Nebraska Newspapers

    HYADS SPEECH
OF ACCEPTANCE.
tJ'T- Chairmn a Members of the
juunriiuon uommmfe: I shall at an
nearly day. and in a more formal man
raw, accept the nomination whirh von
Header, and I shall at that time discuss
i-he various questions covered by the
tiemocratlc platform. It may not be
uui or pmee, nowever, to submit a few
observations at this time upon the
general character of the contest before
aia. and upon the question which is de-s-lared
to be of paramount Importance
An this campaign.
When 1 say that the contest of 1900
3a a contest between democracy on the
-one hand and plutocracy on the other,
1 do not mean to say that all our op
ponents have deliberately chosen to
salve to organized wealth a predominat
ing influence in the affairs of the gov
ernment, but I do assert that on the
important issues of the day the repub
lican party is dominated by those influ
emoea which constantly tend to elevate
jpecunlary considerations and ignore hu
snaa rights.
In 18o Lincoln said that the repub
lican party believed in the man and
Che dollar, but that In case of conflict
it believed in the man before the dol
lar. This is the proper relation which
.should exist between the two. Man,
he handiwork of God, comes first;
money, the handiwork of man, is of In
ferior importance. Man is the master;
money the servant, but upon all Im
gjort&nt questions today, republican leg
islation tends to make money the mas
ter and man the servant.
The maxim of Jefferson,"Equal rights
to all and special privileges to none,"
;and the doctrine of Llnebln that this
.-should be a government "of the people,
ifoy the people, and for the people," are
eing disregarded and the instrumental
ities of government are being used to
advance the interests of those who are
in a position to secure favors from
the government.
DEMOCRACY AND INDUSTRY.
The democratic party is not making
-war upon the honest acquisition of
wealth; it has no desire to discourage
Industry, economy and thrift. On the
ontrary, It gives to every citizen the
.greatest possible stimulus to henest
toil, when it promises him protection
in the enjoyment of the proceeds of his
tabor. Property righta are most secure
-when human rights are respected. De
mocracy strives for a civilization in
which every member of society will
jshaxe according to his merits.
So one has a right to expect from
oclety more than a fair compensation
t Xor the service which he renders to so
ciety. If he secures ore, it is at the
expense of someone else. It is no in
justice to him to prevent his doing In
justice to another. To him who would,
!ther through class legislation or in
the absence of necessary legislation,
trespass upon the rights of another,
the democratic party says, "Thou shall
SK."
REPUBLICAN SHIFTING.
Against us are arrayed a compara
tively small, but politically and finan
cially powerful, number who really
Xroflt by republican policies; but with
Xhera are associated a large number
-who, because of their attachment to
stheir party name, are giving their sup
,gort to doctrines antagonistic to the
jfSonner teachings of their own party,
JBt-publicans who used to advocate bi-
cnetalll&m, now try to convince them-
- jsefv e that the gold standard is good
irppubllcans who were formerly attach
d to the greenback are now seeking an
excuse for giving national banks con
crol of the nation's paper money; re
jublicans who Used to boast that the
. republican party was paying off the
national debt are now looking for rea
sons to support a perpetual and in
creasing debt; republicans who for
merly abnorred a trust, now beguile
themselves with the delusion that there
.tare good trusts and bad trusts, while,
In their minds, the line between the
two is becoming more and more ob--aacure;
republicans who, in times past,
congratulated the country upon the
.-mall expense of our standing army,
jau-e now making light of the objections
-which are urged against a large in
crease in the permanent military estab
lishment; republicans who gloried in
our Independence when the nation was
leas powerful, now look with favor
upon a foreign alliance; republicans
who three years ago condemned "for
cible annexation" as Immoral and even
criminal, are now sure that It is both
.immoral and criminal to oppose for
do! annexation. That partisanship
' lias already blinded many'to present
danger la certain; bow large a portion
mt the republican party can be drawn
over to the new policies remains to be
For a time republican leaders were
'inclined to deny opponents lh right
sto criticise the Philippine policy of the
.administration, but upon investigation
they found that both Lincoln and Clay
asserted and exercised the right to
criticise a president during the pro
jrresa of the Mexican war.
