The daily morning journal and courier., 1900-01-25
COLONIAL VS. TERRITORIAL
EMPHASIZING DEBATE LAST EYEN-
 ING IN Y. M. c. 4. ROOMS.

INTERVENING DEBATE LAST EVEN
 ING IN Y. M. c. 4. ROOMS.
 Hon. H. Lynde Harrison and Professol
 Edward G. Bourne Discuss Best Torn
 ofGovernment for Our New Posses
 sions.
 The educative value of the debate or
 questions of national importance is
 recognized by every body with desire
 for acquiring and decimating hard facts on knotty problems. To the lov. CTS of, statecraft < rousing debate is always instructive and interesting To the younger generation with hall formed ideas and minds as yet plastic and vascillating the debate teaches sev- eral lessons. 1. To have and be sure of solid basis; ?, to emphasize the strong points on the one hand and take advantage of the weak ones on the other;9, to weigh carefully the argu- ments pro and con before forming an opinion.
 There are rumors from all parts of the country at the present time as to the attitude of parties on the colonial policy of the government either pro- jected or surmised and the large au- dience that gathered in the rooms of the Y. M. c. A. last evening to hear the debate between Judge Lynde liar rison and Prof. Bourne bore eloquent testimony to the interest of New Ha- veners on the subject. The meeting was called to order by Judge of Pro- bate CIeaveland on behalf of the educa- tional committee, who introduced Colo mel N. G. Osborn as the chairman and conductor of the deabte.
 Colonel Osborn in few remarks an- nounced the subject as Resolved, That we should adopt a colonial policy for all our new possessions, and the speak CTS: For the affirmative, Hon. H. Lynde Harrison. For the negative, Prof. Edward G. Bourne. Each speak CT was allowed ten minutes to state his case and ten minutes for rebuttal In opening the debate for the affirmative the Hon. H. Lynde Harrison said that he would not include Cuba in the de- bate as, so far as the United States were concerned, Cuba was practically independent Those colonies, there fore, to be discussed were Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippines. The two sides to the resolution was that the government of the colonies must be either colonial or territorial. The ter ritorial form of government, as the speaker understood it, means that the colony, admitted as a territory, may be admitted to statehood when congress or either party sees fit. The colonial, such as Holland and England have given to their possessions, for two or three cen turies The speaker denied right to admit our new possessions to statehood when congress saw fit. Great Britain has learned to give her colonies just such measure of government as people are fit for, Australia and Canada being more able to govern themselves than the people of the East and West Indies When the question of the gov- ernment of our new possessions comes up for solution we can rest assured that by capable civil service the problem of government will be solved. The. edu cated portion of the inhabitants of Puerto Rico may be fit for selfgovern- ment on the territorial system, but the vast majority will not be for the next hundred years. We should learn les- son from Canada. In 1760 Canada passed from French to British control Immediately the English government sent officers to manage affairs as they were managed in England. Discord ensued. Customs language, religion were all French, and when the English proposed to strip the church of her vast fo i,,J bo French Canadians were ready to fight England saw her error in time and | gave to the French Canadians a meas ure of religious toleration and selfgov- ernment, and the danger was averted. l To recognize the prejudices, customs | and religions of a governed people, a | form of local self government, under a | national Judiciary will be better than | to make them territories and ultimately | states. If Hawaii were to become a state you extend to Orientals and Ha- waiians the same privileges of slf- frage as we enjoy at home The ma jority are unfit As a territory sends a representative to congress, this making of doubtful territories opens the ques- ton of political jobbery. Either par ty, when in power, may admit say Hawaii to be territory and subse- luently to statehood for the sake of ] few votes to help them to hold power. It would be most injurious to our con- stitution to have native Hawaiians or voting on the making of our avs. When we cannot trust New Mexico to govern itself we surely can- 1ot trust Puerto Rico, Hawaii or the Help them to govern them selves, but don't invite them to help govern us.
 Prof. Edward G. Bourne for the neg tive asked if we could afford to go pack on the American revolution, f we cared to acknowledge that ,ur forefathers fought
 ,ur forefathers fought for liberty and rot their freedom, though they did not leed it. The chief arguments against he English colonial system-if system t could be called-are:
 First--The colonies are governed by he aristocratic class. They do not care or business. They want to rule, and he governing positions are made for hem. We have no class of this kind.
 Second-The character of our democ- acy is such that if we had the right