whether the thing proposed ought to be done; force says, I desire, I can, I will. When the desire proves to be greater than the ability to accomplish, the force. argument reads (in the past tense) I desired, I tried, I failed. But even force, if accompanied by intelligence, calculates the cost. No one doubts that the United States army and navy are able to whip into subjection all the Filipinos who are not exterminated in the process, but is it worth the cost?

Militarism is only one item of the cost, but it alone will far outweigh all the advantages which are expected to flow from a colonial policy. John Morley, the English statesman, in a recent speech to his constituents, uttered a warning which may well be considered by our people. He said:

"Imperialism brings with it militarism, and must bring with it militarism. Militarism means a gigantic expenditure, daily growing. It means an increase in government of the power of aristocratic and privileged classes. Militarism means the profusion of the taxpayer's money everywhere except in the taxpayer's own home, and militarism must mean war.

"And you must be much less well read in history than I take the liberals of Scotland to be if you do not know that it is not war, that hateful demon of war, but white-winged peace that has been the nurse and guardian of freedom and justice and well-being over that great army of toilers upon whose labor, upon whose privations, upon whose hardships, after all, the greatness and the strength of empires and of states are founded and are built up."

Militarism is so necessary a companion of imperialism that the President asks for a two hundred per cent increase in the standing army, even before the people at large have passed upon the question of annexation. Morley says that imperialism gives to the aristoc

racy and to the privileged classes an increased influence in government; do we need to increase their influence in our government? Surely they are potent enough already.

He calls attention to the fact that the toiler finds his hope in peaceful progress rather than in war's uncertainties. Is it strange that the laboring classes are protesting against both imperialism and militarism? Is it possible that their protest will be in vain?

Imperialism has been described as "The White Man's Burden," but, since it crushes the wealth-producer beneath an increasing weight of taxes, it might with more propriety be called The Poor Man's Load.

If the Peace Commissioners had demanded a harbor and coaling station in the Philippines and had required Spain to surrender the rest of the land to the Filipinos, as she surrendered Cuba to the Cubans, we would not now be considering how to let go of the islands. If the sum of twenty millions had been necessary to secure Spain's release, the payment of the amount by the Filipinos might have been guaranteed by the United States.

But the failure of the Peace Commissioners to secure for the Filipinos the same rights that were obtained for the Cubans, could have been easily remedied by a resolution declaring the nation's purpose to establish a stable and independent government.

It is still possible for the Senate alone, or for the Senate and House together, to adopt such a resolu tion.

The purpose of annexationists, so far as that pur pose can be discovered, is to apply to the government of the Filipinos methods familiar to the people of Europe and Asia, but new in the United States.

This departure from traditions was not authorized by the people; whether it will be ratified by them

remains to be seen. The responsibility rests first upon Congress and afterwards upon that power which makes Congresses.

Whatever may be the wish of individuals or the interests of parties, we may rest assured that the final disposition of the Philippine question will conform to the deliberate judgment of the voters; they constitute the court of last resort; from their decision there is no appeal.

What next? Investigation, discussion, action.

CHAPTER VI.

BRYAN'S MASTERFUL SPEECH.

DELIVERED IN MUSIC HALL, BALTIMORE, JANUARY 20, 1900.

While men may differ as to the extent to which they can help or harm a nation, I believe that at all times the people are able to protect themselves from evil, and that an individual is only important as he can be the means in the hands of the people of protecting their own rights and advancing their own welfare. While to the leader comes the honor, the work is really done by the masses of the people. In politics, as in the army, the generals get the glory and the privates do the work. I feel that I owe it to those who for nearly four years have been bearing the burden in the heat of the day; I owe it to them to say that what I have done is but an atom compared with what they have done. I never lose an opportunity to give credit to that heroic band of Democrats who in 1896 rescued the Democratic party from the domination of plutocracy, and who for three years have stood as a solid wall against those who would lead the Democratic party back to the position it was occupying as a competitor of the Republican party for the favor of the moneyed interests of the United States. In 1896 the voters proved that they could control the policy of the party, and during the last three years they have shown that they can hold what they gained in 1896. In spite

of newspapers, in spite of railroads, in spite of banks, and in spite of every influence supposed to be potent, the plain people in the Democratic party