The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-02-18
THE CONTROL OF THE FITTEsT.

The statement of DR.. Lyman Abbott,
in lecture in Boston the past week, that
1.-The barbaric dog has no right to the man
ger when the Anglo-Saxon OK desires TO
feed is likely to call forth indignant pro-
test from those persons who sustain the
theory that to hold and use a territory
is the inherent right of those who find
themselves in possession of it regardless of
their misuse of it or unftness to MAIN
tain civilized government. Nevertheless.
whatever may be our sentiments as the
oretical quality, the practice of the Ameri-
can people from the earliest settlement
until the present time has been to drive
the barbaric dog from the manger that the
civilized OK may feed. Our policy in this
continent towards the Indians, the more
IL is considered in regard to the we'll
being of the race, has less ground for crit
icism. 1t is absurd to say that a few
hundred thousand aborigines had the right
to North America when the millions of
civilized peoples needed 1t as an arena for
the development of the highest civiliza-
ton.
said of the sacredness of the sovereignty
OF the people of Cuba and the Philip
pines over the territory they occupy. There
are those who boldly declare that we
must recognize and respect the sovereignty
of the people of Cuba to establish indie
pendent government, no matter If instead
of stable government revolutions should
tol~- he Mo Of
! less the exercise of it by the ruling power
insures the liberty and security Of the
| individual, is an evil rather than q good.
| Spain exercised the right OF sovereignty
| over Cuba, but its exercise was so unjust
tc the Cubans and so troublesome to the
| United States that Congress destroyed 1t
| by making war upon Spain. Suppose. as
seems probable, that the Cubans are IN
capable of maintaining a stable govern
rent that viii give the people security
and protect the material interests in the
island, is the United States to permit
Cuba to become another Santo Domingo
or Colombia simply because of sentimental
scruples about the sacredness of sovereign
ty as applied to that people?
| 1t is said that the peace of Europe Is
| the law of Europe. Certainly. sovereignty
! does not hinder the combined powers OF
Europe from checking sovereign govern
ments or nations in their designs. Victor
ious Russia was compelled by the powers
TO stop at the doors of Constantinople
| and agree TO a treaty not to make a sep
arate treaty with Turkey. The Crimean
| war was fought and the treaty of Paris
made to deny Russia the right to make
| separate arrangements with Turkey and
the Balkan states. Sovereign Turkey only
a few years ago. was compelled by the
| decree of the powers to desist In the pur-
pose TO conquer Greece and place hard
conditions upon that government. To-day
by an avowal of the Monroe doctrine, tn.
| United States has practically made itsel:
the protector of the sovereignty OF ths
/ nations in this hemisphere By warning
Europe that IL cannot take the territory OF
| any of them. Thus we rave assumed and
| Europe has admitted. the primacy OF the
| United States In the new world The
same conditions should obtain here as II
| Europe peace should be the law of the
rev world For that reason, Cuba, e
which the United States has given SOW.
ereignty. can have no right to assume ar
independence which will involve tn,
Europe. Under The name Of sovereignty
we cannot permit Cuba to assume the pow.
cru which belong 70 q great nation thu