Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-12-01
VAST RAVISHMENT. =
THAT'S WHAT HAvNrs TAYLOR
c,,s mr., pr.cp TREATY.
OUR EsGsGSIMITY TOWARD MEXICO.
II should Have Guided Us I'm Our
Dealings with Spain--The Incon-
sfsfercy OF Our several Positions
at Paris.
Paris.

NEW YORK. November So.-Hannls
Taylor. lately American Minister q
Spain. publishes in the December No. Of
the North American Review scathing
criticism Of the work OF the American
Peace Commission.
Mr.. Taylor contends that in the nego-
t;ations with Spain respecting Cuba, Porto
Rico, and tho Philippines, the members
OF the commission should have been
guided by the precedent established by
this country IN Its dealings with Mexico
after the victorious issue of the Mexican
war. Then, he says. we refused. as Mex
ico lay helpless at our feet, TO take from
her single square mile OF territory by
right of conquest. Our commissioners
were instructed TO offer her S5.oO0.Oo0 IN
each, and the assumption upon our part
OF moro than 100000 due from her TO
American citizens. as compensation for
the area out OF which has been carved
California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, and
New Mexico.
NEW MORAL PRINCIPLE.
"And thus" says Mr.. Taylor. was as
tablished a new principle OF moral law,
which stands alone perhaps, In the an
nails of nations"
Mr.. TAYLOR contends that now. when.
for the first time since the conquest OF
Mexico, we have another vanquished ma
tiOn at our feet, we owed TO Spain all the
consideration and justice that can be due
10 the weak from the strong especially
as Spain has been an old and q good
friend with whom we had never before
broken off diplomatic relations
The arrangement which has been con-
Guided by the American Commission Mr..
Taylor charactorizes as "a vast ravsh-
ment"
eve have refused arbitration; we have
summarily demanded the surrender of
the entire Philippine archipelago. and as
a salye to Spain we have rendered $780,
90 900
1.-THE war has cost us directly about
Sl65 OoO,O00. and as compensation for that
outlay we have appropriated Porto Rico,
which can hardly be valued at much less
than double that amount IT is difficult
to understand. therefore. why, in dealing
with Cuba and the Philippines. we should
have been unwilling 20 recognize. these
reasonable and natural equities, which
follow acquired territory.
OUR INCONSISTENCY
I'm tho case Of the Philippines, we have
admitted that, 50 far as the debts Of
THESE lSidINS represent tNltNhiNNAto iNi
the Improvement Of the country. they
must run with the land and constitute
a charge upon It, Upon what ground have
we rejected the application of that ele- |
mentary principle of law and common |
honesty 10 the case Of Cuba? The pre- |
tence that IL cannot be there applied, |
because we do not intend 10 accept sove- |
reicnty over cuba win not avail, for as |
soon as Cuba is evacuated by the Spanish |
troops the United States will exercise a |
qualified sovereignty over the island, and |
begin military government there, rigid
" enforcing all laws for the purpose OF !
revenue. both external and in
ternal-a condition which must exist until
Congress orders otherwise. In the case
OF Cuba. as well as in that Of the Philip
pines. the amount Of pacific expenditures
made by Spain for the permanent i'm
Of the island should have been
recognized as a legal charge upon it,"