New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-01-26
PHILIPPINE POLICY.
DR.. Scharman's Support Of the
Government Questioned.
TO the Editor OF The Tribune.

To the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir: I notice with pleasure that Prszis.-s
Schurman OF Cornell University repudiatss "A,
reported criticisms OF our governments uoiev
In Panama, and declares his hearty support %
It. II is gratifying that he does so, though uos
at all surprising. What Is surprising Is that any
intelligent and patriotic American citizen can
take any other view OF the question than TIA,
TO which DR. Schurman commits himself IN hls
letter in tO-day's Tribune.
But I must confess soma surprise a. Dr.
Schurman's comments upon your references 70
his opposition 10 our governments Phflo-
pine policy. With some detailed discussion a
the Philippine situation and outlook he tells IA
that he cordially accepts the past and present
policy OF our government Now. that policy as
1 understand II. has been and Is that the United
States has a right to hold and 70 govern TIA
Philippines as property belonging to this Union,
but not part or the Union. and as outside q
the provisions and operations Of the Consttu-
ton: and even that it has a right TO d o
without the consent OF the governed'-tust a
Jefferson automatically governed Louisiana, 10.
only without. but actually against. the consent
Of the governed" and as Jackson under Non
roe's administration. governed Florida In pur-
suing that policy. our government. as under
60 that it may make that policy perpetual. CT
may abandon II for something else at any time
according 70 the dictation of circumstances.
Finally, believe our government Is so inhsxibly
opposed 70 anything like Statehood IN this Uuica
for the Philippines that Il viii not regard such
a proposition as within the sphere OF reasonable
consideration.
Now. I may De IN error. but have an IN
preston that DR.. SchuTman has more than
one occasion expressed disapproval OF or dissent
from some essential features Of that policy. II
deed. IN his letter in to-day's Tribune he says
OF the retention Of the Philippines as an extra
constitutional dependency: 7 believe the Plan,
II adopted "a q permanent arrangement, violates
the ideals or our Republic and 7 know It IS an
outrage on the national aspirations OF the FI-
piuos: ana II IS profitable neither 70 them nor
TO US" For him thus to characterize the pres
ent policy OF our government certainly seems 10
me 20 make him seem a critic and an opponent
OF that policy. True. We must discriminate BE-
tween n temporary policy and a permanent ar
rangemsnt." Our government has not made Is
policy permanent 1t has made it simply Of n
definite duration. In the words OF the ballad.
1T may be for years. and it may be forever
Really. cannot understand how it is possois
10 accept cordially for an indefinite period q
sarded as Infamous. It seems 20 ne that 70 say
that the policy which the government has been
pursuing and which Il is now pursuing anu
which it shows no sign OF abandoning. but seems
likely to pursue indefinitely IN future-to say
that It, II adopted permanently viii violate ON
ideals. and be an outrage and Unprohtaole' >
not to give that policy a particularly eofaiai
support.
I have no exception to take to DR.. Schurnl@is
statement that the Philippine problem Is SIN
ahead OF US. to be solved in the future. I; msn'
also be said that the problem OF free self-goVe1A
ment IN these United States. upon which w
have been working for a century and a quaIt9''
is still before US to be solved in the future Ger
tainly I am inclined to think so, when see SONS
of the current complications OF the race quesuo1
and OF the questions OF labor trusts and capita
trusts. But I should like to suggest that Tue
solution OF the Philippine problem viii best %
expedited and facilitated by applying ourselves
and by getting the Fiiip,nos to apply themselves
to the task OF doing the next thing" to use
quaint but expressive phrase. rather than Os
attempting to forecast the future. or BY tyins
our hands fast to some obligation at some hSei
future date when we have no assurance that 10
fulhIment VIII then be either desirable or p0s''-
BILE I am not unwilling to cOnceGe that at SONS
future time this government may find II expsli-
ent and desirable TO establish the Philippines +"
some such status as that which Cuba now en-
joys II such time comes before my own TINS
ends. I shall regard It with profound satisla'-
ton. But do not believe Its coming VIII p
fastened single minute by specializing upon /
now. What the FilipinOs need to Go now Is n0'
to think OF what they viii do when-if ever
they become neutrality-suspicious. or wholly mus
pendent but rather OF how they can best rum
their present duties to themselves and to tneN
present government and how they can pest -
the work that lies before khem to-day. As y.
the American attitude toward the Americas
policy in the Philippines. the way to support
Is to support II. and not to stand aside and -,
that II IL is not abandoned or radically alterea
pretty soon IL viii become vicious. Very truD
yours. sPEcTA1ON
Brooklyn. Jan. q. 1904