The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-08-18
The False Charge of Suppression.
(From the New York SUM

~ TATEMENTS are appearing in
- various Democratic news
papers accusing the Republic
can members Of the senate
committee on the Philippines of sup
pressing evidence in the interest of the
Republican party. That the charge is
false is we'll known to those who had
the time and inclination to follow the
voluminous proceedings closely. But
others may be led astray by the reit-
Grafton of the charge, unless they are
made acquainted with the facts.
The Committee on the Philippines
began the investigation on Jan. rs.
With the exception of a week when,
owing to absences, it was impossible to
get a quorum Of the committee, wit
nesses We're heard steadily from Jan.
2S until June 6. The hearings were
held as a rule every day in the week.
and always three or four times week.
During the same period the commit
tee prepared and reported the Philip
pine Tariff bill and the Philippine Gov
ernment bill, the latter being an ex-
tremely long and elaborate act. This
work was all done by the committee
while the hearings were in progress
and thus constantly were Its members
engaged in addition to their duties in
the senate chamber. During the same
period, also, the Philippine Tariff bill
was passed after five weeks continu-
Gus discussion in the senate, and the
than seven weeks of continuous debate.
On June 6, after the government bill
had passed the senate, Senator Lodge
left Washington for ten days, and the
hearings We're interrupted, although
during his absence the committee heard
two witnesses. After the return of the
chairman there was further Interrupt
tion owing to the fact that the close of
the session was approaching and the
members of the committee We're so oc-
cupied in conference that 1t was almost
impossible to get them together. New
ertheless, the chairman called Admiral
Dewey before the committee at that
time and he was heard at length in the
closing days of the session.
The Philippines committee took dur
ing its hearings about three thousand
printed pages of testimony. So much
for the work of the committee, 1t is
doubtful II any committee of congress
ever worked harder or more steadily
than the Philippines committee during
the same period of time.
The committee refused to hear the
following persons:
Mr.. Edward Atkinson, because he had
never been in the Philippines and had
no testimony, but merely opinions to
offer.
Sxto Lopez, who had not been in the
islands for twelve years.
Aguinaldo.
Mabini.
Rio Del Pillar.
The committee refused to call these
men because it did not consider II
proper to summon as witnesses as to
the army of the United States persons
who had been actively in arms against
us and We're then either held as pris-
| oners or in exile.
These We're the only witnesses re-
| fused. The refusal was public and the
reasons for the refusal were given.
| None of these witnesses could have
thrown the slightest light on the con-
| duct of our army because they were
either in the field against us, or in
| prison, or in the United States. Every
other witness asked for was called by
the committee and heard at length.
Every witness suggested by the minor
ity with the exception OF those just
mentioned was ordered by the commit
| tee to be summoned. The list Of wit