New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-07-15

In declaring that he will vote for Parker and
Davis Mr.. Bryan pursues the moderate, con-
ciliatOrE and consistent policy he adopted AZ St
Louis. The Democratic National Convention
approved unanimously a platform which had
received his cordial assent. Though supported
only by weak minority, he had forced COM
promise from the victorious Parker managers
His satisfaction at this triumph was somewhat
dashed by the telegram from EsOpus repudiat-
Ing one important feature of the platform COM
mittee's agreement. Mr.. Bryan is justified in
complaining that this disavowal by Judge Par
fer of the acts and pledges of his representa-
tives was crooked and indefensible" piece of
politics. Mr.. Bryan and the other nine hundred
and ninety nine delegates 10 the convention see
POW that they were deliberately "buncoed" and
rictimiZed: and ii makes no great difference
10 them that the responsibility for the de-
ception practised has been shifted by Judge
Parker 10 the shoulders of his wicked partner
campaign managers.
But Mr.. Bryan consoles himself with the rehec-
ton that, so far the Democratic nominee has re-
pudiated but one feature of the platform commit
tees work. He has not had time yet to disavOw
or modify its other features. Till he writes his
letter of acceptance, at least the Nebraska lead
er can indulge the hope of no more disagreeable
dissents from the ''untrammelled Judgment"
of the convention. AS Mr.. Bryan points out
Judge Parker still stands on a platform whose
tariff plank ''denounces protection as a robbery
OF the many 10 enrich the few" and demands
tariff limited 10 the needs of the government
economically administered. e. a tariff for
revenue and revenue only. This declaration
borrowed from the Nebraska platform. conflicts
absolutely with the Albany platform on which
Judge Parker was put forward for the Presi-
Dental nomination. The Albany tariff plank
calls merely for a reasonable revision of the
tarln, and explains that needless" duties on
imported raw material weigh heavily on The
manufacturer and are a menace 10 the wage
learner" Till Judge Parker attempts to recon
Gle these two views OF the partys tariff policy
Mr. Bryan viii continue to regard him as the
leader in crusade against protection, direct or
incidental-the advance agent Of another VIII
son-Gcrman era of Treasury deficits and bust
ness depression.
Judge Parker still stands. too. on the Ne
braska antitrust plank, which calls for some
mysterious internationally the federal govern
mept, apparently-to prohibit any trust mo
nopolizing business production" in one State
from extending It's operations TO any other
State. This portion Of the St Louis platform
contradicts fatty the State rights dictum of the
Albany platform that corporations chartered
by the State must be subject to just regulation
t'by the State" If the federal government ba q
no power 10 regulate State chartered cornora
lions, how can 1t interfere TO declare that anv
scch corporation is 'monopozing any branch
OF business or production" within the State of
It's origin! Is Judge Parker going 10 stand on
the ST Louis or on the Albany antitrust plank
According TO Mr.. Littleton. he will accent every
line and syllable OF the ST Louis platform as
sacrosanct; but Mr. Littleton's assurances have
hardly the weight now that they had before
Judge Parker was nominated.
Mr.. Bryan, for the present, at least, gives the
nominee the henefit Of the doubt Judge Par.
ker's forthcoming letter will probably slow
whether he accepts in good faith the radical ut
terances forced by Mr.. Bryan into the colorless
diu-Wiilianls platform. Till then Mr- Bryan