The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1900-08-17
ter by what nation it is applied.
OUR TITLE TO THE ISLANDS.
Were the People Thrown in with the Orr
entail Real Estate?

entail Real Estate?
What is our title to the Philippine
islands? Do we hold them by treaty
did we take them? Did we purchase
the people? If not, how did we secure
title to them? Were they thrown in
with the land? Will the Republicans
say that inanimate earth has value,
and when that earth is nodded by the
Divine Hand and stamped with the
likeness of the Creator it becomes Il
fixture and passes with the soil? If
governments derive their just powers
from the consent of the governed it is
impossible to secure title to people,
either by force or by purchase We
could eXtinguiSh Spain'S title by treaty,
but if we hold title we must hold it
by some method consistent with our
ideas of government. Wien we made
allies of the Filipinos and armed them
to buy Spaifi'S title we are not inno-
cent purchasers. But even if we had
not disputed Spain's title she could
transfer no greater title than she had
and her title was based on force alone
We cannot defend such title. but as
RPAAA saw US IL Null Cldlln utGu We
can honorably turn the property over
to the party in possession. Whether
any American official gave the Fill
pinos formal assurance of indepen-
dence is not material. There can be
no doubt that we accepted and utilized
the services of the FilipinoS. and that
when we did so we had full knowledge
that they We're fighting for their own
independence. and | submit that his
tory furnishes no example of turpitude
baser than ours if we now substitute
our yoke for the Spanish yoke.
Let us consider briefly. the reasons
which have been given in support of
an imperialistic policy. Some say that
1t is our duty to hold the Philippine
Islands. But duty is not an argument:
1t is a conclusion. To ascertain what
our duty is in any emergency we must
apply well settled and generally ac-
cepted principles. 1t is our duty to
avoid stealing, no matter whether the
thing to be stolen is of great or little
value. Every one recognizes the obliga-
tion imposed upon individuals to OBJ
serve both the human and moral law:
but as some deny the application of
those laws to nations it may not be out
OF place to quote the opinion of 9TH
erS. Jefferson. than whom there is no
higher political authority, said: Il
know of but one code of morality for
men, whether acting singly or col
lectively." Franklin, whose learning.
wisdom and virtue are a part of the
priceless legacy hequeathed to us from
the revolutionary days. expressed the
same idea in even stronger language
when he said: Justice is as strictly
due between neighbor nations as be-
tween neighbOr citizens. ="
Force can defend a right. but force
has never yet created a right. If it
was true, as declared in the resolu-
tions of intervention. that the Cubans
"are and Of right ought to be free and
independent" Language taken from the
Declaration of independence. it is
equally true that the Filipinos "are
and of right ought to be free and indie
pendent" Who will draw n
line between the natural rights of the
Cpbans and the Filipinos? Who will
say that the former has a right to lib
erty and thar the latter has no rights
which we are bound to respect? And
If the Filipinos ''are and of right ought
to be free and Independent" what right
have we to force our government upon
them without their consent?