The Washington herald., 1916-08-06
Setting the Ball in Motion.

Perhaps never before in the history of Amer
ican Presidential campaigns have the points at
issue been So indistinctly defined This obscura-
ton IS so marked at the present moment that to
one who is not close student Of American
political life it seem as if there actually is
little or no appreciable difference in the views
OF the candidates of the two larger parties. The
recent speech of acceptance by the Republican
candidate disclosed radical venture into the
realm OF new political theory. Taken in its en-
trety 1t amounts to little more than the usual
tme-honored and somewhat perfunctory act of
Setting the ball in motion"
vi course, there the usual attack upon
the foreign policy of the present administration
1t wouldn't do to neglect that, and the Republ-
can candidate did not fail to meet the popular
expectation in that respect. To have ignored
precedent would have been quite out of the oues
ton. On these occasions it is not essential that
candidate should disclose the nature of the
remedy which he has at hand should the oppor-
tunity offer, and Mr. Hughes did not depart from
the unwritten law in this respect
OF one thing, Mr. Hughes seems to feel oui..
certan-"the dealings of the administration with
Mexico constitute confused chapter of blum
ders His own Mexican policy, he assures US.
would be one of "hrmness and consistency
through which alone we can promote an enduring
friendship. Had he stated in what form that
hrmness and consistency" were to be dealt out
1t might have been of passing interest to Senior
Carranza and his friends in Mexico There was
no hint of Intervention or war, but there seemed
to be profound distaste for "watchful waiting. 1"
AS party slogan "a firm American policy"
has an agreeable ring. Standing alone, however,
with nothing behind it to indicate a definite and
serious purpose, it really amounts to little II
was an excellent opportunity for the Republican
Presidential candidate to make known precisely
what he regards "a firm American policy."
but he did not avail himself of it.
For some reason known best to himself pos-
sibly in the interest of discretion, Mr. Hughes
made no especial reference to matter in
which the rank and file of good American voters
seem to be CRAFTY interested. He had abso-
lutely nothing to say about the hyphenated vote
That does not mean, of course, that the German
haiser is silent partner in the business but on
account OF his silence the interesting sub
Ject Mr.. Hughes has grieved deeply more than
one good Republican editor and standpatter.
Hlnc lilac lachrymae from the New York
Tribune: For better or for worse Mr.. Hughes
has declined to stand upon the German issue
as the Tribune hoped he would stand" And
again: THE Tribune believes Mr.. Hughes would
have been wiser had he chosen to deprive tn,
hyphenates of this possible cause for rejoicing ;"
Meanwhile the "hypherates" are probably
vastly less agitated over the matter than are the
Tribune and its equally dsgruntled fellows. 1t
is not ditticult to draw mental picture of the
internal commoton which was raging within the
capacious bosom of Col. Roosevelt as he listened
to this speech of acceptance which was so DIFF
ferent from the one he v-.rA have delivered had
the opportunity been his