Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-10-22

While sentiment Is divided as to the
wisdom Of now giving independence to
the Philippine Islands, there is general
disapproval Of the attempt to deal with
Such q question in the pending tariff
legislation.
For the sake of beet sugar and beans
and peanuts cast the Philippines outside
our tariff wallS!" exclaims the Detroit
News. That As Senators voted against
the proposal should not have the en-
phaSis. The monstrouS fact is that So
Senators voted for It," The Hartford
Courant calls the bringing of the mat
ter into the tariff debate "a shabby per-
torrance" and charges: 1.-THE greed in
spring the movement Is manifest, but it
is equally deplorable on other grounds.
IL reflects a cyniciSm in our dealings
with our dependencies which must in
evltably be preiudicial to our prestige
abroad. The Filipinos can scarcely be
planned II they fail to be impressed by
professions OF altruism on the part of
the United States hereafter"
The move for Philippine independ-
ence in this instance" declares the St.
Louis Globe-Democrat, was not based
upon sympathy for the. Filipinos, but
was an effort to force a tariff upon
Philippine sugar. The hvpocrisv
OF all this will be made apparent in the
exposition of the fact that independence
would mean economic ruin for the
Philippines" The Muskegon Chronicle
argues: II We are to retain the islands
despite their clamor to be permitted to
go on their own, to treat them as part
OF the United States in government, but
as aliens IN commerce, would be to give
them a Wide-open opportunity to draw
deadly parallel with the mother coun-
try,S imposition Of the tea tax that pre-
HlnifQtpd
TOO bad" thinks the Houston Chron-
1cle, that some sections of our country
had to feel the Philippines as an eco
nomlc menace before We could give
proper consideration to the principles
involved in our control of them, but we
should welcome study of the problem
OF freeing them and action upon it. no
matter how brought about. We are I'M
Ger solemn pledge, of course, to give the
Islands independence. That becomes not
so easy now. unless We are to do them
a grave economic injustice. Industry
there has been built up inside our tariff
walls. Trade with the United States has
been created and Is maintained under
free-trade conditions, while trade with
other countries has been barred or re-
Stricted by the tariff schedules. =
1t appears that the economic life of the
Islands would be entirely Frustrated If
run independence were suddenly grant
ed them"
A legal question is raised by the
wheeling Intelligencer, with the state
ment: Congress is without the con-
stltutlonal right of surrendering SOW
erelgnty over the territory of the United
| States. The Supreme Court Of the
united States has decided that the
| Philippine Islands are territory of the
united States. Congress has no mole
| right to cede American territory to an
| uniformed foreign nation to which it is
| proposed to yield sovereignty over the
Philippine Islands than il has to sell
| or give up Alaska or the District OF CO.
| lumbia to Great Britain or France"
The Rock Island Argus, however,
differs strongly with this position, say
ing: 1T may be that some Filipinos do
not want independence. Nevertheless,
| the Philippines should be granted eco
ncmlc independence, political independ-
! ence to follow at a date to be fixed by
| Congress-say five or six years hence.
Some think that our relationship to the
Philippines should be the same as that
between Great Britain and Canada. The
islands could thus enjoy practical SOW
ereignty. At a stipulated time we would
withdraw from the islands altogether
In the meantime the people could pre-
pare for their future political independ-
| ence."
THE whole question should be con-
sidered from every standpoint and 1t
should not be made the tail of any
other legislation" contends the Albany
Evening News, while the Savannah
Press comments: Americans In Ma
Mia, we are advised. regard the pro-