The Washington times., 1902-02-22

seemed nothing left in legislation but the
will Of the President. His frequent in
terruptions finally met with refusal
from Mr.. Spooner to recognize him fur
Their.
Il demand my right TO vindicatiou." he
shouted. Il viii take up the matter lat
err | can't be shut off in that way
Mr. Patterson obtained the consent of
Mir. SpOoner to read some extracts from
n speech o, the latter on the question of
the peace treaty.
M ChnnSc of Views.
The Senator from Colorado" Mr..
Spooner commented has not been long
here; but he has been here long enough
10 acquire the very worst habit we have
meaning interruptionl.
Il have never changed my attitude on
that subject I stated in that speech that
| was reluctant to vote for the raiifica-
ton of the treaty; and that. if the rati-
fcation of the treaty involved permanent
dominion over the Philippine Islands by
the United States, / should vote against
it. But ?: the same time | undertook to
show, and | am of the same opinion now,
looking to the various alternatives which
presented themselves to the President
that in honor and humanity there was
none Olttf course IMAM 10 take possession
of the Philippine archipelago"
Mr.. SpOoner went on to charge with in
consistency those Senators who voted for
an increase of the army, and who now OBJ
ject TO the use of that army.
The Duty of the Army.
Every Senator" he said, who voted
for an increase OF the army knew that
they were to be sent to the Philippines to
fight. and they were employed for that
purpose. Can any Senator who voted to
give the President troops to be used in
the Philippine campaign complain of
their use in a legitimate way?
Nobody has a right to impeach the Re-
publicans or to launch Trades against the
President for using troops in the Philip
pines and carrying on that war there to
the bitter end-not to subjugate an in
dependent people, but to enforce the soy
ereignty and authority of the United
States in territory acquired by the United
States"
MIR. Teller admitted that he had voted
Tor an increase of the army, and would
do so again if necessary.
Then, Mr.. Spooner again declared.
vigorously, no Senator who voted to send
troops there can, with any consistency,
denounce the Government for using
them"
Mr.. Hoar (Rep,, Mass) interpoIated
some remarks about the use of the army
in connection with the elections in the
Southern States in 1865.
Mr.. spooner Proceeds
Mr.. Spooner. resuming the floor said
that he had been diverted from his line
of argument. and that now he was anx-
lous to proceed with his speech. One
thing was certain, he said. and that was
that the United States had perfect right
to the Philippine archipelago.
Spain had coded it. and, rightly or
wrongly. the United States had taken
possession of it. There was no doubt the
United States had the sovereignty and
the title. There was no faint or inval-
idity in the title.
Mr. Spo0ner went on to discuss the his
tory OF affairs in the Philippines imrae-
dlately preceding the outbreak of hostili-
ties. charging Aguinaldo with deception
and bad faith. and, asserting backed with
letters and documents. that hostilities
were not brought on By the American
troops. but were predetermined by Agui-
naldo.
Among the captured documents Mr..
Spooner quoted & letter from AguinaIdo
to ole OF his officers. saying that Ave GER
tain towns had to be reconQuered and
that, to reconquer them, five lives had
TO be taken in each town. which meant,
SAID Mr.. Spooner. the assassination of
five prominent men in each town.
lie asserted that Aguinaldo did not at
any time have government that could
preserve law and order. or ever did His
government during the few months in
tervening between the capture of Manila
ana the ratification of the treaty WIS an
olSarcny and brutal desDotism.
Declaration Not Violated.
lie denied that the Government, in TAX
ing possession of the Philippine Islands,
had violated the Declaration of Indepen-
dence.
TO say" he continued, that we could
not take as indemnity at the end of a
war. inhabited territory. is to impeach
the action of the Government hitherto
when the Democratic PARTY had control
of it.
We took California. We did not con-
suit the inhabitants. BY purchase we
took Louisiana. We did not consult the
inhabitants. We took Hawaii and we
took Porto Rico, and we did not consult
Inc inhabitants. 1t is no answer to say
that in these cases the population was
small. flfty thousand people are as much
entitled TO their rights as five million peo-
pie are
He thought that war with Great Brit
ain would be an improbable calamity. but |
said.
DO you suppose that the people of the |
United States would be willing to enter
into an agreement that if by any unhappy !
chance there should some time in the |
distant future come war between Great |
Britain and the United States we would |
at the end of the war leave the British |
Of Canada Sill the property |
OF Great Britain Is il to be supposed |
that the people OF the United States would |
be willing in such an untcward event to |
hold their Government unable on account !
OF the Declaration of independence. to |
occupy. and to keep. the territory to the |
northward of us, from ocean to ocean,
without the plebiscite of its people? I |
think not
A Parallel.
Mr.. Spooner drew a parallel between |
the opposition made to Mr. Lincoln Suring |
the civil war. which he said helped to |
prolong that war. and the position taken
by the Democratic party against war in
the Philippines. The effect he said, was
the same in both eases. The Filipinos had
believed that the election of Mr.. Bryan to
the Presidency meant their independence.
NO one can tell" he exclaimed how