The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-12-10
TAYLOR IN ANGER
Scathing Criticism Of Peace Com
mission Work.
NEW PRINCIPLE OF MORAL LAW
GraspIng Methods of COnQuerors.
What Should Have Satisfied.
Spain an old Friend.
NEW PRINCIPLE OF MORAL LAW

NEW YORK, November 30.-Hannis
Taylor, late American Minister 10
Spain, publishes in the December num-
Der of the North American Review,
scathing criticism Of the work OF the
American Peace Commission. Mr.. Tay-
lor contends that in the negotiations
with Spain respecting Cuba, Porto Rico
and the Philippines, the members OF
the Commission should have been guild
ed by the precedent established by this
country in its dealing with Mexico aft
er the victorious issue of the Mexican
war. Then, he says, we refused, as
Mexico lay helpless at our feet, to take
! from her a single square mile OF terri
tory by right of conquest. Our Com
missioners were instructed TO offer her
eleven million dollars in cash and the
assumption upon our part OF more than
| 3 ,000, 900 dollars, due from her TO Am
erican citizens, as compensation for the
area out of which has been carved Cal
ifornia, Nevada, Arizona, Utah and
New Mexico.
And thus, says Mr.. Taylor, was
established a new principle Of moral
law. which stands alone. perhaps, in
the annals of nations"
Mr.. Taylor contends that now, when
for the first time since the conquest OF
Mexico, we have another vanquished
nation at our feet, we owe 10 Spain all
the consideration and justice that can
Inc due to the weak from the strong,
Especially as Spain has been an ola ana
a good friend, with whom we had never
before broken off diplomatic relations.
THE arrangement which has been con-
cluded by the American Commission
Mr.. Taylor characteriZes as vast
ravishment.
owe have refused arbitration we
have summarily demanded the surrend-
er of the entire Philippine archipelago
and as a salve to Spain we have ten
dered $40 900, 0OO,' says Taylor.
The war has cost us directly abou
s165 900 900, and as compensation fol
D that outlay we have appropriated Port'
, Rico. which can hardly be valued a
y much less than double that amount. |
/ lis difficult to understand, therefore
why in dealing with Cuba and the PM
J. inr mes we should have been unwlll1n'
Ito recognize those reasonable and nat
!. ural equities which follow acquired ter
ritory.
I'm the case of the Philippines w
have admitted that, so far as the dept
of these islands represent expenditure
for the Improvement of the country
they must run with the land and con
Istitute a charge upon it. Upon VIVA
grounds have We rejected the appllca
ton of that elementary principle
law and common honesty in the cas-
iof Cuba. The pretense that 1t cannc
he there applied because we do not III
tend to accept sovereignty over CuO
will not avail, for as soon as CUBA
levacuated by the Spanish troops IN
United States will exercise quallfe
[ sovereignty over the island and brn
a military government there and riSlt
lv enforce all laws for the purpose
collecting revenues, both external an
internal, a condition which must ext
until Congress orders otherwise In II
(. case of Cuba, as we'll as in that OF II
Philippines, the amount of pacific e
penditures made by Spain for the pc
4. lmanent improvement Of the isiaI
should have been recognized as a leg
e. charge upon it."