Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1901-03-05
THE REPUTATION ACCOMPLISHED.

icdSt NhtitiOu W NOuhli
tion for their parliamentary flnessc.
The usual course for the House would
have been to pass vote. OF non
concurrence in the Senate amendments
and to send the bill to a conference
committee. But conference COM
mittee would have been dangerous
since the bill would then have been
required to pass once more the scru-
tiny of the Senate A group of demo-
cratic Senator's spurred by criticism
from the country, might have begun
filibuster and thus the elaborate ad-
ministration program would have been
ruined. The House leaders, therefore,
adopted another course. They allowed
two hours of debate and then Jammed
the Senate amendments through with
out the change of a word.
1t was rare and most generous
concession, it seems, for the leaders
to permit any debate at all. Here was
proposed radical change in the ma
ton's policy toward Cuba-no small
matter-and, besides it would not DO
to have demagogs like Sulzer and
Lentz bowling around that they had
been gagged. SO the Republicans de-
cided to allow the House to talk for
100 minutes on one of the most I'm
portant issues of the time. 1t was an
inspiring spectacle, which will move
future historians of this period to
eloquent passages concerning Con
gress as a delibcrative body. There is
nothing like deliberation and full and
fair discussion of great themes, espc-
cially when they concern a nations
honor.
The queer humor of the situation is
now enhanced by some OF the ques-
tionings that are breaking out con-
cernlng the real purport and effect of
thing of furry among the formec
shouters for Cuba libre" lest the
terms of the Platt amendment pre-
clude the formal and downright an
nexation of Cuba to the United States.
The New York Sun hastens to demon,
strate that nothing need be feared
on that score. A correspondent had
drawn its attention to the point, say
ing:
The proposed amendment. to the
army bill, imposing limitations upon
the power of the future independent
Cuban government, provides as fol-
lows: "The government of Cuba shall
never enter into any treaty or other
compact with any foreign power or
powers which will impair or tend
to impair the independence of Cuba"
If the United States, as to Cuba, are Il
foreign power" why are they not
interdcted by this provision from ever
anneXing Cuba, equally with Spain,
England, Germany, France, or any
other foreign powerT" Or Is it under
stood, in nm aside, that when we come
to talk annexation the provision quoted
doesn't apply to us?
The answer is prompt and reassur.
ing, says the Sun with great astute-
ness:
1t Is n mere verbal qubble as to
what Is meant by the term foreign
power or powers" Whether or not tine
choice of words Is fortunate and pre-
else, the intention of the trainers of
the amendment is perfectly clear.
They did not mean TO include the
United States in the phrase foreign
power or powers" as here employed.
But If we are not foreign power,
what becomes of the United States
supreme courts recent declarations:
The facts above detailed make It
clear that Cuba is foreign territory.
1t cannot be regarded in any
constitutional, legal or International
sense as n part of the territory of the
United States.
1t seems then, that we are Il foreign
power and that we are not II foreign
power-a fact that might embarrass
some people, but which will cause no
trouble to the annexatonsts.
Can there be any doubt that the
new declaration is a Reputation of the
nations pledge to Cuba and the world
when the promoters and indorsers of
the scheme fall into such discussions
among themselves? Can there he the
slightest obscurlty as to their object?