Arizona daily citizen., 1901-06-13
THE STATUS OF THE PHILIPPINES.

The Washington correspondent of the
Chicago Record Herald has made a ''dis-
covery" which, in his opinion, has a
most important bearing upon the rela.
tions of the United States and the Phil
ippines. In the first place, he states
without reservation that the Supreme
Court had actually reached decision in
respect to the status OF the Philippines
before it adiourned-a decision. it may be
added, which was in favor of the Gov
ernment. The Court, he asserts, con-
cluded that the status OF the Philippines
is not analogous to that of Porto Rico
before legislation by Congress, because
the United States "had never declared
its intention to retain the Philippines
archipelago indefinitely" Furthermore,
the United States was mot in actual
possession, but was wagng war for such
possession" The last point was raised
by Solicitor General Richards on the
day after the Supreme Court adjourned.
The first point is based upon the CORES
pondent's conclusions as to the effect
and significance OF a resolution passed
by the Senate early in 1899.
1t will be remembered that during the
debate on the peace treaty several
amendments were offered by Senators
with the purpose of setting forth spe-
officially the policy of the United States
in acquiring the Philippines. One OF
the strongest objections presented by
those who opposed the ratification OF
the treaty was that the Filipinos were
not qualified for American citizen ship
and that the annexation of the archi-
pelago would result ultimately in giving
citizenship to 10000, 900 Asiatics, who
would be most undesirable addition to
the population of the United States.
On February IA, 1899. the Senate, after
long debate, adopted a resolution
introduced by Senator McEnery, OF
Louisiana, one of the Democrats who
voted for the ratification Of the treaty.
The McEnery resolution declared in
substance that "by ratification OF the
treaty OF peace with Spain it is not in
tended to incorporate the inhabitants of
the Philippines into citizenship OF the
United States, nor is it permanently in.
tended to annex said islands as an in.
tegral part of the territory of the United
States" On the contrary, the resolu-
ton declared it to be the purpose of the
United States "to establish on said
islands government suitable to the
wants and conditions OF the inhabitants,
toprepare them for local self-government,
and in due time to make such DISPOSE
tion Of said islands as will best promote
the interests Of the citizens OF the United
States and the inhabitants OF the
islands"
The correspondent of the Record Her.
aid asserts that "the passing of this res
olution by the very body which had rat
fed the treaty of peace only week be-
fore substantially differentiates the Phil.
ippines from Porto Rico" There is good
ground for the belief that he attaches
too much weight to the McEnery resolu-
tion. although he maintains that the
Supreme Court regarded it as OF the
highest importance-in fact, as "dis-
> tinct declaration of the treaty-making
branch Of Congress that it is not intend
ed to annex the Philippines permanent
ly" to the United States. 1t should be
borne in mind, however, that the Nc
Emery resolution was joint resolution
requiring the concurrence Of both houses
OF Congress. The House of Representa-.
tives never adopted it. nor, after its adj
option by the Senate, was 1t signed by
the President. The Senate ratified the
treaty by the Constitutional two-thirds
majority. 1t passed the McEnery reso-
luton by vote of 26 to %. The fact
that 1t was adopted by only one branch
OF Congress and was not signed by the
President seems to deprive it OF any
force it might have as formal declara-
tion of Congress. The resolution ap-
parentiy has no more weight than a
mere expression OF opinion by less than
one-third OF the membership OF the Sem
ate.