Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1899-10-26
M'LAURIN's LETTER.
The letter reads

The letter reads
Bennettsville, S. c., Oct. u. 1899.
To Messrs. ]. B. Cleveland, j. II. Mont
gomery and others, Spartanburg,
S. c.
Your letter has been received. l fully
concur in everything you say about the
Importance of the retention of the trade
of the South with China. The "open
door" policy is what we need and want.
This has her etofore been secured by
"treaty rights" which have been re-
spected by other nations, only to the ex-
tent to which it conduced to their trade
interests. While ostensibly recognizing
these treaty rights, other nations in vic
lation of them have acquired territory
and excluded therefrom our legitimate
commerce. Russia has gradually alb
sorbed Manchura, and is building a rail
road across Siberia to command the
trade in China. Germany has been ac-
tive and waiting in expectancy to obtain
the Philippines. Japan has gwen Russia
all the fruits of her victory in 1892.
France has been the willing tool of Rus
sia, and England has been passive in her
fear to assail her.
This was the status in the East when
the battle of Manila occurred. This vic
tory thwarted all the scheme Of Russia
s.. +l,o l;er,an,L Lorn,ap+ nf Chino oD6
rendered its absorption and partition i'm
possible. If you want the "open door, "
the United States now holds the key.
The archipelago of the Philippines lies
along the coast of Asia for 800 miles, and
commands it. Manila is the point in the
East which is the center of ocean traffic.
1t is the only point where foreign ma
tions could have obtained commercial
stations without struggle. In the vicis
STUDIES and good fortune of war With
SPAN, and without any intention Of do
ing so, the United States have acquired
the possession of the Philippines, which
gives TO her paramount political and
commercial advantages.
HOLD THE PHILIPPINES.
Ny judgement is that the control of
them, or at least of some portions, is
the only safeguard for our trade interests
in the East The abandonment Of them
means the dsmemberment of China, its
partition among the European powers
and the inevitable loss of our China
trade2
l note you say in your letter "that the
question of our rights in China does not
include an attempt to bring other nations
under the influence of our flag; that this
is not question of territory, not ques.
ton of empire, but simply question OF
of trade" ETC., etc.
1t seems to me that the question OF
trade is not alone involved. The com
mercial and political aspects of the
great problem of the hour in this coun-
try are inseparable, and it is useless for
US to close our eyes to this fact. Would
it not be folly for us TO sacrifice our
commercial interests for purely political
considerations? The maintenance of our
trade in the East does not necessarily
mean the forcible annexation of the
Philippines, or the denial of the right Of
local selfgovernment. but when the war
is ended, by treaty or otherwise, for
Congress to settle all questions in just
and constitutional way.
I do not favor the adoption by the
country of a colonial policy, because of
the vexed and threatening problems
growing cut of it, but do think that, if
possible, the United States should main,
tain sufficient interests in the islands to
command equal trade rights with other
nations in China. This will prevent for
long time the dismemberment of this
vast empire. England and Japan favor
the integrity of the empire, but they
alone cannot guarantee it against the
other European powers With the weight
of the influence of the United States
throEn against dismemberment it would
he rendered impossible.
MANILA, THE OPEN DOOR.
At present, Hong Kong, under British
Influence, is the great distributing point