Instead of meeting the Issue boldly
.-and submitting a clear and positive
plan for dealing with the Philippine
question, the republican convention
. adopted a platform, the larger part of
which was devoted to boasting and to
. atlf-congratnlatlon.
In attempting to press economic
.'questions upon the country to the ex
clusion of those which involve the very
- structure of our government, the re--xmblican
leaders give new evidence of
:-lhelr abandonment of the earlier Ideals
of the party and of their complete sub-
- aervlency to pecuniary considerations.
MUST FACTS ISSUE.
But they shall not be permitted to
:vade the stupendous and far-reaching
..tana which they have deliberately
' .tysoqgbt Into the arena of politics.
wansn the president, supported by
- practically unanimous rote of the house
a nod senate, entered upon a war with
: pain for the purpose of aiding the
straggling patriots of Cuba, the coun-
rr, without regard to party, applaud-
sjd. Although the democrats recog
: nlasd that the administration would
: sucisssrtty gain a political advantage
Crass tbs conduct of a war which. In
- tfcs rsry aatnrt of Um ease, must soon
was! la a complete victory, they vied
-wta to re pool loans ta the support
. rwAca they gam to tat president. When
t sOst-war was over and the republican
ttOsn fespaa to suggs the propriety
mi w.oofcmttl poHcy, opposition at one
tr1sw4 Rattt Warn tat president
in - t MM fcefort Um senate a- troatr
- a issntnlsif tat todepsndeac of
4 r-t atotalsg fsr tat osstsoa of
1 V ft. "rM Wad to Um United
fi Vt- ff lrwJslsa bt--
irl tans saw csfer red to
tf mmet as rts Um Um that
rVw fa taka Um
,.. . m f Lismntfw
- 1 1 4 i. . ti. sat swUm of
rr at rum was I
f t t My,
-X f"
''.
, ratified, a clean cut Issue Is presented
I between a government by consent and
a government by force, and imperial
ists must bear the responsibility for
all that happens until the question is
settled. If the treaty had been rejected
the opponents of Imperialism would
have been held responsible for any in
ternational complications which might
have arisen before the ratification of
another treaty. But whatever differ
ences of opinion may have existed as
to the best method cf opposing the colo
nial policy, there never was any differ
ence as to the great importance of the
question, and there is no difference
now as to the course to be pursued.
The title of Spain being extinguished,
we were at liberty to deal with the
Filipinos according to American prin
ciples. The Bacon resolution. Introduc
ed a month before hostilities broke out
at Manila, promised Independence to
the Filipinos on the same terms that
It was promised to the Cubans. I sup
and then give to the Filipinos the In
dependence which might be forced
from Spain by a new treaty.
In view of the criticism which my
action aroused in some quarters, I take
this occasion to restate the reasons
given at that time. I thought It safer
to trust the American people to give
independence to the Filipinos than to
trust the accomplishment of that pur
pose to diplomacy with an unfriendly
nation. Lincoln embodied an argument
In the question when he asked, "Can
aliens make treaties easier than friends
can make laws?" I believe that we are
now in a better position to wage a
successful contest against Imperialism
than we would have been had the
treaty been rejected. With the treaty
WILLIAM
ported this resolution and believe that
Its adoption prior to the breaking cut
of hostilities would have prevented
bloodshed, and that its adoption at an;
subsequent time would have ended hos
tilities. If the treaty had been rejected, con
siderable time would have necessarily
elapsed before a new treaty could have
been agreed upon and ratified, and dur
ing that time the question would have
been agitating the public mind. If the
Bacon resolution had been adopted by
the senate and carried out by the presi
dent, either at the time of the ratifica
tion of the treaty or at any time after
wards. It would have taken the ques
tion of imperialism out of politics and
left the American people free to deal
with their domestic problems. But the
resolution was defeated by the vote of
the republican vice president, and from
that time to this a republican congress
has refused to take any action what
ever In the matter.
A COWARDLY KVASION.
When hostilities broke out at Manila,
republican speakers and republican ed
itors at once sought to lay the blame
upon those who had delayed the ratifi
cation of the treaty, and, during the
progress of the war, the same repub
licans have accused the opponents of
imperialism of giving encouragement
to the Filipinos. This Is a cowardly
evasion of responsibility.
