The Hawaiian gazette., 1898-12-13
Scalllll Criticism Of Peace Com.
mission Work.
NEW PRINCIPLE Of MORAL Law
Craspins Methods OF Conouerors
what Should rsve satisfied.
spain an Old Friend.

NEW YORK, November 3O.-Hannis
Taylor, late American Minister to-
Spain, publishes In the December mum
Der OF the North American Review, a
scathing criticism of the work of the
American Peace Commission. Mr.. Tay-
Tor 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
5000 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"
MIR. Taylor contends that now, when
for the first time since the conquest OF
Mexico. we have another vanquished
nation at our feet, we owe to Spain all
the consideration and justice that can
be due to the weak from the strong,
especially as Spain has been an old and
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.
I'VE have refused arbitration. We
nave summarily demanded the surrend-
er of the entire Philippine archipelago,
and as a salve to Spain We have ten
dered $4,000 OO," says Taylor.
The war has cost us directly about
s165, 0OO, 900, and as compensation for
that outlay we have appropriated Porto
Rico. which can hardly be valued at
much less than double that amount. IL
is difficult to understand, therefore,
why in dealing with Cuba and the Phil
ippines we should have been unwilling
to recognize those reasonable and nat
ural equities which follow acquired ter
ritory.
"In the case of the Philippines we
have admitted that, so far as the debts
of these islands represent expenditures
for the improvement of the country
they must run with the land and con-
stitute a charge upon it, Upon whaI
grounds have we rejected the applica'
ton of that elementary principle OF
law and common honesty in the cast
of Cuba. The pretense that 1t canno
be there applied because We do not in
tend to accept sovereignty over Cubs
will not avail, for as soon as Cuba II
evacuated by the Spanish troops thu
United States will exercise qualified
sovereignty over the island and bring
military government there and rigid
ly enforce all laws for the purpose o
collecting revenues, both external an'
internal, a condition which must exis
until Congress orders otherwise. In tn
case OF Cuba, as we'll as in that OF tn
Philippines, the amount of pacific ex
penditures made by Spain for the per
manent improvement of the islam
should have been recognized as lega
charge upon it,"