The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-12-28

Is Inc substance OF your eultorlal ana It's
quotation is an adrolt assertion that the
Southern cotton planter ought 70 ia o.
expansion" as you term it, because the
annexation OF the Philippines would in !,
crease the price or cotton no mater how
large the crop.
| doubt the sincerity Of the News in
presenting this argument to the colt n
producer, because expansion is a repuo-
lican scheme and as between demo .rats
and republicans the News has, as long as
can remember been strongly republican.
The republican party favors colonial
policy because corporations can erich
themselves on tropical imports and cheap
labor. and as between corporations and the
producing masses there can be no ques-
tion as to where the News has stood In
the past.
The Inconsistency of the News in this
effort to get the producer of cotton to
favor Expansion" for better prices, is
shown in the fact that the News has al
ways asserted that overproduction was the
cause of low prices Tor the producer o.
cotton, but since the political policy OF
the party in power has advocated onlal
governments the News argues that Eek
pansion' and annexation viii b.ing cool
prices of cotton no matter how large
the crop.
In appearing in the guise of the friendly
adviser of the cotton producer the News
ought not to forget how recently the New
York cotton exchange run prices down by
"Niel estimates of overproduction, its
constant undertaking OF spot cotton by
fictitious futures. and how willingly the
News published such market reports and
at the same time refused to give publ a
ton to articles endeavoring to expose the
frauds upon the cotton producer, FER
petrated by the exchange method of mar
ket gambling In futures. Who had tie
friendship of the News then, the CO.
porations or the cotton producer2
Now, let us see whether the expansion
ist'' or one who favors colonial govern
ments and annexation of territories In
habited by the Malay or black races o.
the tropics. is a friend of the Southern
producer of cotton or the corporations.
There are no cotton mills in the Philip
pine islands and/the inhabitants could not
use raw cotton, hence whether annexed or
not it can not open a market for producers.
The cotton mills of the world are located
in such quantities In Europe that England.
Germany and France control 95 per cent
of the cotton goods trade of the wo:id
They control its prices. Whatever demand
there has been or may be in the Philip
pines, it has been supplied from the cot
ton mills of New England and Europe and
not from the cotton producer. No change
of government could make them use law
cotton instead of the manufactured ar
ticles, and il they were now conquered.
annexed and forced by milf ,ary power TO
purchase double their usual consumpti n
of cotton goods it could not. benefit any
but manufacturing corporations in New
England or Europe. Not'H ase
The amount of cotton goods consume
by conquered and enslaved savage who
was incompetent to govern himself, wouli
not be likely to exceed the amount used
by him when he was free. naked and
happy but some expansionigts who are
friendly to the cotton producer would have
him believe that it would increase the
price of raw cotton to such an extent that
he ought TO favor expansion"
The annexation OF the Philippines would
allow the corporations that import hemp
and MANILA products to bring them in to
America free of import, duty. but tbs
would not reduce the nrice of ma1t Ia
rope TO the American consumer. because
the tariff on manufactured articles would
enable manufacturers to charge the same
prices at home.
The great corporations have made in-
cessant efforts to import cheap foreign la
bor but to a large extent they have been
prevented by legislation. They now seek
by annexation to have the right to import
the cheap labor of the negro and Maay
races of the tropics. The corporations
could then raise their own cotton cheaper
than the white producer and his vocation
would be gone.
If the annexation of all the Orient could
increase the consumption of cotton an
nually, which II can not, ii would then be
virtual enslavement of the American
producer. for while he might get slight
increase in his products, the costs Of
standing armies. the expense of wars and
the maintenance of military governments
would heap debts upon the agricultural
classes that would enslave them. and their
children after them. The expansion st WHO
tells the farmer that he should favor wars
for conquest, establish governments by
force. sacrifice the lives of his cons for
greed and gain, is not his friend. The
economist who tells the citizen that lib
erty, peace and prosperity are best pre-
served for him by destroying that of other
people, and that rest and comfort comes
from debts and taxation, is not he friend
OF humanity nor the disciple OF truth
One factory in the South would be worth
more to the producers than a thousand
military garrisons in Luzon, and one law
that would drive produce gamblers out
of our markets would be of more value
to the farmers than standing amy in
Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines.
Toh, n pits