If It Is right for the United States to
hold the Philippine islands permanent
ly and Imitate European empires In
the government of colonies, the repub
lican party ought to stute its position
and defend It, but it must expect th
subject races to protest against such
a policy and to resist to the extent of
their ability. The Filipinos do not need
any encouragement from Americans
now living. Our whole nlstory- nas
been an encouragement, not only to the
Filipinos, but to all who are denied a
voice In their own government. If the
republicans are prepared to cens'ire all
who have used language calculated to
make the Filipinos hate foreign domi
nation, let them condemn the speech of
Patrick Henry. When he uttered that
passionate appeal, "Give me liberty or
give me death," he expressed a senti
ment which still echoes In the hearts
of men. Let them censure Jefferson:
of all the statesman of history, none
have used words so offensive to tnose
who would hold their fellows In polit
ical bondage. Let hem censure Wash
ington, who declared that the colonists
must choose between liberty and slsv
ery. Or, If the statute of limitations
has run against the sins of Henry and
Jefferson aad Washington, let them
cmsure Lincoln, whose - Gettysburg
speech will be quoted In defense of
popular government when the present
advocates of fore and conquest art
forgottsa.
LIBERTY TUB LAW OF OOD.
tsomsowa baa said that a truth once
spokoa can never be recalled. It Is
traa. It mom on and on, and no one
eaa set a limit ta Its rrsr-wloenlng !n
Pmmu. Pat If H war poastM to ob
Ntarat ptmt word writtoa or spoken
la d'w of Um artsuwnlss sot forth
la tat Uarlarattoa of IWaadsa, a
war ti mmmmmt wovtl MLJ tears fa
i7 tt rrrtsi turn.
God himself who placed In every hu
man heart the love of liberty. He
never made a race of people so low in
the scale of civilization or Intelligence
that It would welcome a foreign mas
ter. Lincoln said that the safety of this
nation was not In Its fleets. Its armies
or its forts, but In the spirit which
prizes liberty and the heritage of all
men. In all lands, everywhere: and he
warned his countrymen that they could
not destroy this spirit without planting
th'i seeds of despotism at their own
d-.ors.
Those who would have this nation
nter uiwin a career of empire must
consider n t only the effect of imper
ialism on the Filipinos, but they must
also calculate Its effect upon our own
nation. We cannot repudiate the prin
ciple of self-government in the Philip
pines without weukening that principle
here.
FRUIT OF IMPERIALISM.
Even now we are beginning to set
the paralyzing Influence of Imperial
ism. Heretofore, this nation has ben
prompt to express Its sympathy with
those who were fighting for civil lib
erty. While our sphere of activity ha
been limited to the Western Hemi
sphere, our sympathies have not been
bounded by the seas. We have fell It
due to btirselves and to the world, as
well as to those who were struggling
for the right to govern themselves, to
proclaim the Interest which our people
have, from the date of their own Inde
pendence, felt in every contest between
human rights and arbitrary power.
Three-quarters of a century ago. when
our nation was small, the struggles of
Greece aroused our people, and Web
ster and Clay gave eloquent expression
to the universal desire for Grecian in
dependence. In 1S96. all parties mani
fested a lively Interest in the success
of the Cubans, but now when a war !s
In progress In South Africa, which
must result in the extension of the
monarchial idea or In the triumph of a
republic, the advocates of imperialism
In this country dare not say a word In
behalf of the Boers. Sympathy for the
Boers does not arise from any un
J. BRYAN.
friendliness toward England; the Amer
ican people are not unfriendly toward
the people of any nation. This sympa
thy is due to the fact that, as stated
in our platform, we believe in the prin
ciple of self-government, and reject, as
did our forefathers, the claims of mon
archy. If this nation surrenders Its
belief In the universal application of the
principles set forth In the Declaration
of Independence, it will lose the pres
tige and Influence which It has enjoyed
among the nations as an exponent of
popular government.
Our opponents, conscious of the weak
ness of their cause, seek to confuse
Imperialism with expansion, and have
even dared to claim Jefferson as a sup
porter of their policy. Jefferson spoke
so freely and used language with such
precision that no one can be ignorant
of his views. On one occasion be de
clared: "If there be one principle more
deeply rooted than any other In the
mind of every American, It is that we
should have nothing to do with con
quest." And again he said: "Conquest
ts not In our principles; It is inconsist
ent with our government."
