The record-union., 1898-06-17
THE WARNINGS OF THE FATHERS.

The 'Record-Union" has been several
times Of late asked to explain wherein
our occupation of the enemy's terri
tory. as an act of war, and holding it
thereafter, as a rightfully won posses
sion, infringes upon the Monroe doc
trine or violates the traditions of the
fathers. This journal has, in compli-
ance-at least to it's own satisfaction
repeatedly pointed out that such acts
and holdings neither trespass upon the
Monroe doctrine nor invade the wise
caution of the fathers.
The Monroe doctrine simply forbids
further extension of monarchical power
upon the American continents. The
warning of the fathers was against en-
tangling foreign alliances. Well, we
have made no entanghng alliances, and
we will make none If any alliances
are covenanted theySwill not be entang-
ling. but beneflcent, helpful and defens-
i've against those who would encroach
upon the rights of self governing peo-
pie. and the destinies Of the Republic
But this warning of Washington and
his colleagues has been contorted into
meanings they never intended, and fit
ted to conditions their prescience could
not foresee. We are told by one of
our Congressman, for instance, that we
are not to engage in foreign broils.
Assuredly not. But if the foreign
broilers engage with US, will our legis-
lative critic have America retreat.
stink into the corner Of her preserves,
and refuse to assert her right to appear
upon the face of the earth?
Here is the case. IN simplest possible
statement: We engage in war with
Spain; it is justified by all our peo-
pie. and held to be righteous and de-
1ensible by even those who warn US
of the teachings of the fathers. AS a
necessity Of prosecuting the war we
seize upon possessions of the enemy and
occupy them. We take them by force
and arms. and dispossess the enemy
AT this stage peace is declared. Shall
we now return to the enemy that which
we have wrested from him? Is 1t en-
tanglement in foreign broils to refuse
TO return an oppressed and downtrod-
den people to the rule Of the taskmas-
ter who has been taken from the necks
OF the Fillipinos by the act of righteous
and defensible war?
But suppose Spain does not demand
the return Of the seized and occupied
territory, being unable to redeem ii by
payment of the war indemnity. and an
other power, not a party to the war
having no relation to 1t whatever. de-
mands that we shall turn over a portion
Shall We. to avoid quarrel with a.
greedy and robber nation, yield. mildly
and submit those we have freed to the
domination OF such pretentious foreign
ers as choose to bluff US? Or. let us
suppose another situation namely.
tory, as 1t Is conceded on all hands we
have right to do, as an act of pun
dshment in war. another foreign power
declares that We shall take hands off"
and restore the fruits of victory. Is
that entangling alliance? Is it engag-
ing in foreign broils to refuse? If so.
God help the nation that claims to be
American. and coward and poltroon be
written across the brow of every man
who gives support to the infamous pro-
position of supine submission
Mr.. Hollis, who writes so interesting
ly and intelligently Of modern war
ships and of sea power, in a. recent
paper reaches the conclusion that after
an the modern armor-clad war vessel
Ill action is not more dangerous 20 it's
occupants than were the old wooden