The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-10-18
Depew on imperialism.

4
| AS trust magnate and lawyer, Ssna-
| tor Depew doubtless considers it his plain
| duty to his employers and to the Hay
Pauncefote Treaty. to get up on the
stump and laud the achievements of the
Hanna Mckinley Administration. From
| this point OF view we can readily under
stand how easy it would be for him TO
stifie any qualms of conscience ne may
feel in stultifying his past public record
| and little things OF that sort, in order to
| promote the objects OF the trusts gener-
ally, and the particular transportation
| family of which he has been long the
| trusted elderly butler.
But, time was when Chauncey NJ. De-
I pew was not so ready to swallow every
| glutinous thing confected by his friend
| Smiling William. He was net always an
imperialist-in speech at least. In Msy.
| 1895. for instance. shortly after Admiral
Dewey's capture of Manila. he said, to an
interviewer in Chicago: "If We should
| keep the Philippine Islands, we would
reverse the traditions of the Governm. Mt
from its foundation He continued:
Let us see what that would mean. In the
first place, it would mean the establishment OF
4 military government over possibly ten mill
lions Of people. six thousand miles away from
us: and it would mean the increase of our
navy to the proportion of the navies OF Eu-
rope. 1t would mean the increase of our
army to one hundred and fifty thoussnd-more
likely TO two hundred thousand men. II would
mean the increase Of our annual expenditures to
Double what they are now.
Senator Depew's words of two years ago
seem to have been prophetic to an extent.
We have not yet increased our army TO
two hundred thousand men, but. should
Mr.. Mckinley and Republican Congress
be elected that would follow as a matter
of course. So far have only realized
one half CT the Depew prediction in that
regard. But he seems to have been within
the truth in saying that a carpetbag CO.
lonial policy would double our expenses.
We have bought the Philippines for twen-
ty Clillion dollars, and, including that sum,
they will have cos: us two hundred and
eighty-seven million dollars by March l.
1901, not to make mention of the Ameri-
can lives that have been lost in the war of
conquest; because Republicans never count
lives. Money is the only thing they know
or care about. In the interview to which
We have alluded above, Mr.. Depew said
some other pointed and pertinent things.
One remark of his, upon the tendencies
Of new national departure in the direc.
tion of imperialism, is well worth repro
duction. It was this:
"What also does worldwide policy mean
10 ns? 1t. means Capitalization which would
change materially the relations of the United
States 20 the Federal Government The control
Of these populous colonies would he centred at
Washington and should have ccntraliza-
ton Of power far beyond what the old FEEDER.
alists ever dreamed Of. You cannot have empire
without all its attributes. and that means
practical revolution of form of government
and an abandonment Of the beliefs which the
fathers held when they established this Govern
ment in l776'
Again the Senator was prophetic. In
the short time which has elapsed since he
held this language We have seen cen
traiization of power at Washington in the
hands of the Executive. not only in way
that the "old Federalists" never dreamed
of, but in open and impudent violation
of the Constitution of the United States.
We have seen the party in control, and
its Administration. advance and main
of component States of the Union. the
President and not the Constitution is
supreme. And under this new interpre-
tation we have witnessed the establish
ment and growth of an exploiting loot
ing, and theving carpetbag colonial sys-
TEN that no sane citizen would have be-
lieved possible oven n decade ago. The
not be possible to squeeze revenue out of
the Philippines. in excess of their cost
and maintenance. and Mr.. Depcw an
swered:
Every time you attempted TO collect tax
from these people they would rise and you would
have TO call on yorr military force TO suppress
them And suppress them for what? For doing |
what John Hancock did? They might quote |
against us our immortal declaration that taxa |
ton without representation is tyranny.'''
Judging from his expressed convictions. |
which We have in part quoted, it would |
seem to have been incumbent upon Sena-
tor Depew to oppose Imperialism, course |
which he has been far from pursuing since |
he donned the toga. But perhaps he feels |
like his brother Sena: or, Hoar, who con- |
siders 1t expedient to bury his faith and !
principles since their exposition might be |
harmful to the interests of the robber |
trusts whose humble servants both he |
and the New York Central man assuredly |
are. Nevertheless, Mr.. Depew would do
well to keep his mouth as with a bride
when he is tempted to defend Hanna-Mc-
Kinley Imperialism during the remainder |
OF the campaign. He is too thoroughly
nm record