DIFFERENCE 13 BIG.
The forcible annexation of territory
to be governed by arbitrary power, dif
fers as much from the acquisition of
territory to be built up Itilo states as a
monarchy differs from a democracy.
The democratic party does not oppose
expansion, when expansion enlarges
the area of the republic and Incorpo
rates land which can be settled by
American citizens, or adds to our pop
ulation people who are willing to be
come citizens, or adds to our popula
tion people who are willing to become
citizens and are capable of discharging
their duties as such. The acquisition of
the Louisiana territory, Florida, Texas,
and other tracts which have been se
cured from time to time, enlarged the
republic, and the constitution followed
the flag Into the new territory. It Is
now proposed to siexe upon distant
territory already more densely populat
ed than our oWn country, and to force
upon the people a government, for
which there Is no warrant In our con
stltutlon or our laws. Even the argu
ment thst this earth belongs to those
who desire to cultivate It and have
the physical power to acquire tt can
not be Invoked to Justify the appropri
ation of the Philippine Islands by the
United States. If the Islands were un
inhabited Americans citizens would not
be willing to go there and till the soil.
The white race will not live so nesr
the equator. Other nstlons have tried
to colonise the same latitude. The
Netherlands have controlled Jsva fot
MO years, and yet today there are lest
than sJ.OSO people of European birtn
scattered among 11,800,000 natives. After
a century and a half of English dom
ination In India, less than one-twentieth
of one per cent of the people of
India art of English birth, and It re
quirts an army of 7s.00t British soldiers
to taka .cart of the tag collectors,
ftpala has asserted title to the Phil.
Ippmt Islands for three centuries, and
yw, when oar fleet entered itajiiu
Bar. there wort leas than Ujm gpan
tarda rsstdta hi the niHpptnoj.
a oowNuai poncy means utat wt shall
UM raitfftats a tfw traasrs,
t re wtaekmasters and a few office
holders, and an army large enough to
support, the authority of a small frac
tion of the people while they rule the
natives.
EVIL. OF STANDING ARMY.
If we have an Imperial policy we
must have a large standing army as
Its natural and necessary complement.
The spirit which will Juftlfy the for
cible annexation of the Philippine Isl
ands, will Justify the seizure of other
Islands and the domination of other
people, and with wars of conquest we
can expect a certain. If not rapid,
growth of our military establishment.
That a larye permanent increase In our
regular army is intended by the re
publican leaders is not a mere matter
of conjecture, but a matter of fart. In
his message of December 5th, 1S9S, the
president arked for authority to In
crease the standing army to inOQftrt
In 1SJi8 the army contained about 2;",000
men. Within two years the president
asked for four times that many, and a
republican house of representatives
compiled with the request after the
bpanish treaty had been signed and no
country was at war with the United
States. If such an army Is demanded
when an imperial policy Is content
plated, but not openly avowed, what
may be expected If the people encour
age the republican party by lndoising
its policy at the polls. A large stand
ing army Is not only a pecuniary bur
den to the people and. If accompanied
by compulsory service, a constant
source of irritation, but It Is ever a
menace to a republican form of gov
ernment. The army is the personifica
tion of force, and militarism will In
evitably change the Ideals of the peo
ple and turn the thoughts of our young
men from the arts of peace to the sci
ence of war. The government which
relies for Its defence upon its citizens.
is more likely to be Just than one which
has at call a large body of professional
soldiers. A small standing army and a
well equipped and well disciplined state
militia are sufficient In ordinary times
and in an emergency the nation should
in the future, as In the past, place- Its
dependence upon the volunteers who
come from all occupations at their
country's call and return to productive
labor when their services are ni longer
required men who fight whgen the
country needs fighters and work when
the country needs workers.
CITIZENS OR SUBJECTS.
The republican platform assumes that
the Philippine iwlands will be retained
under American sovereignty, and we
have a right to demand of the repub
lican leaders a discussion of the future
status of the Filipino? Is he to be a
citizen or a subject? Are we to bring
into the body politic eight or ten mil
lion Asiatics, so different from us in
race and history that amalgamation
Is impossible? Are they to share with
us in making the laws and shaping the
destiny of this nation? No republican
of prominence has been hold enough
to advocate such a proposition. The
McEnery resolution, adopted Dv the
senate Immediately after the ratifica
tion of the treaty, expressly nega-.lves
this idea. The demxratlc platform de
scribes the situation when It says tnat
the Filipinos cannot be citizens without
endangering our civilization. Who will
dispute it? And what is the alterna
live? If th Filipino Is not to be a
citizen, shall we make him a subject?
