The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-09-11


sible thing for Republicans to laugh at Mr..
Taggart's Establishments and tell him that
only Democrats should vote for Democrat
who promises Democratic administration?
MORAL CONSIDERATIONS PARAMOUNT
Two recent expressions regarding the
Philippine question and its ultimate set
Element challenge attention, because, both
coming from intelligent sources, they are
based on Numerically opposite ideas. The
first was from Mr.. Jacob G. Schurman, one
of the United States commissioners to the
Philippines, who, in a statement for the
Associated Press, said:
The issue to-day is not a commercial one,
although the natural resources of the Phil
ippine islands are of great value and await
is the question one of political expediency
or party politics, although in its collateral
branch there may be aspects on which po-
litical parties may properly divide; but the
question to-day is neither one of CONNER
cial advantage nor of partisan politics. 1t is
a purely moral question. The vital issue is
the honor of the Nation, the protection of
loyal Filipinos and the fulfillment of our
obligations to the nations OF the world in
volved in our acceptance of sovereignty.
The other expression was from Senator
Carter, of Montana, who, in an interview
at Washington. said:
This is a practical age We are going
to deal with this question on the basis of
dollars and cents. If the American people
believe that the Philippines are going to
help us they will never let the islands go.
If, on the other hand, they find that the
Philippines mean constant drain and small
return, you will find the verdict of the peo-
pie to be against permanent retention.
Neither religion nor sentiment will have
much influence in determining the verdict:
we can show the country that it WILL as l
think we can. the American flag will never
come down from the Philippines.
1t would be difficult to conceive of views
more completely antagonistic. One makes
the moral question entirely paramount,
wholly ignoring commercial considerations,
while the other makes it purely a COM
mercial matter AM says the only question
will be, will it pay? BY moral question in
this sense is not meant religious, because,
as far as the government is concerned, that
does not enter into the case. The moral
question embraces considerations relating
to the national honor and the duty of the
Nation to itself and other peoples. In this
view of the case a majority of intelligent
Americans will doubtless agree that Com
missioner Schurman is much nearer right
than Senator Carter. He does not deny
that there is a commercial aspect to the
case, but he places the moral aspect far
above it. and in this he is right. We might
afford to abandon or sell the Philippines,
but we cannot afford to abandon or sell the
national honor or cravenly run away from
duties that destiny or Providence has i'm
posed upon us. No doubt the Philippines
are immensely valuable in a commercial
way, but perhaps we might get as much
commercial benefit out of them without
asserting and establishing the sovereignty
of the United States over them as by doing
so. The anti-expansionists are making this
argument. They say, What is the use OF
our right to trade with islands that we can
trade with just as profitably without own
ing them? We don't need to own the Phil
ippines in order TO trade with them" That
is a very mercenary view. 1T is true, we
do not need to own the Philippines in order
to trade with them, but we need to own
them in order to show that when the Unite ed
from a nation with whom she has been al
war and gets 1t she is able to make her
title good. We need to own the islands In
order to show that the United States gov
eminent Is brave enough to assume any re-
| sponsibilities that events may put upon II
and strong enough to maintain it's right:
under any and all circumstances.
| Commissioner Schurman touches on one
| phase Of the moral question that is i'm
| portant-namely, our duty to protect the
| loyal Filipinos. There Is a large number
of Filipinos within our lines who are en-
tirely loyal to the United States, and Their,
| is reason to believe that a majority of al
the inhabitants would prefer American RUE
| to Aguinaldo. For the United States t.
surrender TO Aguinaldo would be to aban
| don these hundreds of thousands of Ioya
| Filipnos to every kind of terrible punish
| ment. By acknowledging allegiance to tn
United States they have practically de
clared their confidence in its purpose an,
| its ability to protect them. To desert then
would be a disgrace from which the Natiol
| could never recover.
The Philippine question involves com
mercial considerations, but they are no
paramount. " is very narrow and low
| view of the situation TO say, as Senate
Carter does, that the sole question is, viii
| far more important.