Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1900-08-17

| tioii, WildL is VI bc tllc lOI vi tHc FIlt-
pinos, who resisted our authority? If
secret influences could compel disre-
gard of our plain duty toward friendly
people, living near our shores, what
treatment will those same influences
provide for an unfriendly people 1000
miles away? If, in this country where
the people have the right to vote, Re-
publican leaders dare not take the side
of the people against the great monop-
olies which have grown up within the
last year, how can they be trusted 10
protect the FIlipinos from the corpor-
ations which are waiting to exploit
the islandsf
PORTO RICO AND CONSTITUTION.
Is the sunlight of full citizenship to
be enjoyed by the people of the United
States, and the twilight of citizenship
endured by the people of Porto Rico,
while the thick darkness of perpetual
vassalat e covers the Philippines? The
Porto Rico tariff law asserts the doc
trine that the operation of the consti-
tuition is confined to the forty five
STATES. The Democratic party disputes
this doctrine and denounces it us re-
pugnant to both the letter and the
spirit of our organic law. There is no
place in our system Of government for
the deposit of arbitrary and irrespon.
sible power. That the leaders OF a
great party should claim for any Pres
ident or Congress the right to treat
millions of people as mere "posses-
sions" and deal with them unre-
strained by the constitution or the
bill of rights shows how far we have
already departed from the ancient
landmarks, and indicates what may
be expected if this nation deliberately
enters upon a career Of empire. The
territorial form of government is tenn
porary and preparatory, and the chief
security citizen of a Territory has is
found in the fact that he enjoys
the same constitutional guarantees
and is subject to the same general
laws as citizen OF State. Take
away this security and his rights will
be violated and his interest sacrificed
at the demand of those who have po-
litical influence. This is the evil OF
the colonial system, no matter by what
nation it is applied.
WHAT IS OUR TITLE?
What is our title to the Phillip
pine islands? Do we hold them by
treaty or by conquestf Did we buy
Them or 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 a value, and when that earth is
nodded by the Divine hand and
stamped with the likeness of the Gre
ator, it becomes 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 govern
ment. When we made allies of the
Fllipinos and armed them to fight
against Spain We disputed Spain's
title. If we buy Spain's title we are
not innocent 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
a title, but, as Spain gave us a quit
claim deed, we can honorably turn the
property over TO the party in posses
sion. Whether any American official
gave the Filipinos moral assurance
of independence is not material.
There can be no doubt that We ac-
cepted and utilized the services OF the
Filipinos and that when we did so we
had full knowledge that they were
fighting for their own independence,
and l submit that history furnishes
no example OF turpitude baser than
ours if we now substitute our yoke
for the Spanish yoke.
Let us consider the conditions which
we have given in support of an i'm
perialistic policy. Some say that it
is our duty to hold the Philippine
Islands. But duty is not an argument !;
it is conclusion. TO ascertain what
our duty is, in any emergency, we
must apply we'll settled and generally
accepted principles. 1t is our duty to
avoid stealing, no matter whether the
thing to be stolen is of great or little
value. 1t is our duty to avoid killing
a human being, no matter where the
human being lives or 10 what race or
class he belongs. Every one recog-
nizes the obligations imposed upon
individuals to observe both tho hu-
man and moral law, but as some deny
the application OF those laws to nations,
it may not be out OF place to quote
the opinions of others. Jefferson,
than whom there is no higher political
authority, said:
ONLY ONE CODE FOR MORALITY.
"I know of but one code of NOR.
ality for men, whether acting singly
or collectively"
Franklin, whose learning, wisdom
and virtue are part of the priceless
legacy bequeathed 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 between neighbor
citizens. A highwayman is as much
robber when he plumbers in a gang
as when singly; and the nation that
makes an unjust war is only q great
gang"
Men may dare to do in crowds what
they would not dare to do as individ-
uals, but the moral character of an
act is not determined by the number
of those who join in it. Force can de-
fend right, but force has never yet
created right. If it was true. as de-
clared in the resolution of interven-
ton, that the Cubans care 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 independent"
The right Of the Cubans to freedom
was not based upon their proximity to
the United States nor upon the lang
uage which they spoke, nor upon the