On that question the democratic plat
form speaks with emphasis. It declares
that the Filipino cannot be a subject
without endangering our form of gov
ernment. A republic can have no sub
jects. A subject is possible only in a
government resting upon force; he Is
unknown In a government deriving Us
Just powers from the consent of the
governed. The republican platform says
that "the largest measure of self-government
consistent with their welfare
and our duties shall be secured to them
(the Filipinos) by law." This Is a
strange doctrine for a government
which owps its very existence to the
m-n who offered their lives as a pro
test against government without con
sent and taxation without representa
tion. In what respect does the position
of the republican party differ from the
position taken by the English govern
ment In 176? Did not the English
government promise a g;od govern
ment to the colonials? What king
ever promised a bad government to his
people? Did not the English govern
ment promise that the colonlBts should
have the largest measure of selfgovern
ment consistent with their welfare and
English duties? Did not the Bpanish
government promise tcs give to the
Cubans the largest measure of self
government consistent with their wel
fare and Spanish duties? The whole
difference between a monarchy and a
republic may be summed up In one sen
tence. In a monarchy the king gives
to the people what he believes to be a
good government; In a republic the peo
pie secure for themselves what they
believe to be a good government. The
republican party has accepted the Eu
ropean Idea and planted Itself upon the
ground taken by George III and by
every ruler who distrusts the rapacity
of the people for self-government or
denies them a voice In their own af
fairs. WHY IT HESITATES.
The republican platform promises
that some measure of self-government
Is to be given to the Filipinos by law;
but even this pledge is not fulfilled.
Nearly sixteen months elapsed after
the ratification of the treaty before the
adjournment of congress last June, and
yet no law was passed dealing with the
Philippine situation. The will of the
president has been the only law In the
Philippine Islands wherever the Amer
ican authority extends. Why does the
republican party hesitate to legislate
upon the Philippine question? Because
a law would disclose the radical de
parture from history and precedent
contemplated by those who control the
republican party. The storm of pro
test which greeted the Porto Klcan bill
was an Indication of what may be ex
pected when the American people are
brought face to face with legislation
upon this subject. If the Porto Rlcans,
who welcome annexation, are to be de
nied the guarantees of our constitu
tion, what is to be the lot of the
Filipinos, who resisted our authority?
It secet Influences could compel a dis
regard of our plain duty toward friend
ly people, living near our shores, what
treatment will those same Influences
provide for unfriendly people 7,000 miles
away? If, In this country whert the
people have the right to vote, repub
lican leaders dare not take the side of
the people sgalnst the great monop
olies which have grown up within the
last few years, bow can they be trusted
to protect the Filipinos from the cor
porations which art walling to exploit
the Islands?
Is the sunlight of full cltlsenshlp to
be enjoyed by the people of the United
Btstes, snd the twilight of setnl-cltlsen-shlp
endured by tht people of Porto
Rico, while tht thick darkness of per
petual rassalaga covers the Philip
pines? Tht Porto Rlcan tariff law as
serts tht doctrine that tht operation
of tht constitution Is confined to tht
forty-flvt states. .The democratic party
disputes this doctrine and denounces it
as repugnant to both tht letter and
spirit of our organic law. There la no
place la oar system of government for
tht dtpoatt of arbitrary aad Irrsspoa
IMa powtr. Tkat Um Isaarrs of a
great party should claim for any pres
ident or congress the right to treat
millions of people as mere "posses
sions." and deal with them unrestrain
ed by the constitution or the bill of
rights, shows how far we have already
departed from the ancient landmarks
and Indicates what may be expected If
this nation deliberately enters upon a
career of empire. The territorial form
of government is temporary and pre
paratory, and the chief security a cit
izen of a territory has Is found In the
fact that he enjoys the same constitu
tional guarantees, and Is subject to the
same general laws as a citizen of a
state. Take away this security and his
rights will be violated and his Interest
sacrificed at the demand of those who
have political influence. This Is the
evil of the colonial system, no matter
by what nation It Is applied.
