The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-12-20
oUR DUTYs

/
] In the address at the banquet here the
President said that as il was our duty
| TO send Dewey ana Merritt TO the Phil
| lippines to destroy the Spanish feet there,
and to capture the capital of the Islands,
/ ID was our duty TO remain there and give
! The people protection. aud also our guild
ance to better government, which would
| secure to them peace and education and
security in their lives and property and in
The pursuit OF happiness Further along
in his speech he said that whatever COW
enants duty has made for us in the year
1898 we must keep IL Is clear from these
expression that the administration is COM
mitted to the policy OF retaining losses
sion of The Philippines.
While it is true the President did not say
that he favored a colonial policy for the
ISLANDS, the conclusion is that ii is that
policy which he will recommend. The
country would never consent to the an
nexation of the islands and the recogni-
ton of the Fnlpinos as citizens having all
the rights and privileges which the citi-
zens of the United States have In fact,
the President would hardly regard it as
wise 10 give the semi-savage people Of
the Philippines representation in the House
and the Senate.
But because it was our duty to destroy
the Spanish fleet at Manila does it follow
that it is our duty to undertake the gov
eminent Of the Philippines? We did not,
as the President minated in his address,
destroy the government which the Fill
pinos md. We only weakened it, With
Cuba off their hands the Spaniards would
have been as well able TO govern the is
lands as they were before the war began.
That this statement is about correct was
recognized in the discussions which took
place al the meetings of the peace COM
mission in Paris.
The real point then in the Presidents
position is that il is our duty 10 give the
Fnpinos a better government than the
spaniards gave them or would give them
if permitted to have the islands.
But if il IS our duty to give the Fill
pinos a better government, is it not equal
ly our duty to give other oppressed oeo-
pies better government? 1t may be ans
wered that we are under special obliga-
tons to the Filipinos-that we interfered
with the condition of affairs which eX-
listed in their country, and therefore are
bound to continue to interfere in their af-
fairs But If they do not want us to In
terfere in them, does our duty require Us
to do so? 1t must not be overlooked that
we did not go to the Philippines for the
purpose of interfering in the affairs of
those islands. We went there to strike
Spain a blow and make her let go her
hold on Cuba. At the time we destroyed
SPANS fleet at Manila, the F'ilipinos
were struggling to free themselves from
Spanish RUE. What we did therefore at
Manila helped the Filipinos. They were
doing all they could to destroy the Span
ish government of the islands. We did not,
as the President intmates, do the Fill
pinos a great wrong and are not there
fore bound to do them what we consider
| a great service. If it be true, as assert
ed that they are eager for independence,
would it be a service to them to hold them
subject TO our will? Is it in fact our duty
to do anything more for them than we
| have already done? If, as the President
says, we destroyed the government which
they had, did not we do just what they
wanted done? And if they now want in
| dependence would we be doing our duty
if We should refuse to let them have it
| because we do not think they know how
to govern themselves? If we insist upon
| governing them against their consent, do
we not only fail to do our duty by them,
but do we not nullify the doctrine on which
our own government is founded, namely
that governments derive their just pow
| ers from the consent of the governed?"