The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1900-03-01
THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 1900.

AN article from the pen of Congress
man Cooper, Chairman of the House
Committee on Insu1ar Affairs, making
an exposition of the constitutional
questions presented by the case of
Poto Rico, was published in the
Sunday Sentinel. It states very clear
Nv the antagonistic views on these
questions. In commenting editorially
upon the letter the Sentinel pays our
CONGRESSMAN the following well de-
served tribute:
r7"The constitutional question raised
bv the case of Porto Rico is stated IN
todav's Sentinel by Congressman
Coeper. Nobody has made, and no.
body is likely to make, better state
ruerlt of it. What Mr.. Cooper says is
as clear as plate glass. 1t looks easy
enough to be so clear as ne is, but
everybody who has tried and failed
Knows that nobody can see and ex-
plain such complicated subject clear
ly uniess he has intellectual powers or
a high order. Another very uncommon
quality appears in Mr.. COOper's art1-
Gle. He states the cases of persons
with whom he does not agree as ade-
aouateqy as he states his own. Very
few of us can do this-because most OF
as don't really want to, for one reason,
and also because it requires more I'M
agination than most of us have to put
strongly opinions which we do not
hold.
Passing from the constitutional
question to Porto Rico and its 1nhaD1-
tauts Mr.. Cooper describes the island
ia words which bring it wildly before
Wisconsin people, whom he is part1cu-
1arlg addressing. Then he gives
little sketch of Porto Rican character,
as revealed in the Porto Ricans who
have appeared before the insu1ar COM
,yuittee of which Mr.. Cooper is chair
2rran. In a few words he tells Us their
.sinrs. and the difference between what
tR1ey want and what the secretary of
war has proposed to give them. From
ore of them he quotes words which
rive d lively and an agreeable notion
Of the islanders character and mode
of thought. Mr.. Cooper closes his
article by calling attention to the
argument of those who say that what
eyer may be done for Porto Rico will
be d precedent for legislation about
the Philippines. 'FOr myself" ne
adds, II am unable to appreciate the
force of this argument. L do not pc
fieve that for congress to do the wise
aud right thing in one case is to create
a precedent to compel it to do foolish
aud wrong thing i'll another" Even
persons who do not concur IN Mr.
Eooper's opinion will admit that this
is admirably said.
A detailed expression of Mr.. Cooper
opinions as to what should be done tor
Porto Rico must of course be sought IN
his insular bill. In the article pub
listed this morning he has stated with
exceptional 1ucidity some of the prob
Ierus to be solved. One seldom comes
across a writer, in or out Of public life,
who has such a talent for exposition as
Mr. Cooper"
On Saturday Congressman Cooper
introduced a bill providing a govern
meat for Porto Rico" Though fol
lowing the general lines of the Foraker
bill, it is based in many respects on
new lines and contains many features
not contained in the Foraker bill. Mr..
Cooper's measure provides for gov
eruor and an executive cabinet,
to be appointed by the President,
aud also Legislature. The
Legislature provision provides for
q council and a house of delegates,
the upper body to consist of fourteen
naembers to hold their Offices for four
wears, seven of the council to be ap-
goiuted by the President, and seven to
Gse elected from as many election dis
tricts. The house of delegates to con
stst of thirty-four men, part to be
chosen by popular suffrage, the quail
fcation of electors being practically
the same as chat under existing mill
tary authority, ability Ito read either
Spanish or English, or payment of
small amount of taxes. 1t fixes the
capital at San Juan.
The exposition published in the Sen
tiueL is evidence that Congressman
Cooper has studied the case to the
bottom.