WHAT 13 THE TITLE?
What Is our title to the Philippine
Islands? Do we hold them by treaty
cr by conquest? Did we buy them or
did we take them? Did we purchase
the people? If not, how did we secure
title to them? Were they thrown In
with the land? Will the republicans
say that Inanimate earth has value,
and when that earth is molded by the
Divine Hand and stamped with the
likeness of the Creator It becomes a tlx- J
ture and passes with the soil? If gov
ernments derive their Just powers from
the consent of the governmend, It Is
impossible to secure title to people,
either by force or purchase. We could
extinguish Spain's title by treaty, but
If we hold title we must hold it by
some method consistent with our Ideas
of government. When we made allies
of the Filipinos and armed them to
fight against Spain, we disputed Spain's
title. If we buy Spain's title we are
not innocent purchasers. But even If
we had not disputed Spain's title, she
could transfer no greater title than she
had, and her title was based on force
alone. We cannot defend Buch a title,
but, as Spain gave us a quit claim deed,
we can honorably turn the rrot"'fly
over to the party In possession. V ileth
er any American official gave the Fili
pinos formal assurance of Independence
is not material. There can be no doubt
J.
ADLM E.
that we accepted and utilized the serv
ices of the Filipinos, and that when
we did to we had full knowledge that
they were fighting for their own Inde
pendence, and I submit that history
furnishes, no example of turptltude
baser than ours If we now substitute
our yoke for the Spanish yoke.
OUR DUTY.
Let us consider briefly the reasons
which have been given in support of
ai imperialistic policy. Some say that
It Is our duty to hold the Philippine Isl
ands. But duty Is not an argument; It
Is a conclusion. To ascertain what our
duty Is, In any emergency, we must
apply well-settled and generally ac
cepted principles. It Is our duty to
avoid stealing, no matter whether the
thing to be stolen Is of great or little
value. It is our duty to avoid killing
a human being, no matter where the
human being lives or to what race or
class he belongs. Everyone recognizes
the obligation Imposed upon Individu
als to observe both the human and
moral law, but, as some deny the ap
plication of those laws to nations, it
may not be out of place to quote the
opinion of others. Jefferson, than whom
there Is no higher political authority,
said: -
"I know of but one code of morality
ror men, whether acting singly or col
lectively," Franklin, whose learning, wisdom and
virtue are a part of the priceless leg
acy bequeathed to us from the revolu
tionary days, expressed the same Idea
In ever stronger language when he said:
"Justice Is as strictly due between
neighbor nations as between neighbor
citizens. A highwayman Is as much a
robber when he plunders In a gang as
when singly; and the nation that makes
an unjust war Is only a great gang."
Men may dare to do In crowds what
they would not dare to do as Individ
uals, but the moral character of an act
Is not determined by the number of
those who Join In It. Force can defend
a right, but force has never yet created
a right If It was true, as declared In
the resolutions of Intervention, that
the Cubans "art and of right ought to
be free and Independent," (language
taken from the Declaration of Inde
pendence) It Is equally true that the
Filipinos "are and of right ought to be
free snd Independent." Tht right of
the Cubans to freedom was not bssed
upon their proximity to the United
States, nor upon the langusge which
they spoke, nor ret upon the race or
races to which they belonged. Con
gress by a practically unanimous vote
declared that the principles enunciated
st Philadelphia In 177 were still alive
snd applicable to tht Cubsns.
WHO WILL DRAW THE) LINE?
Who wtl Id raw a lint between the
natural rtghes of tht Cubans and the
Filipinos? Who will aar that tht for.
mtr hart a right to liberty and that
tht latter have no rights which ws ara
bound to respect? And, If tht Fili
pino "art ana or right ought to be
free and Independent," what right hare
wt to lorct our government anon atem
without their consent? Before our dutr
ran be ascertained, their rights must
bt determined aad whoa tattr rights
ara ones dtttrnUnsd, It is as arwsa our
BMtr to raapagt Umos rtgnto aa It WM
the duty of Spain to respect the righto
of the people of Cuba, or the duty of
England to respect the rights of tho
American colonists. Rights never con
flict; duties never clash. Can It be our
duty to usurp political rights which be
long to others? Can it be our duty t
kill those who, following the example!
of our forefathers, love liberty welt
enough to fight for It?
