Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1904-09-12

they intend to cut down the navy OF, the
Alaskan telegraph system? Do they In
tend to dismantte our coast Qualifications
II there Is to be real and substantial
cutting down In national expenditures It
must be in such matters as these. The
department OF agriculture has done serv-
Ice Of incalculable value to the farmers Of
this country In many different lines. Do
our opponents wish to cut down the mon
ey for this service They can do 1t only
by destroying the usefulness Of the serv-
ice itself. -,,'. $50 - r
! The public work of the United States
has never been conducted with higher
degree of honesty and efficiency than at
s., the present time, and a special need Of
praise belongs to those officials RESPONSE
BILE for the Philippines and Porto Rico,
where the administrations have been
models of their kind. OF course wrong
has occasionally occurred, but it has been
relentlessly stamped out We have
known no party in dealing with offenders
and have hunted down without mercy ev-
cry wrongdoer in the service Of the ma
ton whom 1t was possible by the utmost
vigilance to detect, for the public servant
who betrays his trust and the private in
dtvidual who debauches him stand as the
worst of criminals, because their crimes
are crimes against the entire community
and not only against this generation, but
against generations that are yet to be.
Our opponents promise independence to
the Philippine Islands Here again we are
confronted by the fact that their irrecon-
cilable differences Of opinion among them
selves, their proved inability to create
a constructive policy when in power and
their readiness, for the sake of momen-
tary political expediency, to abandon the
principles upon which they have insisted
q al
whether they do or do not intend in good
faith to carry out this promise if they are
given control of the government. In
their platform they declare for indepen-
dence, approximation their language is
a little ohscure-without qualification as
to time-and indeed a qualification as to
time is an -absurdity, for we have neither
right nor power to bind our successors
when 1t Is impossible to foretell the con-
ditions which may confront them-while
If there Is any principle involved in the
matter 1t is just as wrong to deny inde-
pendence for a few years as to deny 1t
for an indefinite period. But in later and
equally official utterances by our oppo-
nents the term self government was SUBJ
stituted for independence. the words used
being so chosen that in their natural con-
struction they described precisely the
policy now being carried on. The Ian
guage of the platform indicated a radical
change of policy; the later utterances in
dicated continuance Of the present poll
icy. But this caused trouble in their
own ranks, and in a still later, although
less formal, utterance the self govern
ment promise, was recanted and indie
pendenoe at some future time was prom
ised in its place. They have occupied
three entirely different positions within
fifty days. Which Is the promise they
really intend to keep ?-~They do not know
their own minds, and no one can tell
how long they would keep of the same
q working agreement among themselves
If such ambiguity affected only the
American people it would not SO greatly
matter, for the American people can take
care Of themselves. But the Filipinos are
In no such condition. Confidence Is with
them plant Of slow growth They have
been taught to trust the word of this
promised nothing which it did not per-
form. II promised Independence they will
expect Independence not In the remote
future for their descendants, but immedi-
ately for themselves. If the promise thus
made Is not Immediately fulfilled they
will regard 1t as broken and will not again
trust to American faith. and 1t would be
indeed wicked thing to deceive them in
such fashion. Moreover, even If the
promise were made to take effect only
In the distant future the Fuipinos would
be thrown into confusion thereby. In
stead of continuing to endeavor to fit
themselves for moral and material ad-
yapcsment iA tho present they would
abandon all EFFORT at progress and begin
fractional intrigues for future power, y
ia To promise to give them independence !
when it Is prudent to do so or when
they are eft" for 1t Of course implies that !
they are not fit, for 1t now and that it
would be imprudent to give 1t to them
now. But as we must ourselves be the
Judges as to when they become "fit' and
when it would be prudent" to keep such
follows that to make such promise now
would amount to deception upon the
Filipinos
1t may well be that our opponents have
no real intention Of putting their promise
into effect. II this Is the case, If. in other
words they are insincere in the promise
they make. it Is only necessary to say
again that it Is unwise to trust men who
are false in one thing to deal with any
thing The mere consciousness of broken
faith would hamper them In continuing
our policy in the islands, and only by
continuing unchanged this policy can
the honor Of the country be maintained
or the interests Of the islands subserved.
If, on the other hand. our opponents came
into power and attempted to carry out
their promises to the Filipinos by giving
them independence and withdrawing
American control from the islands, the
result would be a frightful calamity to
the Filtpinos themselves and in it's larger
aspect would amount to an international
crime Anarchy would follow. and the
most violent anarchic forces would be di-
rected partly against the civil govern
ment partly against all forms of religious
and educati onal civilization. Bloody con-
ftcts would inevitably .ensue in the archi-
pelago, and just as inevitably the islands
would become the prey Of the first power
which in its own selfish interest took I'D
the task we had cravenly abandoned OF
course the practical difficulty in adopting
any such course Of action-such policy
Of scuttle," as President Mckinley called
it-would be found well nigh insuperable
II it is morally indefensibIe to hold the
archipelago as whole under our tutelage
In the interest OF its own people, then it is
morally indefensible to hold any part of
It. In such case what right have we to
keep q coaling station :? 6 What right to
keep control over the Moro peoples?
What right to protect the Igorrotes from
their oppressors? What right to protect
the law abiding friends OF America in the
islands from treachery, robbery and MUIR
der?y Yet to abandon the islands COM
p1etely without even retaining Ecoaling
station, would mean to abandon the posi-
L. LIZ xt- =