The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1900-04-21
Senator Hoar and the Philippines


From Philadelphia Ledger, Republican.
Senator Hoar's speech on the joint resolu-
ton declaring that the Philippine Islands are
territory belonging to the United States, and
that it is the intention of the latter to estab-
lish and maintain governmental control OF the
group, presents in great detail and in its COM
pleteness from every point of view the ground
of American opposition to the permanent re-
tention of the islands as dependencies Of the
United States. Senator Hoar appeals from
what he terms the present delirium of En-
pre- to the calmer future, but he, neyerthe-
less, argues his momentouS cause with all the
care a conscientious statesman would display
we're the question addressed to tribunal
whose mind can be swayed by argument and
has not vet decided. Senator Hoar is not
mere iconoclast, with no plan of his own for
the disposition of the country and peoples
which the fortunes of war have thrust into our
guardianship. His proposition is to reject
cession of allegiance, which to HIM implies
that sovereignty is salable and purchasable
commodity. He would guarantee to the is
lands immunity from the interference of for
eign governments; prefer the assistance OF
the United States in preserving order until the
people of the Philippines have reasonable
opportunity to set up an independent gov
eminent; aid them IN lnauguratlng such gov
eminent; invite European PowerSto agree
that such independence shall not be disturbed,
and declare that the United States will apply
to the Philippines the doctrine declared as to
Mexico, Hayti and the South American Re
publics.
This sufficiently defines Senator Hoar 5 own
position as TO the future of the group, and his
speech is designed to demonstrate that forcI-
bic suhjugation or any domination imposed
upon the Philippines, without the consent OF
their inhabitants, is contrary to American
fundamental law, to American precedents and
to the sound construction ofinternational law.
The speech is much too lengthy for fall pre-
sentation, but glance at some of the salient
points, particularly those portions which deal
with the question of the consent OF the gov
erned, = with the general Interpretation OF the
Declaration and the Constitution and those
which cite the deliverances of the most emf
nent statesmen of the past upon these great
themes, will indicate the thoroughness ol
Senator Hoar's research and the earuestness
of his desire to reach firm ground tor his opln
ions.
AT the start Senator Hoar declares that
nothing can be won for liberty IN the Philip
pines save through the Republican party, aud
that iii that party cannot be persuaded, his
case is ''for the present hopeless He then
confronts the crucial question, Can Congress
constitutionally hold in subsection unwilling
vassal States p He admits that the United
States can acquire and hold property, and
ordain rules and regulations for its DISPOSE
ton; but he propounds the searching inquiry
whether we can acquire and govern property
by conquest, or treaty, or sale, tor the sole
purpose of so holding aud governing 1t with
out reference TO any further constitutional
purpose such AS the making OF new States.
the national defence, the construction OF forts.
etc He maintains that territory can no more
be held BY the United States for other than
constitutional ends than wafships can be held
for such ends But the Philippine question Is
not territorial alone What are our conSitu-
tioual relations 10 their inhabitants? The Sen.
ator answers that they cannot be governed
against their will: that tins Is an end which
tar from being sanctioned by the Constitution
is prohibited therein;
Governing subject peoples and holding them Tor
that purpose l. not a constitutional end ON the
contrary. IL is end which the generation which
framed the Constitution and the Declaration decfar
ed was unriEh and ahhorrcnL ~. m my
opinion We have no constitutional power tuacQuiTe
territory for the purpose Of holding 10 IN vssaA
against the Will Of IT. people
Senator Hoar says that our purchase Of the
Philippines was IN fact, not a purchase ct
even its territory, save some public bindings.
The people own the farms and town dwellings;
the religious orders the rest. In every pre-.
vions acquisition the United States became
the land owner. The Philippine cession, The
Senator insists. was the attempted purchase or
eession ''of nothing but sovereignty over the
people, who, under the present proposition,
are not 10 share in such sovereignty. The
purchase Of allegiance pure and simple, Sema-
tor Hoar holds. Is something that International
laws says cannot be bought.
You have no right aecorIinE 70 the las u
tons. 10 obtain BY purchase OF acquisition soFeT-
eighty over people which Is not actually exc
cfsasi by the country which undertakes - convey
OF Weld H. IL Is familiar principle % she coin
mon law that you cannot make 3 lawful purchase
OF land OF % chaitc OF which the seller Is dtsTs
sessed This rule applies with tenfoid force % uu
dertaGing to purchase human beings when their
country and The selling power sdsFoSssss-i a. the
time Of the ale. and where the utle can ouiy D.
enforced by war
The Senator AYERS thai in every acquisition
heretofore made by this coantry full recogui-
ton Of the doctrine OF consent OF The gov
erned'' WAS gwen. Coming 10 the Declara-
ton. he comments that the immortal lusgru-
ment refers only to political rights, relations
and duties; that Il speaks not OF the rights ot
individuals. but Of the rights OF peoples and
nations IN their relations witk one another
'.Our fathers were not dealing In this feanssnp
clause with the doctrine % the social com pact. they
were not considering the rights Of ninoniiess they
used the word people equivalent % nation 81
state. organized political being aud Dot asa
mere aggregate Of persons not collected or ass1cl
ated They were not thinking Of Robinson CTusoe
in his desolAta island. They were Affirming llls
right Of each Of the thirteen colonies ftr&teiy %
Of ai together 10 throw 90 the yoke u George III
and to separate itself OF themselves from Great
Britain
The question l. pat. with air % triumph
II il were somehow hari 20 ansHer Al = hsi point
in tn do men get these God given rights u
yGurSf Well. the answer > easy cuOuEh oar
tAtherS 10 the A ton o. the Declaration 81 In
dependence were speaking Of The equal rights 81
nations, Of the duties 10 each other The exact
point " here few scattered settlements become a
people or few nomaiic tribes nation may not
admit Of precise mathematical definition. AZ what
point does brook become rivegT When does =
pond become lake. or a lake seAf Bug surely
there are nations and peoples, there y Organized
nafioilSl life and there are scattered hkbilARtons
and wandering tribes 70 whom these ttles never
applied. Louisiana Florida. Alaska, New Mexico.
Californla-Beither had. nor dad their inhabitants
claim 10 have, such national vitality when We &C
quiresf them. And II there gerc anything OF that
sort when we annexed them, it desired to eame 20
as. And Il came to US 70 become part Of us-bone
Of bone aesh Of our flesh. life Of our life, soul
Of our soul"