The silver blade. (Rathdrum, Idaho) 1895-1903, 1900-05-05

yer republican had been applied TO
him 10 the past, but II the term re-
publican was to be applied To him IN
the future, he wished II applied Us
antI-republican, or not at all.a
He divided the Philippine question
into three questions, which he de-
sired every republican to answer To
his own conscience for himself.
First--"Is it.llegalP'' Second --.'ts 1t
justp" -Third-"Will It payf''
In answer to the question, lis It
Legally" he said he had had the honor
OF representing the state of Washing
ton before the supreme court Of the
United States, our highest tribunal,
In case which involved the title to
tide lands, which case involved the
question as to when the constitution
took force and effect over any terri
tory acquired by the United States.
The supreme court had decided In
this case, aud In hundreds Of others,
that the constitution extended over
all territory Immediately upon its
acquisition. He quoted the follow
ing decisions:
| 'FOr this is one of the underlying
and fundamental principles of our
form Of government that a territory
of3the United States, upon attaining
sufficient population and wealth,
shall be erected into separate states
and admitted into the Unto b on an
equal footing with all other states Of
the Union"
1.-THE territories acquired by con-
gress, whether by session from the
original states, or by treaty with a
foreign country, are held with the
object, as soon as their population
and condition justify, Of being ad-
United into the union as states upon
equal footing with the original states,
in all respects, and the title and do
mini0n of the tide waters and the
land under them are held by the
United States for the benefit of the
whole people, and, as this court has
often said in cases above cited, Sin
trust for the future states.' y
In the case Of Cross vs.. Harrison,
decided by the supreme court OF the
United States, 1t was disti nctly held
that California became part of the
United States the instant that the
treaty was signed with Mexico, and
that the federal laws, including the
tariff laws, became operative there.
The same principle has been held by
that court in nearly hundred Other
cases. Under this decision, the Puerto
Rico tariff bill-is absolutely and I'm.
questionably unconstitutional.
1t is useless for the imperialsts t.
prevaricate about the intentions Of
the present administration with refer.
ence to the Philippines. You ali
know that they do not mean to hold
thsm as we now hold New Mexico
Arizona and Alaska, with the inten.
tiOn of erecting them into states iL
the future and admit them into The
Union. Under these decisions they
cannot be held for any other purpose
than to be erected into tates and
admitted into che Union. Does any
citizen desire this? Is IL legal tt
hold them for any other purpose? ]
think not. He then severely scored
the administration for the passage Of
tie Puerto Rico tariff bill, declaring
this act to be the stepping-stone tt
the holding of these islands as In.
perial colonies.
In answer to the question, ''Is II
just" he quoted from official docu
ments published Ia the Congressional
Record, showing that the Filippinol
had been accepted as allies; had beer
provided with five thousand stands O.
arms by the United States; had beer
led to believe by officers of the arm!
and navy that they should gain thei
long-sought independence in retur,
, for their aid. Was it just to nov
hold these islands as American colo
MES? Every statement be made II
answer to this question was backe'
, up by official letters and document
+ published in the Congressional Rec
ord. They were the public document
of the United States in this matter
+ he said. In discussing the question
. "Will it pay?" he said:
: II confess to some humiliation a
an American citizen at being com
PEELED to discuss the question whethe
2 Dolicy which is both illegal and IN