The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-01-25
LODGE FOR EXPANSION
Senator Clay Opposes a Policy of
Imperialism.
BOTH FOR RATIFICATION
Earnest Insistsncy for Formal Declara-
ton of Peace = Teller Urges an
Independent Government
for the Filipinos.


to-day, one by Mr., Lodge of Massa-
chusetts, and the other by Mr. Clay CT
Georgia. While the two senators diff
fered Numerically as to the policy of
expansion, upon which they dwelt, both
are in favor of the immediate ratifica-
ton of the pending treaty They con-
tend that once the treaty is ratified,
congress will have full power to deal
with conditions respecting the territory
acquired during the war with Spain,
and not before. Mr.. Lodge particularly
argued for a formal declaration of
peace, which could be had only by the
ratification of the treaty.
When the senate convened to-day,
Gallinger had a resolution passed when
he intimated might show a scandal in
connection with the management of
the Washington asylum of this city, the
responsibility for which he frankly
placed at the door of congress. 1t pro-
vided for an investigation of the asy-
lum by the committee of the District
of Columbia. Gallinger said there were
628 inmates of the institution. In the
Workhouse for males there are ZIG
hunks and 314 inmates. He deemed the
situation to be a disgrace to Washing
ton and calculated to bring reproach
upon congress.
At the conclusion of routine business
senator Lodge was recognized to de-
liver his announced speech upon the
policy of expansion. Lodges position
on the foreign relations committee, his
Wen known antagonism to views On
the question of expansion and ratifica-
ton of the peace treaty entertained by
his distinguished colleague, Senator
Hoar, aroused unusual interest in his
address.
He spoke in part as follows:
Mr. President: In connection with
these resolutions and others which have
been raised, one of constitutional law,
been haised, one of constitutional law,
and one of public policy. 1t is not my
purpose to enter at any length into the
former discussion. I believe that the
United States has the undoubted power,
which it has frequently exercised, to
acquire territory and to hold and goy-
ern 1t. l am ready to admit, if neces-
sary. that action in these directions
must be taken for constitutional pur-
poses, but the constitutionality of the
purposes, when congress is about to
exercise these or any other powers,
must be determined by congress itself,
through its majority. I believe that the
power of the United States in any ter
ritory or possession outside the limits
of the states themselves is absolute
with the single exception of the limita-
ton placed upon such outside possess
sions by the thirteenth amendment.
Such, at all events has been the policy
of the United States and it's course of
action in practice.
Higher Sanction.
Constitutions do not make people:
people make constitutions. Our consti-
tuition is great and admirable, because
the men who made it were So and the
people who ratified it and have lived
under it We're and are brave, intelli-
gent, and lovers Of liberty. There is
a higher sanction and a surer protec-
ton to life and liberty, to the right of
free speech and trial by jury, to JUS
tice and humanity in the traditions,
the beliefs, the habits of mind, and the
character Of the American people, than
any which can be afforded by any
constitution, no matter how wisely
drawn.
Holding these views as to our con-
stitutional powers, the great question
now before the American people re-
solves itself in my mind to one of
policy purely. There is only one ques-
ton demanding actual and immediate
decision now before congress and he
people, and that is whether the treaty
with Spain shall be ratified or not. 1
have heard no opposition expressed to
any part of the treaty. except such
portion of it as relates to the Philip
pines and that, therefore, is the sole
point upon which I desire to touch. In
our war with Spain we conquered the
Philippines, or, to put it more exactly, We
destroyed the power of Spain in those
islands, and took possession of their
capital. The treaty cedes the Philip
pines to us. 1t is wisely and skifully
drawn. 1t commits us to no policy, to
no course of action whatever, in regard
to the Philippines. When that treaty
is ratified, we have full power and ere
free to do with those islands as we
please, and the opposition to it's ratii-
cation may be summed up in a single
sentence, that the American people and
the American congress are not to he
trusted with that power and freedom
of action in regard in the inhabitants
of these distant islands. We must
either ratify the treaty or reject it, For
l cannot suppose that any one would
seriously advance the proposition that
We should amend the treaty in such a
way as to make pledges to Spain, and
to Spain alone, and to give bond to
Spain, and to Spain alone, for our good
conduct in a matter which will be
wholly our own to decide.
The Alternatives.
Let us look, then, at the alternatives.
Suppose we ratify the treaty. The ISL
ands pass from the possession of Spain
into our possession without committing
us to any policy. / believe we can be
trusted as a people to deal honestly
and justly with the islands and their
thus given to our care
What our policy shall be do not know,
because l, for one, am not sufficiently
informed as to the conditions there, to
be able to say what it will be best
to do, nor, / may add, do / think any
one is. But | believe that we shall have
the wisdom not to attempt to incor-
porate those islands within our body
polite, or make their inhabitants part
of our citizenship or set their labor
alongside of ours and within our tariff
to compete in any industry with Amer
lean workmen. I believe that we shall
nave the courage not to depart from
those islands fearfully, timidly and
unworthily and leave them to anarchy
among themselves, to the brief and
blOOdV 6Onoip q finn nf