the
Virginian-Pilot two or three questions:
Does it believe that under this Sec
ton 1884 MIR. Bryan's indianapolis
pledge OF assistance to the cause OF the
Luzon insurgents gave aid and comfort
to persons engaged i'll rebellion or in
surrection against the authority of the
United States?
IF 1t holds the contrary, on the
ground that Mr.. Bryan's indianapolis
pledge did not constitute an Indictment
to the Luzon insurgents to continue
lhe!r insurrection against the authority
of the United States, what answer
does the Virginan-Pilot make to Law
toms testimony, sealed with mis- own
likelihood, that the continuance OF
fighting IS chiefly due to reports that
are sent out from America
But, perhaps our contemporary
holds Mr.. Bryan gultless under Sec
tion 1884 on the other ground that we
possess no legitimate authority in the
Philippines and that these persons in
arms against our flag there are not
rebels, but patriots, fighting on their
own soil.
If that is the Virginian- Pilots reas-
oning. what answer does it make to
the indisputable fact that the treaty
which transferred the Philippines to
& our sovereignty and established the au-
thortty Of the United States Govern
ment In those islands was ratified with
Mr.. Bryans direct approval and by
his personal advice TO the Democratic
Senator's who voted for ratification"
The Virginian-Plot does not believe
that Mr.. Bryan gave laid and com.
fort" within the meaning of thi.
statute. Neither does the Sun. other
wise It would do It's duty as a publ,
Journal and demand that Mr.. Bryar
be punished.
To say that MIR. Rryan's speech cam,
Within the scope of Lawton's declare
! ton. is TO beg the whole question. Law
ton gave no Testimony" as to Mir
Rfyan's Indianopolis speech. -
AS To Their our title to She PM
3:2< az X u. 3,