The Greenville times. [volume] (Greenville, Miss.) 1868-1917, 1900-08-18

subject? Are we to bring into the body
, polite 100000 or 100000 Asiatica, 81
different from us In race and history tha
amalgamaton is impossible? Are they
to share with us in making the laws anc
shaping the destiny OF this nationY Nc
republican of prominence has been bolc
| enough to advocate such a proposition
The McEnery resolution. adopted by the
senate Immediately after the ratihcatior
OF the treaty, expressly negatives thlt
idea. The democratic platform describes
the situation when 1t says that the Fill.
pinos cannot be citizens without endan-
gering our civilization. Who Will dispute
It? And what Is the alternative? II the
Filipino Is not to be citizen. shall We
make him a subject? On that question
the democratic platform speaks with en-
not be a subject without endangering ouI
form of government. A. republic can
have no subjects. A subject Is possible
only In a government resting upon force
its Just powers from the consent OF the
governed. The republican platform says
that the largest measure OF selitt-gover m :
our duties shall be secured to them lthe
Filipinos) by law" This is a strange doc
trine for government which owes It's
very existence to the men who offered
their lives as protest against govern
ment without consent and taxation with
out representation. In what respect does
from the position taken by the English
government in 1776? Did not the English
government promise a good government 1
Used a bad government to his peo-
Pile? Did not the English govern
ment promise that the colonists should
ment consistent with their welfare and
| English duties? Did not the Spanish gov
eminent promise to give to. the Cubanss
the largest measure of self-goyernment
| consistent with their welfare and Spanish
duties? The whole difference between a
monarchy and republic may be summed
| up in one sentence. In monarchy the
king gives to the people what he believes
| to be a good government: in republic
| the people secure for themselves what
The republican party has accepted the Eu-
| ropean idea and planted itself upon the
| ground taken by George III. and by every
| ruler who distrusts the capacity of the
people for self-government or denies them
a voice in their own affairs.
The Presidents Will the Only Law.
The republican platform promises that
some measure OF self-government is to be
this pledge is not fulfilled. Nearly 16
months elapsed after the ratification of the
treaty before the adjournment of congress
last June, and yet no law was passed deal
ing with the Philippine situation. The will
of the president has been the only law
in the Philippine. islands wherever the
American authority extends. Why does
the republican party hesitate to legislate
upon the Philippine question? Because a
law would disclose the radical departure
from history and precedent contemplated
by those who control the republican party.
The storm of protest which greeted the
Porto Rican bill was an indication of what
may be expected when the American peo-
pie are brought face to face with legisla-
ton upon this subject. If the Porto Ricans,
who welcome annexation, are to be de-
MED the guarantees of our constitution,
what is to be the lot of the Filipinos, who
resisted our authority? If secret infu-
ences could compel disregard of our plain
duty toward friendly people, living near
our shores, what treatment will those same
influences provide for unfriendly people
1000 miles away? II, IN this country where
the people have the right to vote, repub-
lican leaders dare not take the side OF the
people against the great monopolies which
have grown up within lI1s the last few years.
Filipinos from the corporations which are
waiting to exploit the islands?
enjoyed by the people of the United States,
and the twilight OF semi-citizenship en-
dured by the. people of Porto Rico, while
fae the Poro Ree
tariff law asserts the doctrine that the
operation of the constitution is confined
to the As states. The democratic party dis
putes this doctrine and denounces 1t as
repugnant to both the letter and spirit of
our organic law. There is no place in our
arbitrary and irresponsible power. That
the leaders of a great party should claim
for any president or congress the right to
treat millions of people as mere posses
sions" and deal with them unrestrained
by the constitution or the bill of rights
shows how far we have already departed
from the ancient landmarks, and indicates
what may be expected If this nation de-
liberately enters upon a career OF empire.
The territorial form of government is tenn.
security citizen of a territory has is found
in the fact that he enjoys the same con-
stitutional guarantees and is subject to
fI1 rO1 1Or n nj n a
state. Take away this security and his
rights will be violated and his interest
sacrificed at the demand of those whohave
political influence. This is the evil of the
colonial system, no matter by what nation
1t is applied.
Title to the Philippines.
What is our title to the Philippine is
lands? Do we hold them by treaty, or by
take them? Did we purchase the peo-
pie? If not, how did we secure
title to them? We're they thrown brown
licans say that inanimate earth has value.
and when that earth is nodded by, the
Divine hand and stamped with the like
and passes. with the soil? If governments
derive their just powers from the con-
sent of the governed, it is impossible to
by purchase % we pee Gould extngush SPANS
title by treaty, but If we hold title we
must hold it by some method consistent
made allies Of q the Tipinos and armed
them to fight against Spain, we disputed
Spain's title. If we buy SPANS title we
z; are not innocent B 5fe even ven
could transfer no greater title than she
had, and her title was based on force
alone. We cannot defend such title, but,
as Spain gave us quit claim deed, we
can honorably turn the property over to
the. party in possession. Whether any
American official gave the Fflipinos ior.
NAL assurance of Independence Is not
material. There can be no doubt that we
accepted and utilized the services of the
Filipinos and that when we did SO we mad
full knowledge that they were fighting
for their own independence, and submit
that history furnishes no example OF
turpitude baser than ours If we now SUD-
Let us consider briefly the reasons
which have been given in support OF an
imperialistic policy: Some say that 1t Is
our duty to hold the Philippine islands.
But duty is not an argument; it is a con-
clusion. To ascertain what our duty IS,
in any emergency, we must apply we'll
It is our duty to avoid stealing, no matter
whether the thing to be stolen is OF great
or little value 1t is our duty to avoid
XII nam BENG ne no nc n What race
or class he belongs. Everyone recognizes
the obligation imposed upon individuals to
observe both the human ana inc moral az t thWs
laws to nations, 1t may not pc out OF
place to quote the opinion of others. JEFF
ferson, than whom there Is no higher po-
litical authority, said:
1T know of but one code of morality for
men, whether acting singly or collec-
lively"
Franklin, whose learning. wisdom and
virtue are a part of the priceless legacy
bequeathed to us from the revolutionary
days, expressed the same idea in even
stronger language when he said:
Justice is as strictly due between
neighbor nations as between neighbor
citizens. A highwayman is as much a
robber when he plumbers in gang as
when singly; and the nation that makes
an unjust war is only great gang"
Force Creates No Right.
Men may dare to do in crowds what they