The Washington times., 1913-05-04
BRYAN AND THE CALIFORNIANs.

The address which Secretary Bryan made to the
legislature at time when he knew that his mission
to it had been failure, and that the Objectionable
anti-aen land ownership bill would pass, was a
model of temper and conciliatory attitude So, in
deed, have been all his communications with the law
makers, so far as they have been reported in the
Eastern press. He has made it perfectly clear at
all times that he spoke the emssary of the Presi-
dent, and he has been extremely careful that at no
point should he seem to threaten q Federal inter.
ference with the fullest exercise of the States
sovereign authority. At the same time, he has
urged with vgor and insistence the dangers of the
course on which, from the beginning, it has been
apparent the legislature was bent.
Only captious criticism will attempt to point out
and make capital of the fact that Mr. Bryans mis-
sion has failed. 1t is not his fault; it may be
doubted if another could have succeeded where he
has failed.
But it does prove the impossibility of our
anomalous scheme of dual sovereignty. Mr.. Bryan
probably was more efficient emissary, in such
case, than would have been man who had always
maintained the extreme doctrine of paramount
Federal authority. Mr.. Bryan has been an advocate
of the largest authority, the fullest autonomy for
the States. Had he represented the opposite view
his advice might easily have been regarded as in
reference
But Mr. Bryan must come away from his ses-
sions with the California legislators filled with un-
easy contemplatons of the difficulties that invest
governmental system under which such contre-
temps as the present one is possible He can hardly
fail to realize that his own position is bit contra
dictory. Most people will believe that the Bryan
of 1896 and 1900 and 1904 and probably of 1908
had he not been part of the responsible Federal
Government, would have been in sympathy with the
purpose of the California legislature. That would
nave been perfectly consistent with his long-man-
tanned attitude State rights.
The suggestion that referendum petition be
secured, and the operation of the law suspended
pending vote on it by the people of California, is
excellent and to the point 1t is explained that
the vote could not be taken until the close of 1914
BY that time no matter how the vote might result,
diplomacy would have opportunity to better the
situation so far possible, feeling would doubtless
in considerable measure subsde, and the people Of
Japan would come to understand the full measure
of good faith with which this Government was
handling its difficult part of the affair.
That an incident of this sort should sravely in
terfere with the longesablished good relations be-
tween the United States and Japan would be nothing
less than an international crime. 1t is unhinkable
that the people of this nation should assent to being
drawn into conflict with Japan, even into a
serious impairment of their excellent relations be-
cause of such an affair
And yet what we to do about it? Is the
national feeling represented at Washington, or at
Sacramento? Undoubtedly, at Washington Then
shall Sacramento Aaunt the wishes and nufy the
purposes of the nation? How, constitutionally,
shall that very result be prevented?
1t will take the better part of two years to get
referendum determination of CALIFORNIA; own atti-
tude toward this law. After that, legal proceedings
may stave off tine inevitable for another long period
In the meantime, such constitutional amendment
would obviate recurrence of such incident, and
dispose of the present one might very properly bel
and pressed.