The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-12-14
BILL FOR PHILIPPINES
Continued from Page one.)

This in the method of an empire in- stead of that of a republic. We oppose the whole policy of the majority in deal ing with the Philippine archipelago. We believe. that instead of tho effort they are making to set up and hold permanent colonies there we should long since have inaugurated a policy assuring to the peo- pie of those islands stable government and their ultimate independence.
 But even if there is to be an admitted change in our institution and our form of government and a wide departure from the old landmark of political truth, that all governments instituted among men derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and if it be admitted that we are to embark upon the danger ous and desperate policy of colony hold ing and subiect-governing, to none of which do we agree. even then we could not give our assent to the passage of the present measure. The colonial plan set up by this bill is unjust and illiberal in the extreme"
 The report further says that the Sec retary of War in effect made the tax law for the Philippines and thus exercised greater power than most Kings. Contin- uing, it says: The second section in eff feet declares that the Philippine Islands are foreign territory to the extent that
 
 United State shall pay the same rates of duty as are provided in the existing tariff laws of the United States, known as the Dingley tariff act. The Dingley act has proven itself to be the trust-breeding measure. We witness daily the great trusts, born of the Dingley tariff law, so manipulating the manufactures and the prices of goods that our people are forced by them to pay at our own homes and in iarI,A iCnc For hAI manufactured goods and commodities than the same goods and commodities are manufactured by them and shipped abroad and sold for in the foreign mar kets of the world
 We do not believe the trade we are now obtaining or that we are likely to obtain under our operations in the Philippines is worth what we are paying for it."
 The report says foreign nations got S4SOO0,OOO of Philippine trade while the United States shared in the Philippines trade last year to the extent of &, 427, ,506, representing profits to our government or people of about q, ,0S5,54.
 This paltry sum-" it says, "is insig- nficant when we consider it has cost us more than $S5, 900. GOO to maintain our army in the Philippines for the past year.
 The report says we will have expended when the next year closes for the main tenance or our army Tn the PnllpplneS and our operations in the Orient $450- 600, 0OO not including the increase in naval expenditures and the S20000,00O paid to Spain under the treaty4of 1899.
 It adds: The casualties which have oc- cured in the effort to enforce the poli- cies of the majority in the islands are of such appalling magnitude that it should shock the public mind. We are squarely in opposition to the methods and poli- cies of the majorities of the committee in their efforts to deal with the Philip pine Islands. We do not believe that the people of those islands can be made citizens of our republic without gross in- justice to our people and without doing violence and perhaps irreparable injuries to our institutions; nor can We hold them as subjects without the most radical changes in our form and theory of gov ernment which we are unwilling to see inaugurated.