The Bolivar bulletin. (Bolivar, Tenn.) 1888-1946, 1900-08-17


| with an unfriendly nation. Lincoln EN-
| bodied an argument In the question, when
| he asked: Can aliens make treaties
easier than friends can make 1aws7" I
| believe that we are now In better posi-
ton to wage a successful contest against
| Imperialism than we would have been
had the treaty been rejected. With the
| treaty ratified, a clean cut issue is pre-
| sented between a government by consent
| and a government by force, and imperial
lists must bear the responsibility for all
/ that happens until the question Is settled.
/ II the treaty had been rejected, the op-
/ ponents of imperialism would have been
held responsible for any international
/ complications which might have arisen
| before the ratification of another treaty.
| But whatever differences Of opinion may
| have existed as to the best method OF op-
| posing the colonial policy, there never was
| any difference as to the great Importance
| Of the question and there Is no difference
now as to the course to be pursued.
Promises to the FilIpinOs.
The title of Spain being extinguished
we were at liberty to deal with the Fill
| pinos according to American principles.
The Bacon resolution, introduced a month
| before hostilities broke out at Manila,
| promised independence to the Filipinos on
the same terms that IL was promised to
the Cubans. I supported this resolution
and believe that its adoption prior to the
/
prevented bloodshed, and that its adop-
ton at any subsequent time would have
ended hoStilities.
If the treaty had been rejected. consid-
erable time would have necessarily
elapsed before a new treaty could have
been agreed upon and ratified, and during
that time the question would have been
agitating the public mind. If the Bacon
resolution had been adopted by the senate
and carried out by the president, either
at the time of the ratification of the
treaty or at any time afterwards, 1T would
have taken the question of Imperialism
out of politics and left the American peo-
pie free to deal with their domestic prob
lens. But the resolution was defeated by
the vote of the republican vice president,
and from that time to this a republican
congress has refused to take any action
whatever in the matter.
COwardIy Accusations.
When hostilities broke out at Manila,
republican speakers and republican edit
ors at once sought to lay the blame upon
those who had delayed the ratification of
the treaty, and, during the progress of
the war, the same republicans have ac-
cused the opponents of imperialism of Civ
ing encouragement to the Filipinos. This
is a cowardly evasion of responsibility.
If ii is right for the United States to
hold the Philippine islands permanently
and initiate European empires in the gov
eminent of colonies, the republican party
ought to state its position and defend it,
but it must expect the subject races to
protest against such policy and to resist
to the extent OF their ability. The tlnpinos
do not need any encoura cement from Amer
leans now living. Our whole history has
been an encouragement, not only to the
Filipinos but to all who are denied voice
in their own government. II the republic
ans are prepared to censure all who have
used language. calculated to make the
Filipinos hate foreign domination, let them
condemn the speech of Patrick Henry.
When he uttered that passionate appeal
Give me liberty or give me DEATH" he
expressed a sentiment which still echoes
in the hearts of men. Let them censure
Jefferson; of all the statesmen of history,
none have used words so offensive to those
who would hold their fellows in political
bondage Let them censure Washington,
who declared that the colonists must
choose between liberty and slavery. Or,
If the statute of limitations has run against
the sins of Henry and Jefferson and Wash
ington, let them censure Lincoln, whose
Gettysburg speech will be quoted in de-
Tense of popular government when the
present advocates of force and conquest
are forgotten.
Some one has said that a truth once
spoken can never be recalled. 1t is true.
1t goes on and on, and no one can set a
limit to its ever widening influence. But
IL it were possible to obliterate every word
written or spoken in defense of the prin-
ciples set forth in the declaration of in
dependence, a war of conquest would still
leave its legacy of perpetual hatred, for
IT was God Himself who placed in every
human heart the love of liberty. He never
made race of people so low in the scale
Of civilization or intelligence that it would
welcome foreign master.
Lincoln said that the safety of this nation
was not in its fleets, its armies or It's forts,
but in the spirit which prizes liberty and
the heritage of all men, in all lands, every
where; and he warned his countrymen that |
they could not destroy this spirit without |
planting the seeds of despotism at their |
own doors.
Those who would have this nation en-
ter upon career of empire must consider |
not only the effect of imperialism the |
but they must also calculate its |
effect upon our own nation. We cannot |
repudiate the principle of self-gOvern- |
ment in the Philippines without weaken
ing that principle here.
ParnIyzinE imperialism.
Even now we are beginning to see the
paralyzing influence of imperialism. Here !
tofore, this nation has been prompt to ex-
press its sympathy with those who were
nghting for civil liberty. While our sphere |
Of activity has been limited to the west
ern hemisphere, our sympathies have not
been bounded by the seas. We have felt
1t due to ourselves and to the world, as
well to those who were struggling for
claim the interest which our people have,
from the date of their own independence,
felt in every contest between human
rights and arbitrary power. Three-quar-
ters of century ago, when our nation
was small, the struggles of Greece |
aroused our people, and Webster and Clay
gave eloquent expression to the universal
desire for Grecian independence. In 1896,
AL parties manifested a lively interest |
N the success of the Cubans, but now
rf,ay, F- IL D., Nrg
"a, which must result in the extension Of
the monarchial idea or in the triumph of
4 republic, the advocates of Imperialism
n this country dare not say a word in
behalf of the Beers. Sympathy for the
Beers does not arise from any unfriend-
iness toward England; the American peo-
pie are not unfriendly toward the people
IF any nation. This sympathy is due to
he fact that, as stated in our platform,
We believe in the principle of self-govern-
nent and reject, as did our forefathers,
he claims Of monarchy. II this nation
iurrenders its belief in the universal ap-
,lication of the principles set forth in
he declaration of independence, 1t will
ose the prestige and influence which it
las enjoyed among the nations as an ex-
,onent of popular government.
Our opponents, conscious of the weak
less of their cause, seek to confuse i'm
,erialism with expansion, and have even
Jared to claim Jefferson as a supporter
# their policy. Jefferson spoke so freely
md used language with such precision
hat no one can be ignorant of his views. |
On one occasion he declared: IF there |
,e one principle more deeply rooted than
my other in the mind of every American,
{ is that we should have nothing to do |
With conquest" And again he said: Con ;
luest IS not in our principles; it is in
consistent with our government"
Right Kind of Expansion.
1-ba forc{hfa annexation oP tarrf%or,, e. |
e governed by arbitrary power differs as |
much from the acquisition OF territory to | !