Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1899-01-26
[From Madison Democrat, Sunday, Jan. o. !
PARKINS0N1S VIEWS.
Sound Sense Applied to Philippine
Problem.
QUESTION OF DUTY ONLY

|
late naturalization. Ultimate Autonomy
| for Islands.
SIN the last issue of the Aegis Prof.
j. b. Parkinson, of the chair of polit-
ical economy at the university, con-
tributes an article on our island pos
sessions that constitutes a really very
sound, simple and common-sense dis
cussion of subject that is now at
tracing the attention of the world.
Prof. Parkinson very properly de-
clares that the constitutional power
to acquire new territory is no longer
| open to discussion, and yet it has
been stoutly disputed by intelligent
men from the beginning. The power
is not expressly given, but is clearly
| implied from the authority to make
war and conclude treaties. 1t has
been confirmed by repeated exercise
and by general acquiescence.'
Another point is equally we'll
made. But what of the millions,
good, bad, and Indifferent, who in
habit these islands of the sea?' is
asked. Will they not, when the
treaty of cession is ratified, become
at once citizens of the United States,
entitled to come and go as they
please, and to enjoy all the rights and
privileges of American citizenship?
| Not at all, answers Prof. ParkinsO on.
The whole question of citizenship is
practically in the control of congress.
Barring the limitations imposed by
the XIVth amendment of the constitu-
ton, congress can determine absolute
ly who shall, and who shall not, be
citizens of the United States. Not a
Filipino, Porto Rican, or Cuban can
become a citizen against the will of
congress, by the mere acquisition of
the territories to which they belong.
But what of those more
fundamental rights guaranteed in the
body of the constitution, and added to
and further emphasized in the amend
ments. Shall we not be legally bound
to extend to these in detail to the
| Filipinos and other islanders? No.
The constitution was made for the
states and not for the territories. We
are morally bound, as far as practic-
able, to secure these rights in our
territorial possessions but congress
has the power to govern the terri
tories practically as it likes, and
whatever rights are guaranteed, or
| privileges bestowed. must be effected
through such instrumentalities as con-
|
have we constitutional or other, it is
urged, to acquire territory and gov
ern it without the consent of the peo-
n pie who occupy it? Have we not pro-
claimed to the world the doctrine that
governments derive their just powers
from the consent of the governed?'
Certainly, and the doctrine serves
we'll as a working basis-as an ideal
to be sought after, but it has never
been literally realized in practice and
never will be until the millennium is
reached, when government will be un-
necessary. Our fathers proclaimed it
as an abstract theory, then went to
work at once to ignore it in actual
practice. Not a territory has been
organized and governed in full recog
milton of the principle, but the general
trend throughout has been in that di-
rection. Such governments have been
provided as seemed best suited to the
needs of the people, without much in
quiry as to how far they derived their
just powers from the consent of the
governed The domain acquired from
Mexico has been carved into territor-
les, and most of these admitted as
states into the union. But two of
them, after the lapse of half a century,
still remain on the outside, and sub
ject to the control of congress. Alas
ka was purchased more than thirty
years ago, and to this hour has but a
vestige of civil government. No gov
eminent is practical unless it is suited
to the intelligence and capacity for
self-government of the people for
whom it is instituted.
Discussing our moral duty in the
promises, Prof Parkinson says:
We went to war on humanitarian
grounds. Not a word in the resolu-
tions of congress hints at any other
motive. The general result in this
case was easy to predict. But the
incidental issues of war can never be
foretold. When the contest was on,
it was our right to strike the enemy
at the weakest points. This was done.
AS result, Porto Rico and the Phil
ippines came into our possession by
conquest and, after treaty ratitica-
ton. we shall be at liberty call them
our own. But If we were absolutely
honest in giving our motive for going
to war, we are at least morally bound
to the Porto Ricians and the Filipinos
the same considerations we promised
the Cubans. We are in Cuba as the
direct result of the war, and our only
excuse for remaining is to secure the
pacifcation of the island. We are
in Porto Rico and the Philippines
by the accidents of the war, and
we may legally remain at will.
We are under promise to vacate Cuba
when her people have shown their
desire and ability to preserve order
and governor themselves: we cannot
consistently insist on remaining in
Porto Rico and the Philippines after
the people of these islands have clear
" shown II like desire and ability.
The Philippines must not be premit-
ted to become prey to themselves or
to other nations. 1t is our duty to
the people of these islands. and not
their noisy leaders. that should sway
our action. Our rule over them should
be kind and considerate, but always
firm: they should be schooled as
rapidly as possible to an apprecia-
tion of the value of civil liberty and
| ai,,+ nd shnpld no