The age-herald., 1900-08-09

at war with the United States in any part. of the world. If such army IS demands ed when an imperial policy is contemplateds but not openly avowed, what may be ex4 pected if the people encourage the Re- publican party by endorsing It's policy at the polls? large standing army Is not only peculiarly burden to the people, and, if accompanied by compulsory service, constant source of irritation, but it Is ever a menace to a republican form of soverns ment. The army is the personification of force, and militarism will inevitably change the ideals of the people and turn the thoughts of our young men from the arts of peace to the science of war. The govern- ment which relies for it's defence upon it's citizens, is more likely to be just than one which has at call large body of pro- fessional soldiers. A small standing army and well-equipped and well-disciplned State militia are sufficient in ordinary times, and in an emergency the nation should In the future as in the past place its dependence upon the volunteers who come from all occupations at their coun- try's call, and return to productive labor when their services are no longer required men who fight when the country needs fighters and work when the country needs workers.
 Ills Future Status
 The Republican platform assumes that the Philippine islands will be retained un- der American sovereignty, and we have a right to demand of the Republican lead- CTS a discussion of the future status or the Filipino. Is he to be citizen or sub- ject? Are to bring into the body ponuc eight or ten million Asiatics, so different from us in race and history that amalga- nation is impossible? Are they to share with us in making the laws and shaping the destiny of this nation? No Republican Of prominence has been bold enough to adVo- cate such a proposition. The McEnery res- olution, adopted by the Senate immediately after the ratification of the treaty, ex- pressly negatives this idea. The Democrat- ic platform described the situation when it says that the Filipinos cannot be citi- zens without endangering our civilization. Who will dispute it? And what is the al. ternative? If the Filipino is not to be clt- izen, shall we make him subject? on that question the Democratic platform speaks with emphasis. It declares that the Filipino cannot be subject without en- dangering our form of government
 A republic can have no subjects A sub- feet is possible only In a government rests ing upon force, he Is unknown in goVerns ment deriving it's just powers from the cong sent of the governed. The republican plat. form says that "the largest measure or self government consistent with their welfare and our duties shall be secured to them (the Filpinos) by law" This Is strange doctrine for a government which owes its very existence to the men who of1ered thelr lives as a protest against government Wltns out consent and taxation without represens tation In what respect does the position of the Republican party differ from the position taken by the English government in 1776? Did not the English governmens promise a good government to the colon- ists? What King ever promised pad government to his people? Did not the
 ---~-~--------~--~------~-