The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-08-16
He Shows TINT the Charge that In
dependence Was Promised Fill
ipinos Is False.
FROM PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
HE QUOTES To SHOW Til POSITION
OF THE GOVERNMENT.
An Statement That Puts to
ROut the Imaginary Griev-
ances of the Aunties.

mond, Is stopping AT the DeHisoh- MT.
Foulke attended the meetings OF the Anti
imperialists yesterday and last night and
later at his hotel In a statement made to a
Journal reporter he said:
The charge was made In Mr.. Ehrich's
speech yesterday that we had made prom
Uses of independence to the F~ilipinos and
had betrayed them, and in the speeches to-
night at Tomlinson Hall 1t was said that
we had been faithless to our allies-had
been guilty of treachery. Is that true?
Were the Filipinos our allies at all?
Now If by the word allies the Anti
imperialists mean that the Filipino insur-
gents and ourselves were before the taking
OF Manila both seeking a common object,
TO wit: the destruction of the power of
Spain, in that sense we might call them
allies.
There were certain things. mot many
that were done together. Admiral Dewey
let the Filiponis nave arms which he did
not need. he had certain prisoners turned
over to them, whom we could not keep-he
sent two war vessels TO Subic bay 90 pre-
vent a German cruiser from interfering
with them-and there were a few other acts
of a similar character.
ALLIANCE NEVER EXISTED
But an alliance In the original and roper
sense of the word never existed for a mo-
ment. There was neither treaty, league
nor confederacy. Now If two enemies upon
a battlefield cease firing and go out rogetn-
er under a flag of truce to bury the dead.
are they therefore allies? After the work
Is done are they then under the duty of fire
M ,oarao Is a;tbar - &bop, oAI;oad 70 n
knowledge the independence of the other.
even though it was known while they were
burying the dead that independence was
the thing claimed? Or if they had come
together not as enemies. but as strangers
or as friends would the mere fact that they
had both worked for a single object deter
mine what their relations were to be in ref
erence to each other, after this object was
accomplished? Yet this is the sort of logic
which seeks TO draw a recognition of Phil
ippine independence from the mere fact
that the Fflipinos and We were both fight
ing at the same time against Spain
The Cherokees aided the forces of the
Union in the late civil war. Did we there
fore agree 10 liberate the Cherokee nation
from al! control of Congress?
Even if the Filipinos had been our allies
In overthrowing the power OF Spain that
fact alone would not have determined the
subsequent relaClOnS between them ana
us-nor would IL of itself impose upon us
any obligation as TO their future status,
except as to one thing, to wit: That since
We were both fighting Spain, we should not
afterward put them in the power of Spain.
Therefore, when the question was asked of
kear Admiral Bradford, who testified be-
fore the peace commissioners at Paris,
whether we could honorably turn Aguin-
aldo and his followers over to Spain. the
answer was that we were bound to protect
him. That WAS the only DUTY which arose
from Aguinaldo's so-called cooperation in
the war. But it was not even cooperation
in any strict or proper sense of the word.
INDEPENDENT ACTION.
Our action was for the most part en-
tirely independent. The Filipino soldiers and
our own were always sharply separated.
We assumed no power over them, never
commanded them, nor did Aguinaldo ever
any part of our troops. Both par
ties desired TO break down the power of
Spain and each, acting for itself, did all 1t
could TO accomplish that single purpose.
Indeed. in some ways they opposed us and
thwarted our efforts. General Anderson
wrote to Aguinaldo July %, 1898. that if he
did not aid him in securing horses and sup
Ilies he would have to pass him and make
requisition directly on the people (See Sen.
Doc. 81, Z. 394.) General Greene (see Sen.
Doc. 81. II. 43) says that Aguinaldo did
L1uch to thwart General Anderson, going so
far in a letter of July %, 1898, as to warn
General Anderson not to land troops on
Philippine soil without his consent.
AguinaldO says in his letter to Consul
Williams. Aug 1: why do not the Ameri-
can generals operate in conjunction with
the Filipino generals and uniting the
forces render the end. more decisive"
= $ . And again: at is useless for me to
represent to my compatriots the favors
received through Admiral Dewey. for they
assert that up TO the present the Ameri
tan forces have shown not an active, only
a passive cooperation from which they
suppose that the intention of these forces
as not for the best" (Sen. Doc. 62. p. 1881
Thus we see that Anti-imperiallsts COM
plain because we co-operated with Aguin-
aldo and now refuse TO recognize his gov
eminent, while Aguinaldo himself COM
planned as early as Aug. i, 1875, that we
What does Aguinaldo mean by the words
passive co-operation?" Simply that we
were going ahead in our own way to de-
stroy the Spanish power, leaving Aguinal-
dos men to do what they liked, TO the
same end. That was precisely the fact.
IT is evident, then, that whatever passive
cooperation Ito use Aguinaldo's words) ex-
listed in overthrowing the power of Spain
implied no decision as to what was to be
lone with the islands after the power ot
Spain was overthrow. That the future dis
position of the islands was a matter in
which all parties were at liberty TO act &C.
Ctidiite ~ IL aAtIdt6S VI ~ W JubS
ment. This appears from many acts and
circumstance lasting from the very be-
ginning of the war down to the time when
the negotiations for peace began.
CONSUL WILLIAMS'S REPORT.
Mr.. Williams was our consul at Manila,
and when the war broke out he went to
Hong-Kong and returned to the Philippines
with Dewey. On May II, before Aguinaldo
had arrived at Manila, he reports: 1.-The
insurgent leader, Major Gonzales, reported
10 me last week on the Olympia that they
had $1,000 troops under arms. good and
bad, surrounding Manila, endeavoring 20
cooperate with US. = . These natives
are eager TO be organized and led by United
States officers. and the member of their
Cabinet visited me and gave assurances
that all would swear allegiance TO and
c~heerfully follow our flag" (Sen. Doc. 81,
T. 327.)
Mr.. Wildman was our consul at Hong
Kong On May 8 he reported, announcing
the statements of Cortes, Rosario and Con-
saga and others. wealthy landholders,
bankers and advocates OF Manila, tender
ing their allegiance to the United States.
(Sen. Doc. 62. =. 334)
On May IA he inclosed the statements
OF Rotea. Lopez and others also rendering
allegiance. These statements say that the
parties making them adhere 10 the United
States government in annexing the Philip
pines. (Sen. Doc. GO. PIP. 338. 1851
These important Filipinos at Manila
knew. therefore. that annexation was one
of the possibilities which would be con-
sidered by the United States, even at this
] early time. aud they concurred In it.
In June. 1893. the great fear OF Asuin-
aldo and the insurgents was that America
xrntald rfsfurn the claude N Gnafr ~ ole