The daily morning journal and courier., 1901-02-27
The Cuban Problem |.

Cuba independent. We solemnly anC
 publicly promised that we would in nc
 way seek to annex the island to tht
 United States. We have pluned our.
 selves on our dlsinterestedness in ren.
 derinS Cuba this service. We have
 proudly contrasted ourselves with other nations, which are charged with never
 waging war except for a selfish pur-
 pose. To be sure, this profession o1
 highly Christian conduct, in thus free
 ly sacrificing life and treasure for the
 benefit of our neighbor had its bright
 ness somewhat dimmed when, as the
 enemy sued for peace, it was found that we were going to adopt the decid-
 among other nations, of making the de-
 feated party pay us for having got the
 victory over them. We took Guam, Por- i to Rico and the Philippine Islands as indemnity,' but in the articles of
 peace we still stuck to our agreement
 respecting Cuba, and stipulated that
 she should be independent. We re-
 tained troops in the island and under took to maintain order until the Cu-
 bans could establish a government of
 their own. But whenever this should be done we were under the most solemn obligation to evacuate the island, and
 leave the people to their promised inde-
 pendence.
 But what do we now hear? It is inti- be submitted to our congress for its
 approval; that Cuba's foreign relations
 must be under the control of the United
 States; that her finances also must be
 supervised by us, to say nothing of
 other less radical demands. In short, 1t
 is intlmated that we must break our
 word This is the problem shall we keep our promise, or not? Surely, it ought to be a very simple problem The wonder is that any one ever had the te merity to raise such a question.
 In l777, when the American colonies were fighting for their independence, France took up arms in their behalf, and helped them to gain their object. What would our forefathers have thought if after that war was over and the colonies adopted new constitution the French government had insisted that it must receive it's approval be- fore going into effect? if 1t had inti- mated that we were to have no power to make treaties or to declare war except as France should approve? It never occurred to France to make such de- mands, although she never had pronnis- ed not to make tEem. How does our relation to Cuba differ from that of France to us, except in that we. made a formal promise to guarantee to Cuba | her independence, while France made | none such to us? Her representative, who was sent to us after our govern | ment was established, did indeed pre- sume so much on the obligation of the | United States to France that he under took to dictate our foreign policy. But | he was speedily dismissed and France | was made to understand that we were an independent people in fact as well | as in name.
 It is simply amazing, not only that the proposal to break our word should be made, but still more that the propo- sal should meet so little indignant de- Have we as a nation lost all sense of honor? Can we condone, and even defend an act which violates l fundamental principle of morals? It s almost nauseating to hear or read the oitiable apology sometimes made for he proposed policy. "A bad promise s better broken than kept we are old. Bad" in what sense? Why. be- 'ause 1t is imagined that our political interests may be better subserved by Cuba than by leaving her in- lependent. In other words the promise vas made in the spirit of the com nand that we should love our neighbor s ourselves: but inasmuch as it has 'een found out that we ought to act elfishly and love ourselves better than UT neighbor, therefore our promise vas "bad!" Are we really going to VOW pure Machiavelianism as our E ighest political morality? "A bad promise better broken than ept?" What Is meant by such a prop sition, when made by any reputable Nothing more than this: That
 promise which commits one directly 0 immoral conduct, or promise made nder a radical misconception of facts. r a promise extorted by physical or 1oral compulsion, need not be regard d as necessarily binding. No one can , retend that we have any such excuse or going back on our word to the Gu ) ans The promise was good one; we I ave been lauding it as magnanimous. < wen r It was less noble than it has cen called, or even if it is conceivable nat 1t may cost us something to keep { , the obligation remains as binding as . ny promise ever made by man to man | all the more binding, if possible, be- ause made to weak people by a rong one and made in the face of the hole world.
 The Cubans have fulfilled the condi- ons on which we are pledged to leave lem to themselves. Shall we fulfil the edge? The proposal recently made
 the United States senate to withdraw / om Cuba whenever a government d. 'all have been established which guar 4 ltees to us the right to protect" the P dependence of the Cubans, gives us rtain other special privileges and inn \ 'ses on them certain new obligations