Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1899-02-09
AN INTERMITTENT POLICY.
Onreaiabflity or the RepuhTsean A.
manistration in Critical sis-
uafIons.

shall republicans stand by McKin-
ley?" asks an expansionist party organ
They probably ought TO as q gen
eral party proposition; but the
best republicans, as well as the
best democrats. have preferred to
consider the Philippine question
from . broader standpoint. Par
ties are essential In government. but
| they do not necessarily enter into every
| phase OF public affairs. There are or
gans which are blindly insisting on
the most extreme course with references
| to the new acquisition" In the orient.
| merely because they think IL In tho
policy Of the administration, and they
do not feel At liberty to have thoughts
Of their own. President Mckinley may
surprise them some day. In several
| important instances In his public life
he has not been so welded to senti-
ment or q principle that he has not
been able to make q radical and sudden
switch.
II il very well understood that the
administration occupies radically diff
ferent position from the one ii as
sumed when the peace commissioners
personally that which he has failed to
gain official knowledge of. The resoiu-
ton which he offered some time since.
and which was adopted by the senate.
asking for certain information about
the peace negotiations. was couched in
the usual terms. Il recognized the
right commonly accorded to the ex-
ecutive department to decline TO COM
municate anything which IL might look
upon az incompatible with the public
interest. What Hoar evidently de-
sired TO bring out was the fact that
the peace commissioners on behalf OF
the United States were originally au-
thorized to demand only n coaling sta
ton on the island of Luzon. This and
nothing more. The executive depart
ment has taken doubtful advantage Of
its prerogative to refuse this informa-
ton. Its assumption that publication
of the matter would be incompatible
with the public interest is farfetched.
It simply does not want to be exposed
in its swift changes.
The policy Of requiring only coaiing
station rapidly grew into q treaty
which contemplated the permanent ac-
ipelago, and the cold shoulder to the
liberty-seeking Filipinos. Some OF the
friends of the treaty, and even some
of its trainers. have been driven to the
claim that the ratification of the treaty
leaves the future OF the islands broadly
open: that it would not be in the slight
est detriment TO the idea of extending
to the people of the islands the OPP
portunty TO organize a government OF
their own.
That may be the purpose now, but it
was not at the time the treaty was
framed. The article relating TO the
control of the Philippines is different
from that providing for the case of
Cuba. Why were they not made alike3
Why were the advocates of the treaty
put in the position of making COM
plicated, and more or less pcttifogging,
argument to show that independent
government is possible under the third
article? Why was the matter not put
in plain terms?
The difference was that congress had
promised that the war should not be
one for the acquisition of Cuba. We
made no such promise as to the Philip
pines. reasoned the administration.
Morally, it argued, the cases are the
same, but technically we are free TO
grab slice of the orient, and let us
do so to make ourselves popular with
the people. Expansion is the prevalent
cry, and we will get into the swim.
Now the administration is not so sure
that expansion is popular, and 1t is
hedging"
The serious matter now before the
people, or before any party. is not OF
standing by Mckinley" but of pur-
suing the right course.-Cincinnati En-.
quirer.