Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1899-10-20
SPIRIT OF THE PRESS
FACTS AND OPINIONS GATHERED
FROM CONTEMPORARIES.
OUR NEW SLAVE TERRITORY.

whereby l1dt pOieuJdle TtCOSnih thc
sovereignty of the United States in his
dominions, is considered at length in
letter from Manila by r. II. Little, the
correspondent of the Chicago Tribune.
This correspondent devotes the follow
ing paragraph to the provisions in the
compact relating to human servitude:
The other provisions in the treaty
relate to slavery, religion and other
customs in which our views are different
from those held by the Moros, and where
a distinct and written understanding is
necessary. The slaves are those taken in
war, slaves for Indebtedness, or those
who are born in state of servitude. 1t
is provided in the treaty that all slaves
have the right of buying their freedom
at a price to be fixed by disinterested
parties, or another may buy slaves
freedom for him.
This is the fullest statement of the
terms of the provision regarding slavery
that has yet appeared. By it the extent
of slavery in the Sulus is made better
known. 1t seems that slaves are made
not only out of prisoners captured in
war, but out of people who cannot pay
their debts and out Of the descendants of
all such persons. The Sulus might enjoy
peace forever and yet the supply of
slaves would be kept up. In the United
States the number of slaves would soon
be very large if men who failed to pay
their debts were thrown into state of
servitude.
The Bates compact distinctly recog-
nizes the institution of human slavery
and allows its indefinite continuance
under the American flag. The provision
that slave may buy his freedom, or that
another may buy a slaves freedom for
him, does not abolish slavery. On the
contrary, it officially recognizes slaverys
existence and substantially pledges to
the system protection by the United
States government, so long as any slaves
are held. And the sultan of Sulu, it Is
certain, was not given to understand that
the institution is ever to be entirely
abolished. 1t may run on for many
years, according to local conditions.
The theory of the Bates compact OBJ
viously is that it would be unwise to
interfere with slavery in the Sulus, the
"views" of the Moros being different
from ours. These "views," as well as
local conditions, may continue a con-
siderable period, and, therefore, accord
ing to the theory, the system of bondage
must remain an equal length of time.
The 18th amendment to the constitu-
ton of the United States has been in
force since 1865. 1t declares that
''nether slavery nor involuntary servi-
tude, except as a punishment for crime
shall exist within the United
States, or any place subject to their
jurisdiction" If, In the face of that
amendment, the official recognition of
slavery in the Sulu Islands by the gov
eminent of the United States is not
gross violation of fundamental law, then
black is white and all human reason is
nothing but the gibberish of maniac.
The apologists for the Bates compact
draw parallel with the treaties
with Indian tribes. But the Sc
apologists are defed to exhibit any
treaty with an Indian tribe since 1865
that recognizes human slavery as
domestic Institution. The 18th amend
ment killed human slavery-or was sup
posed to-not only within the limits of
the United States, but in "any place
subject to their jurisdiction" The
amendment was absolutely inclusive and
sweeping, and was so intended by the
statesman who framed it.
1t may be admitted, for the purpose of
discussion, that human slavery, owing
to local conditions, ought to be tolerated
in the Sulu islands. Great Britain,
which is not bound by any written con-
stitution and particularly by no 18th
amendment, allows slavery to continue
in its East Africa dominions for ex.
pediency's sake. There may be as much
reason for tolerating it in the Sulus as in
East Africa.
But was there any necessity for an alb
sorption of slave territory by the United
States, when, according to the funda.
mental written law of the land, slavery
was forever prohibited: 1t can be stated
with the utmost positlveness that there
was not the slightest necessity for in
GLIDING the Sulu group with the Philip
pine group in the territory which the
Paris treaty coded from Spain to the
United States. The Sulu group Is dis
tinct from the Philippine group in re-
ligion, being Moslem, and in location.
lying so far south as almost to touch the
great island of Borneo. SPANS sover-
eighty over them was not recognized by
Great Britain and Germany until as late
as 1876 or 1877, and SPANS control of
them had never been more than normal.
The United States was not bound to take
them because of any obligations assumed
toward their inhabitants in the Spanish
war. Alleged commercial considerations
did not require it, because the stepping
stone" to China was amply provided for
by the Philippine group proper. Ques-
tions OF geographical unity did uot
demand it, because the Sulus are as
much part of the great group of islands
OF which Borneo is one, as they are of
the Philippines. If the SuIus had been
left with Spain, as were the Carolines,
they would undoubtedly have been