Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1899-01-12


ed his statements on the bred Scott
decision. He analysed the decision,
showing that a majority OF the court
did not support the position with ref
erence to the acquisition and govern
ment of territory, that Vest had said
Il did and really only one of the asso-
ciate Justices stood squareiy with
Chief Justice fancy in support OF the
fun force Of the decision
Foraker then entered upon consti-
tutional argument in reply to the
points made by Vest and Canery IN
support of the resolution. In begin
ming a discussion of the speech OF
Hoar, Foraker said: Il listened as
always do listen to the speech OF the
senator from Massachusetts. 1t was
speech of great ability and power,
such as he always delivers, but whe,
it is reduced it amouNts only 10 this
that the government of the United
States has only the power TO acquire
territory for constitutional purpos 3
and as to what the constitutional pur-
poses are the senator from Massachu-
sets shall be the sole and exclusive
Judge"
Foraker's remarks brought Hoar out
for a further explanation OF MS pos
ton. lnterrupting the ONO senator.
he said: IF we thought 1t necessary
fCr our national defense to annex an
outlying territory and IL the people Ct
that territory objected to our acquisi-
ton of it, ! should consider the sub
jugation of it as a great national
crime to be repudiated and condemn
ed and l should say that the United
States would better go down beneath
the waters of the Pacific in honor
rather than disgrace itself by such a.
ton" Hoar said ne did not mean TO
say that great continent upon which
rcamed few thousand savages hay
ing no government and incapable of
government should be passed by or
that civilization should stop at its
threshold.
Foraker repudiated the conclusion
by Eoar. LAS l now understand the
senator from Massachusetts, said
Foraker. the march of civilization
ought not to be stopped for lack of
consent. The march of the French
across the dark continent and of the
British to Fashoda is not then to be
interrupted"
Foraker maintained that the gov
eminent of the United States had am
pie power to acquire territory b.;
treaty and he demanded to know If
Hoar did not think territory so acquir-
ed was acquired constitutionally.
THE trouble" continued the speaker,
"is that the senators are talking about
theory instead Of practical condition.
What have the senators who have dis
cussed these theories proposed. Moth
ing. You all know the precedents OF
the condition we face. We had made
war and its fortunes had carried us
to the Philippines. When the end
came these islands were in our pos
session. What was to be done? Four
possibilities existed. We might return
the islands to Spain. allow some othe.
country TO seize or gobble them up.
the people of the islands might be left
to themselves and the anarchy that
existed there or We might ourselves
take possession of them. The unani-
nous voice Of the country was opposed
to the return of the islands to the ty-
rannical government of Spain. In
! many of the state conventions ringing
| declarations against such course
| were adopted and one of these was the
| convert ion of the state of the senator
! from Massachusetts" (Hoar).
Il wrote it myself" announced M.
| Hoar.
"Then / presume that the senator Is
opposed to that course" remarked
| Foraker. amid laughter.
I'VE could not leave those islands a;
| the mercy of other countries. We de
| o.;I a1 t,aE M aScin1l of them -
! selves-for the present at least-unti!
the people of those islands are ready
and capable of self government"
| The assertion of the temporary
| character of our possession of :he
| Philippines created a stir in the cham
Der. Foraker reiterated it. We coul
not desert the people of those islands,
he said, and subject them to the risks
of disorder. anarchy. misrule and mob
| rule, while they might still be unfit
| for lf-government-bu our occu-
patton was not to be permanent.
Il don't understand that any one de
sires anything but the ultimate ind
pendence of the people of the Philip.
| pines" said he emphatically, Meth
| err the President nor any one in this
chamber
! Bat what about our right. If WE
choose to hold them permanently with
no thought of their ultimate indepen-
dence?" inquired Hoar.
I'VE have an unquestioned right ia
do So, replied Foraker.
Il speak particularly of our legal
right
Bacon, Ga, asked what difference
there was between our relations to Gu
ba and our relations to the Philippines
why we could not deal with the latter
on the same basis as the former. sim
ply hold them now with the declared
purpose of giving them self-govern
ment as soon as possible.
1.-The case of Cuba" replied Foraker
speaking with great elaboration, was
simple one, involving only our rela-
tions with Spain and the Cubans them
selves"
I'm the case of the Philippines. there
were other complications which can
not be spoken of here, but IL which
senators will hear in executive session
which justified the Presidents course
in the most ample manner and vindi-
cate most completely everything he has
done. In fact no other course Is safe
in view of the object We naturally