Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1899-04-28

!
the Philippines, under a title which the
inhabitants are bound neither in law nor
morals to respect.
A year ago the name of Weyler was
the execration of the whole civilized
world. The decree of Weyler to the
Cubans was "submission or extermina-
ton" To-day, if we can trust our in
formation, the same decree is being en-
forced in the name of the United States
against the people of the Philippines.
The Manila correspondent Of New York
newspaper, which is authority for this If
it is authority for anything, gives us this
interesting example of our way of doing
it, in an account of the fighting around
Manila:
"Occasionly a Filipino would fall for
ward apparently dead, wait until he was
fairly under the heels of the Americans,
and then foolishly rise and attempt to
gain safety. To shoot man at six feet
range with Springfield rifle is hard
thing to do, but the orders were to let no
insurgent live, and off would go the
whole side of his head, or he would fall
with wound through the abdomen
large enough to drop potato through"
Even Weyler could hardly do better
than this. Arej the American people
satisfied to have their government en-
gagged in this business? That is the
question to-day, and that is the question
before this meeting.
1t has been said by high authority that
nine tenths of the people support the
policy of the government. There are
many who support it, for variety of
reasons, but | am not aware that the
people have been counted upon this ques-
ton. There are Republicans who feel
bound to support it as the policy of
Republican administration. The army
and navy support it, because for them it
is duty and promotion. There are eX-
pectant politicians who support it as the
policy of more offices and more power.
Some statesmen, hitherto eminent for
/ twisting the British lions tail, support it
though the caudal appendage is now in
another hand, the hand of British diplo-
macy. which is leading them to do its
work.-for all this is done more for
Great Britain than for us. There are
newspapers which support it, on various
grounds, some as party journals, some
for the glory of foreign empire, some in
the interest of trade, one, | believe, in
the cause of civil cervice reform, and
some possibly with the remote view TO
their circulation. There are ministers of
the gospel who support it, in the inter-
| vals of wondering why more people do
not attend their churches, believing,
presume, that the Prince of Peace will
approve the killing of half the Filipinos
if his message of good will toward men
may be carried to the other half. There
are also high minded and patriotic cit
liens who submit to 1t because they see
no help for 1t. Their view is this We
are in the Philippines, wisely or un-
wisely, rightly or wrongly, and we must
restore order before we can deal with the
question of government.
Let us see about this. Is it necessary
to slaughter the inhabitants to restore
order? What occasioned the disorder
which we are suppressing with fire and
sword? Look back for a moment. How
did we begin with the Fiipinos? We
began by inviting their help against
Spain, whose power in the islands they
had broken before Dewey sailed into
Manila bay. They were our allies, for
mally or informally, in honor it matters
not which, so far as we needed them.
The protocol of August II conveyed
the first hint that, after availing our
selves of their help, we proposed to sub
iugate them and seize their country to
ourselves. They protested. If they
had done less they would have deserved,
and had. the contempt of the world.
They tried TO appeal to our government
for conference. if nothing more, upon
their position and our purposes, and this
appeal was denied.
So our serpentine diplomacy worked
its way along until the purpose was
openly declared TO ignore our Obliga-
tons, disregard their claim to voice in
the government of the territory, always
theirs by right which they had begun
to recOnQuer from Spain, and subject
them to our military power upon our
own terms. TO this they refused to sub
nit. and we are killing them because
they refuse. But for this there is no
reason to believe that a hostile shot
would ever have been fired against us
by single Filipino.
Who, then, were the aggressors
Tried by the high declaration with
which we began the war against Spain,
who were the aggressors? Forcible an
neXatiOn was declared to be not only ag-
erosion, but criminal aggression. II ia
said that we are not guilty of such
criminal aggression, because we ac-
qured the islands by purchase. Who
sold them to us? The inhabitants have
never sold them. We acquired from
Spain only such title as she had, title
which never rested on anything but
force. We took it, such as it was, with
full notice that it was disputed, and not
only disputed, but broken.
The headlines call the Filipinos
''rebels.' Why rebels? What allegiance
have they ever owed TO us? We have
2 no no