The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-01-23

ried out. There are only two persons whose
ideas on the question of annexing the Philip
pines have given me cause for serious
thought. One of them thought that by an
nexation certain United States merchandise
could be sold to the Filipinos The other
was preacher who thought that by expan-
sion and annexation he could sell some
Protestant Bibles to the natives.
MILITARY DICTATION.
"The President of the United States" con-
tinued the speaker will on March 4 next
adjourn Congress, which will not meet again
until December, during which time he will
become military dictator OF more than
twelve and one-half millions of people in
these conquered islands. Yes, our constitu-
tional President is going to govern them
by his own personal will, and will you not
tell me that the act will not afford him a
swelled head?
Mr.. Eusts referred to the late war with
Spain, and contended that the signing Of the
peace protocol after the suing for peace by
Spain was in itself sufficient to decide the
questions involved.
Samuel Gompers president of the Ameri-
can Federation of Labor was the next
speaker Mr.. Gompers severely criticised
the inconsistency of the United States gov
eminent in going to war to free the Cubans
and of denying the same measure of free
dom and liberty to the Filipnos. He de-
clared that the flag Of the Nation should
Eever be used to hide tyranny. He said that
it was not improbable that the Filipinos will
yet become part of the standing army of
the United States and might yet be called
on to shoot down American wage earners.
He said it was impossible to subdue a peo-
ya1o INV oF nd Of fbo tivoa
maintain our free institutions.
w. Bourke Cochran, the next speaker,
said: This heresy of Imperialism sweeping
over the country is threatening the stability
of our institutions and our measure of free
government. 1t is policy of infamy This
| country of ours, the home of alien races,
| who are now raising aloft our hands in pro-
test against a policy which, if successful,
will obscure the horizon Of the whole human
| race. Shall this country step down from
| the high eminence which she has attained
| in the family of nations, in the matter of
| imperialism? When we are asked to take
| this step, it is but natural that we ask its
! promulgators to unraYel their pretenses
and, when we do So we find them advocat-
| ing contradictory arguments. The question
! of imperialism and expansion, boiled down
| to it's true import, is a dangerous policy
| either to adopt or pursue. The imperialists
| tell you that trade follows the flag, when in
fact every American knows that the oppo-
site is the case. 1t is the flag that follows
| trade. Is it part of the principles of our
| free and Independent government to pro-
| ceed TO cvilize a weaker people by first
| shooting and then robbing them? We
| shrink from the responsibility imposed on
US by destiny, and when we fail to be con-
WINGED of this appeal to destiny, we are
| charged with being un-American.
A NEW GROWTH.
This child of destiny is a new growth in
this country, but in the old world he is as
old as human depravity. No nation, par
| ticularly the American Nation, can have a
citizen soldiery and a mercenary army. 1t
is against the faith of Washington and the
signers of the Declaration of independence.
The imperialists of to-day would have you
and me believe that Washington and the
trainers of the Constitution descended on the
Capitol at Washington and played havoc
with the Nation, and were, of course, de-
cidedly un-American.
with regard to the Philippines, if we are
to become barbarous, let us excel in our
)barbarity as we have excelled in our civlli-
zation, all the other nations of the world.
Let us not substitute the weight of cannon
balls for moral integrity and support. l con-
fess L am in favor of expansion if it is
meant in the right direction. In this case
everything depends on what is meant by
the right direction. If we want expansion,
why here to the north of US lies a country
which is a natural part of us. Why not an
next Canada? I'd be delighted to see that
line of custom houses beyond our border
blown into the great lakes and our line of
territory to the north of us extended to Baf-
fms bay. Deeply as 1 desire annexation
with Canada 1 would not have it by force
of arms. The histories of Alsace and Lor-
raine and Englands treatment of Ireland
but too well Illustrate the foolishness of an
nexation by force and coercion. Now, if
England likes us as she claims she does, let
her convince Canadians that their true des-
tiny is with u.s.