The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1899-12-18
Weather Forecast.
THE TRUTH AND LAW OF THE
PHILIPPINE QUESTION.

PHILIPPINE QUESTION.
Some Journals which profess great
faith in the Administration and insist
that they are solicitous that the insur-
rection in the Philippines shall be put
down. and the authority of the United
States firmly established still take the
position that as the Senate of the
United States has expressed itself, as
they assert, opposed to the permanent
annexation of the Philippines, there is
some sort of conflict between that dec
laration and the calls of the treaty with
Spain, by which the islands were ced-
ed to the United States absolutely, and
that this state of affairs leaves the pol
icy OF the Administration toward the
Philippines underlined and in a bad
way, and opens our doors wide to Fill
Pine immigration and competition.
It is profitable to consider the facts.
The Senate ratified the treaty by one
vote more than the required two-thirds
of the membership Of that body. That
effected the annexation of the islands
absolutely. They became our property
beyond recall Some days subsequent
ly the Senate, with a bare quorum pres
ent, passed resolution expressive OF
it's judgment that the annexation of
the islands should not be treated as
United States; that as the Senate view
ed it, it was not intended to ineorpor-
ate the people of the Philippines into
the citizenship Of the United States;
that 1t was intended to establish there
form of government suitable for such
people to prepare them as soon as may
be for local self government, and in due
time to make such disposition Of the
islands as will be for the best interests
of the United States and the people Of
the Philippines.
Now it will be observed that the Sem
ate thus distinctly held that it. would
be unwise to recognize the Filipinos as
citizens; that the Senate distinctly
negatived the idea that the annexation
already accomplished meant confer
ment of the right or privilege Of State
hood, and that it Enthusiastically set
forth the doctrine that the United
States may hold possessions, may dis-
pose of them, may sell or lease them,
or provide for the special government
of them, as Congress may determine
The Senate as plainly as it could say
did hot fr1f1 Of
the Philippines is in the hands OF Con-
gress. s-t4@
There is no inconsistency in this dec
laration when it is placed beside the
treaty with Spain. Annexation was an
accomplished fact. but the Senate ex-
pressed it's opinion that such annexa-
ton was not to be construed as max
ing the islands permanently or other
wise an integral part Of the United
States unless we chose to so consider
1t. This was speaking directly in line
with all the precedents; it was declar-
ing what the commentators upon the
Constitution, the Supreme Court of the
United States and our leading states
men for a century have held, namely,
that new possessions are to be con-
trolled, governed, provided for and d.
rected at the pleasure of Congress.
They do not possess inherent right
right to local self government; that is
a privilege granted solely by Congress-
Alaska has been held in precisely that
position from the day of its purchase.
The case of the Hawaiian Islands
moves upon different plane because
acquisition in that case was by treaty
with the local Government, and treat
ment to follow must accord with the
spirit and terms Of the compact
But Porto Rico, the smaller West In
dian acquisitions, Guam and the Phil
ippine archipelago are in our hands to
dispose of as we will. The resolution
of the Senate speaks of such disposal of
the Philippines as Congress in the fu-
ture may determine to be best for the
people of the Islands and Of the United
States. That disposition may be re-
tention under regulation; it may be
lease or sale; or absolute independence
That it is within the power of the
United States to declare which, is un-
questioned by any fair minded student
of the question.
There is nothing new in all this. It
has been the uniform policy of the ma
ton. There is nothing alarming In it,
There is nothing vague or indefinite in
it. Hence all this shout and worry and
pleading for the immediate declaration
of permanent policy is senseless. We
are dealing with the present and that
involves, first, the assertion and es-
Establishment of our sovereignty; second
ly, the setting up Of a stable govern
ment suitable for the needs and equal
to the present capacity of the inhabi-
tants. In the future will come the
adoption Of a permanent governmental
policy regarding the new possessions.
In our belief 1t will be determined to
permanently hold the whole archipeI-
ago. National concern will prevent us
from selling or leasing to any other
Power; regard for our interests and
those Of the people of the islands will
forbid erection of the possessions into
States. Nor will they be erected into
territorial forms. They will be perma-