The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-12-10
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1895.
THE REASONS AGAINST ANNEXA-
TION.

Readers OF The Times need no expla-
nation Of The Times position regarding
the proposed acquisition of the Philip
pine Islands by the United States. The
Times is as much opposed TO such acqul-
stion as Il can possibly be to anything
is 10 be looked at as it IS and not from
any false and misleading standpoint. We
want to see the objections to the acqui-
sition put upon their true ground and
not upon false ground that only obfus-
cate the mind and lead on to other mis-
conceptions.
We see it stoutly maintained from day
to day that the Constitution forbids the
government to acquire these islands. We
think that the spirit and essence of the
Constitution forbids it, but the case is
not as 1t IS generally stated There can
be no doubt that at the end Of a sue
cessful war with another power one gov
eminent could. consistently with its Con-
stitution. demand from another power an
indemnity. There n certainly nothing
in the letter or the spirit Of the Consu-
tuition to forbid this Very well. If we
can demand an indemnity. but the beaten
power has no money TO pay with, but
had an abundance of land with which it
could pay, could we not accept land in
place Of money as the indemnity? There
is nothing in the letter Of the Constitu-
ton and there is nothing in its spirit to
prevent this. SO, If we can accept the
land as the indemnity. is our right to be
defeated because the land has people re-
siding on it? 1t would be absurd to say
90, and we say, therefore, that those
who deny the right Of the government
10 acquire territory at the end OF war
misread the Constitution. There Is no
thing in the letter or spirit of the Con-
stitution which forbds our government
to acquire territory at the end Of a war,
and cases might arise in which it would
be- in the highest degree desirable ami
even necessary that we should acquire
territory.
The true point of objection. therefore,
IS not TO the government acquiring terri
tory. but to the government going into
the colonizing business, and the restric-
t,on against this is not to be found in the
letter of the Constitution. but in its
spirit and in the nature Of our institu-
tons.
The condemnation of a measure may
bo as emphatic in this spirit and nature
as IL can be made by express words.
The English have no written constitu-
ton. Their constitution exists in history
and tradition alone. Yet it is common
thing 10 hear members Of the English
House OF Commons deny tho right OF
Parliament 10 pass given measure be
cause 1t is opposed TO the Constitution
as Il is TO hear members of Congress
oppose measures for the same reason.
Our theory OF national life is that of
the republic. The essential ilea is that
there are no superiors or interiors, but
that all stand upon one footing ruled and
governed by the law. Within the do
main OF the republic all must be equals
with one law ruling over ALL There can
be no foot OF territory within its rule
where all are not citizens, with the same
rights before the law that any other citi-
zens In any part Of the territory have.
i, Is true we have territories where this
theory is not IN force But they are re-
gions which we mold In state OF tute-
lage and preparation with the intention
to convert them into States with ciu-
Gems clothed with fun rights at the
earliest moment possible.
But II we acquire the Philippines It will
not oe with the intention OF rearing them
up 20 the conditions Of Statehood. No
part OF the American people tolerates
She thought OF injecting eight or ten new
States. populated by cannibals, into our
Federal system OF States. The purpose
and intention is to take them and hold
them, not as integral parts OF our Fede-
raj republic. but as dependencies and
colonies, TO 90 ruled as the politicians
prey by pro-consuls and other corrupting
and dehasing agencies. We are 20 nave
a piebald republio-part republic and part
despo.5sm-and, IL that comes about. who
can cay that the despotism Will not soon