Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1900-06-26
.FILIPtNOS' RIGHTS
Mr.. Bryan Says They Are Identical
With Those of Cubans.
INCONSISTENCY OF His ASSERTION
Why Did He Not Advocate Amend
ments to the Treaty.
EXPLANATION IS IN ORDER

There recently appeared in the daily
press" said one of the best-known Of west
ern senators to a Star reporter, IAN inter-
view with Mr.. Bryan, in which he says:
Il believe that the rights of the Filipinos
and the rights of the Cubans are identical.
The recognition of the rights of the Cubans
by resolution did not create those rights.
They existed before
"Whatever truth there may be in the as
sertion that all men in all countries have
equal and identical rights, it is not true
that the United States is under obligation
to protect all the rights of all the people
In the world. What right have the people
of Cuba or the peope of the Philippines to
call upon the United States to rescue them
from tyranny anarchy and barbarism and
protect them in all the rights and privileges
which the people of the United States en-
joy? Both the Cubans and the Filipinos
have always had the right to fight for. ac-
quire and maintain liberty, but they never
had the right to ask the United States to
do their fighting and set up free and in
dependent governments for them.
A Declaration of Policy. Not of Rights.
1.-The resolution of Congress declaring that
1t was not the intention of our government
to acquire Cuba was a declaration of policy,
but not a declaration of the rights of the
Cubans. If that resolution had declared
that it was not the intention of this govern
ment to acquire the Philippines it would
have been inconsistent for the United States
to purchase or acquire by conquest the ISL
ands of the archipelago. But no such pol
icy was declared by the United States In
regard to any of the islands of Spain ex-
cept Cuba. All questions with reference to
the policy of the United States in regard
to them was left open to be settled by
treaty at the conclusion of the war.
Ridiculous Assertion.
1.-THE assertion of Mr. Bryan that the
right of the Filpinos to be treated the same
as the United States chose to treat Cuba
existed before the war or exists at all is
simply ridiculous Neither the Cubans nor
the Filipinos had any rights or claims
whatever upon the United States, and the
assertion that such rights existed is not
compatible with the character of candi-
date for President The rights of the Cubans
or the F'ilipinos to any particular kind of
government was never a subject of negotla-
ton between the United States and Spain.
Spain ceded the occupation of Cuba to the
United States and the United States as
sumed the obligation of that occupancy in
accordance with the resolution of Congress.
Spain ceded the sovereignty of the Philip
pines to the United States in the treaty of
Paris, and Mr.. Bryan's influence secured
its ratification.
Spain by the first article of the treaty
of Paris relinquished all calm of sover-
eighty over Cuba, without monetary con-
sideration, and the United States undertook
to occupy Cuba temporarily in pursuance
of the resolution of Congress and to dis
charge the international obligations of the
island in the protection of life and proper
ty during such occupancy.
by the second article of the treaty Porto
Rico and the Island of Guam were uncon-
ditionally ceded to the United States with
out monetary consideration.
1.-THE third article of the treaty declares
that Spain cedes to the United States the
archipelago known as the Philippine ISL
ands and comprehending the islands lying
within the following lines naming the
boundaries. The United States will pay
to Spain the sum of s20,OOO.0OO within three
months after the exchange of the ratifica-
tions of the present treaty
Mr.. Bryan's Inconsistency.
eff Mr. Bryan was in favor of extending
the Monroe doctrine to the East Indies
and setting up governments which the
United States would be bound to protect,
why did he not advocate an amendment to
the treaty to that effect? The United States
at the time the treaty was ratified held
military possession of the harbor and city
of Manila. Why did he not stipulate for
temporary occupancy as in the case of Gu
ha? Why did he advocate the payment of
$2OOta,, 600 for the Philippines if he did not
intend that the United States should have
an interest in the islands or in the public
property named in the treaty, such as
lands, buildings, wharves, barracks. ports.
structures, public highways and other
property. all of which was bought with the
S2000O.000? How could Mr.. Bryan consent
to the purchase of those islands and the as
sumption of responsibility for the mainte-
nance of law and order and the protection
of life and property therein If he intended
to ignore the purchase and the obligations
1,xyf fa1 tot dor
and if he intended to have this government
make Aguinaldo a dictator and maintain
him against all the world?
1.-The disregard of the obligations as
sumed by the treaty and the squandering
of $2O.OOO.OO0 which Mr.. Bryan now advo-
Gates will not exonerate him from his ad-
vocacy of the treaty: which he now so
ure expended by the United States in good
faith to carry out the obligations imposed
by the treaty with Spain are the legitimate
results of that treaty, which could not have
been ratified without the cooperation of
Mr.. Bryan. He had enough friends in the
Senate who would follow his advice to de-
feat the treaty. and 1t was his advice which
make point against President Mckinley
for the faithful discharge of the duties
imposed upon him by the paramount au-
thority of the treaty. the ratification of
which was secured by the personal inf1u-
ence of Mr.. Bryan himself.
Ratification of the Treaty.
'If it be assumed that the ratification of
the treaty was a necessity to make peace
with Spain, it can hardly be contended that
the discharge Of the obligations imposed
by the treaty was either crime or a mis-
take. Besides, there can be no doubt that
Spain would have willingly kept the
Philippines and allowed the United States
to keep the $2OOOO,OOO if Mr.. Bryan had
insisted upon an amendment to that effect
before he and his friends would consent to
its ratification. Mr.. Bryan had it in his
power to shape the treaty in harmony with
his present policy.
"a plain explanation from Mr.. Bryan
why he advocated the ratification of the
treaty which involved vast expenditures Of
blood and treasure and now advocates sur
rendering any Of these islands without con-