The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1900-10-27

ber l9 1898. was but Ttp3tltion OF the
proclamation Of May 10, 1898 TO which
/ have referred The sovereignty OF
tho Uaited States waa expressly claimed
By right of conquest on May 10, 1888,
As an inevitable, foreseen result, as
plain as the coming Of any fixed event.
The treaty Of peace formally oeded
the Philippines 60 as Bat this cession
was not In the nature Of an original
grant-it was confirmation Of the
ntle existing by conquest
The President did not assume to
issue these proolamations as President
Of the Uuited States-they were itsued
under his constitutional hand as Dom
mander in Chief Of the Army and
Navy Of she United States.
Ia war the power OF the President as
Commander in.Ohief Is supreme and
arbitrary In peace he acts in conJune
tion with the Senate
Between the signing Of the protocol
aud the dehuitiye ratification Of the
treaty by the Senate, the Presidents
power as Commander. Chief was In
fall vlgor and force. and coupling this
With the other facts. and with the
treaty agreed on. she President's proc
lamstion was perfectly proper and
egal lie had the undoubted right TO
prepare the minds of the Filiplnos for
the inevitable future.
L. there any doubt Of his complete
right to do this? If there Is. l refer to
the decisions Of the United States Su'
preme Court The powers Of the Pres
ldent are defined In the 2nd article Of
the Constitution It was decided By
the Supreme Court OF the United States
In reference 90 the Mexican War that In
the conquest Of a couotry the President
may establish a provisional government
wh.on may ordain laws and institute D
judicial system which will continue In
force after the war aud until modified
by the direct legislation Of Congress or
BY the territorial government establish
ed By its authority. Laurence 8
Wheaton on international Law, 2nd
Ammo. Ed p 80. note 80. citing Flem.
iDR vs P5ge, How, 65 Gross vs
Harrison. l6 How. l9O., Liebensdclfer
vs Webb 20 How, M
What law or provision Of the Oonsii.
tuition prevented Mr.. Mckinley from
making his proclamation Assumption
is neither proof nor argument. Why
should he wait7 Co' he not act in
anticipation? Gould he not assume
that the Senate would in oil honor and
deceuoy-to say nothing Of the merits
conf. q the deliberations Of on inde-
pendent commission composed Of
Americans and Spaniards! Aud when
is should be confirmed, by a sort Of jus
postilimini. IL retroacted TO the date OF
It's original adoption, and its conhrma.
tion reacted back and ratified all Of the
acts Of the President as Commander
in.Obiei The fact Of It's confirmation
by the Senate silenoes sll objections.
Il is urged that American sovereign
ty did not exist at this time. Bat 1t
did, and the proclamation Of May 10,
1898, seven months previously. had
claimed its existence by conquest
Read the comment Of she proc
lamation Of December 10th, and it is
seen that it DO not rest up0n the
treaty alone: Il asserts that; THE
dest, action Of she Spanish feet In the
hsrbor Of Manila by the United States
naval squadron, CON handed by Rear
Admiral Dewey. followed BY the reduc-
tion Of the CITY and the surrender Of
she Spanish forces, practically effected
the conquest Of the Philippine Islands
and the suspension Of spAni'1 sover-
eighty. "
Il claimed that this proclamation
was-substantially declaration Of war
against the Filipinos II this is so the
war was declared long before. by the
proclamation Of May 10. 1898 But let
us 90 deeper into this wonderful point
Of the anti.imperialists. Suppose the
treaty had not been ratified. We-
would then have existed between the
United States aud Spain. Was the
President, then, not claiming sover-
eighty over these possessions, the prop
erty Of Spain? But the treaty was
ratified, and ratified through the cen.
csded influence Of Mr.. Bryan. This
paramount anti-imperialist now Ad.
mits in his letter Of acceptance;
II was among che number Of those
who believed it better to ratify the
treaty and end the war, release the vol
unteers. remove the excuse for war
expenditures, and then give TO the
Filipiuos the independence which
might be forced from Spain by a new
treaty. In view Of the ortiz
oism which my action aronsed in
some quarters. tske this occa-
sion 30 rest the reasons given at
that time. l thought it safer to trust
the American people to giveiindepend-
ence 10 the Filiplnos than to trust the
accom- plishmeDt of that purpose to
diplomacy with an ubfriendly nation
So believe that we are now in q
better position TO wsge a successful oon-
test against imperialism than we would
have been had the treaty been rejected.
With the treaty ratified clean.cut Issue
Is presented between government by
consent aud a government by force II
the treaty had been rejected the oppo.
nents Of imperialism would have been
held responsible for any international
/ .,t.o4s.,,a r.vhfoh m, fohk hava artisan