Some poet has described the terror
which overcame a soldier who. In ths
midst of battle, discovered that he ha
slain his brother. It is written: "All.
ye are brethren." Let us hope for tha
coming of the day when human life
which when once destroyed cannot b
restored will be so sacred that it will
never be taken except when necessary
to punish a crime already committed,
or to prevent a crime about to be com
mitted!
HIGHEST OBLIGATION.
It is said that we have assumed be
fore the world obligations which make
It necessary for un to permanently
maintain a government in the Philip
pine Islands. I reply, first, that tha
kuki ,,,iimti,in of this nation is to
be true to Itself. No obligation to any
particular nation, or to an nauons cum
KinoH nan reniilre the abandonment -of
our theory of government and the sub
stitution of doctrines against wnicn our
naMnnnl Ufa haa heen a iirotest-
And, second, thst our obligations to th
Filipinos, who Inhabit the islands, are.
greater than any obligation which wo
can owe to foreigners who have a tem
porary residence In the Philippines or
desire to trade there.
It Is argued by some that the Filipi
nos are Incapable of self-government,
and that therefore we owe It to the
world to take control of them. Admiral
Dewey, In an official report to the navy
department, declared the Filipinos more
capable of self-government than the
Cubans, and said that he based his
opinion upon a knowledge of both races.
But I will not rest the case upon the
relative advancement of the Filipinos.
Henry Clay, In defending the rights of
the people of Fouth America to self
government, said:
"It Is the doctrine of thrones that
man is too Ignorant to govern him-
'
Km
f7
w
oTEVENHON.
self. Their partisans assert his Inca
pacity In reference to all nations: If
they cannot command universal assent
to the proposition. It Is then remanded
to particular nations; and our pride and
our presumption too often make con
verts of us. I contend that It Is to ar
raign the disposition of Providence
Himself, to suppose that He has create
beings Incapable of governing them
selves, and to be trampled on by kings.
Self-government Is the natural govern
ment of man."
DESPOT INVITED.
Clay was right. There are degrees
of proficiency In the art of self-government,
but It Is a reflection upon the
Creator to say that He denied to any
people the capacity of self-government.
Once admit that some people are capa
ble of self-government, and that others
are not, andt hat the capable people
have a right to seize upon and govern
the Incapable, and you make force
brute froce the only foundation of gov
ernment and Invite the reign of tha
despot. I am not willing to believe
that an all-wise snd an all-loving Oo
created the Filipinos, and then left
thern thousands of years helpless until
the islands attracted the attention of
European nations.
Republicans ask: "Shall we haul A,.
the flag that floats over our dead In
the Philippines?" The same question
might have been asked when the. Amer
ican flag floated over Chapultepec and
waved over the dead who fell there
hut the tourist who visits the City of
Mexico finds there a national cemetery
own by the United States and care.l
for by an American citizen, Our flag
still floats over our dead, but when the
treaty with Mexico was signed. Amer
ican authority withdrew to the Rio
Grande, and I venture the opinion that
during the last fifty years the peoplo
of Mexico have made more progress
under the stimulus of Independence and
self-government than they would have
made under a carpet-bag government
held In place by bayonets. The United
States and Mexico , friendly republics,
are each stronger and haplper than
they would have been had the former
been cursed and the latter crushed by
an Imperialistic policy, disguised ss
"benevolent assimilation."
"Can we not mnvum
asked. The question Is not what w
v... uu, um wnsi we ought to do. This
nation can do whatever It desires to do
wh.Mt dotv i,?::r.?.'.',!,i,t.'
In the way, the people can amend tha
constitution. I repeat, the nation caj
do whatever It desire, to do, but It can.
,W U.m.?.
man uoon raphin hi.
do Whst h. plessesT H. ciragSS
wpun mn mac nt haa beeia
taught to tonalfl ...-.."""D5"
" int taws or God Ha
KiSlV? -It fathw
.... , tuw 10 tnt grave.
but ht can not annul ,h, arntsncs,
thla nation. It is of age, and cat da
0Mttewa4 oa Mat ragaj