"wr
The Commoner.
WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PUBLISHER.
Vol. 4. No. 50..
Lincoln, Nebraska, December 3o, 1904.
Whole Number 206
THE RELIGIOUS ARGUflENT
The Penticostal Herald, of Louisville, Ky., re
prints an editorial on the Philippine question writ
ten by Doctor Winston, editor of the Nashville
Christian Herald. It so ably presents the "re
ligious" argument used by the imperialists that it
is reproduced on another page in order that the
reader may the better understand the answer
thereto.
The text of Doctor Winston's editorial is to bo
found in the sentence: "But should not the mean
ing of the present situation be sought not in what
we need but rather in what they need?"
This puts the United States in the attitude of
a benevolent" parent dealing with a child and gen
erously considering the interest of the child rather
than the interest of the parent. Before this posi
tion is accepted as the true one, it is well to re
member that it is the attitude of all who have
engaged in persecution. Every individual or group
of individuals guilty of forcing any form of re
ligion upon non-Christians or upon Christians
holding to a cifferent creed has done it under the
firm conviction that he persons persecuted -were
being benefitted- Persecution has always been de
fended, when defended at all, on the ground that
the tortures employed Were really employed for
the spiritual welfare of the persons tortured. If
the victim died before his reformation was com
plete it did not alter the theory or disturb the
complacency of those who were putting the theory
into practice. Those who believe that they can
beat blessings into their fellows are never dis
turbed by so trivial a thing as the death of the
person to be benefitted,-because could not the per
son escape death by accepting the blessings of
fered or by adopting the opinion suggested?
Not only has Doctor Winston's theory been
employed by those who have persecuted in the
. name of the Almighty, but it has been employed
by those who have claimed to rule by divine right.
Every king, czar or emperor who has forced arbi
trary government upon his subjects or upon col
onies against their will has done it on the the
ory that he was regarding the good of his subjects
rather than the good of himself. The annals of
despotism are full of protestations of unselfishness
and benevolence made by rulers who were forc
ing unsought blessings on their suffering subjects
and exacting a high price therefor.
To come down to our own country, every
argument made in behalf of slavery was based
upon the theory that slavery was for the good of
the slave, and no one acquainted with the -slaveholder
or with the history 6f slave-holding can
doubt that in most, if not in all cases the slave
holder conscientiously believed that the system of
slavery was best for the 3layo. The Bible was
quoted in support of slavery as an institution, and
Lincoln complained bitterly that he had the sup
port of so few of the ministers of his own city in
his efforts to prevent the extension of slavery.
Reference is made to persecution, to monarchy
and to slavery only to shov that the position
which Doctor Winston takes is not a new one. but
has been the position occupied by those who have
attempted to force their opinions or their guar
dianship upon others. If any one points to the fact
that nations made formally Christian by the sword
have afterwards become devout supporters of that
religion, or to the fact that kings have sometimes
benefitted their subjects or to the fact that slavery
brought much of. good to people carried away from
Africa by force, it is a sufficient answer to say that
a different test must be applied. The question i3
not whether some good may not have followed a
"wrong course, hut whether greater good might not ..
have followed a better course. It is a-mistake com
monly made to credit a bad system with good that
may follow, whereas we should rather consider the
greater good that might have followed wiser action.
To say that a cruel and unkind parent may confer
some benefit upon his child may bo true, and yet a
wise and kind parent might confer a far greater
benefit.
Doctor Winston quotes Bomo one (namo
not given) as saying "I went to the Philippine
Islands convinced that our retention of them was
an international crime. I left them convinced
that any other course than that wo aro pursuing
would bo a breach of international humanity,
comparable to leaving a helpless Infant to perish
in the 3torm. When they will bo ready for self
government is an interesting question, but at
present it is academic. It is a fact that they aro
not ready or capable for it."
This is the opinion of one individual, name un
known; but even if his namo were known and It
were a name familiar to all. it would still bo tho
opinion of one man. Tho fact that ho changed his
opinion after visiting tho Philippines does not
add greatly to tho weight of his testimony. If
Doctor Winston tlesired to prove that the American
people are incapable of self-government he would
find men in this country who would take the stand
and testify to their belief that froo govornmont is
a failure, but such testimony ought not to havo
any weight with those who bolievo in free institu
tions. Tho moment wo assert that some people aro
capable of self-government and some people in
capable, that moment wo not only destroy tho foun
dation upon which free government rests, but wo
question the wisdom and benevolence of the Cre
ator. Henry Clay, fifty years ago, in discussing tho
rights of tho people of South America, said:
It 13 not, therefore, true, that the imputed
ignorance exists; but if it do, I repeat, I dispute
the inference. It is the doctrine of thrones,
that man is too ignorant to govern himself.
Their partisans assert his incapacity, In ref
erence to all nations; If they can not command
universal assent to the proposition, it is then
demanded to particular nations; and our prido
and our presumption too often make converts
of us. I contend, that it Is to arraign the dis
positions of Providence himself, to suppose
that he has created beings incapable of gov
erning themselves, and to be trampled on by
kings. Self-government Is the natural govern
ment of man.
And so it may bo said today, that it would bo
a reflection upon tho Almighty to say that ho
made Filipinos and left them for thousands of
years incapable of self-governmcnt-that is to say,
helpless-until Spain found them, governed them
nrainst their will for three centuries and then sold
us the privilege of continuing an alien govern-
mG1 The doctrine that Doctor Winston presents is
bad enough where there is no admixture of selfish
interest A man who conscientiously believes that
?te his Christian duty to force his authority
ii'non another is dangerous enough when he is
SffJatod Bololy by conscience, but he is still moro
dfngerodUsf there is added a pecuniary motive
The president in his letter of acceptance dwe t
unon our duty to the Filipinos but he also inti
mated that we would find it advantageous to otir
sdves to hold tho Philippine islands Senator
Lodge four years ago in his speech as chairman of
the republican national convention, assured tho
wuntr? that we were not forgetting ourselves en
tire? Where money and morals are mixed it is
iSlt, if not impossible to tell where greed
leaves off and conscience begins. ,
It must alBo bo remembered that a largo ma
jority of tho Filipinos belong to ono branch of
tho Christian church and if we nro to defond a
colonial policy on religious groundB wc are npt to
find some clashing between tho denominations.
Tho missionary spirit has been appealed to to somo
extent, and somo havo convinced themselves that a
colonial system In tho Philippines la In the Inter
est of Protestantism. Words need not be multi
plied to convince tho readers of Tho Commoner
that a governmental policy Intended to holp ono
branch of tho Christian church as against an
othor branch, or to help tho Christian church as a
wholo against another religious faith is entirely
inconsistent with our theory of government as well
as with tho spirit of our religion.
If, as Doctor Winston Biiggosts, tho only ques
tion is whether a colonial policy administered by
us would bo best for tho Filipinos, The Commoner
would answor In tho negative. This country can
help the Filipinos more by setting them an cx
amplo than It can by sending them carpet-bag of
ficials. It can holp them infinitely more, and do
it at far less expense, by educating their young
men and young women and sending them back to
spread tho light of our civilization and tho bloaa
ings of our Institutions. Tho Filipinos will nat
urally trust tho people of their own raco more than
tbey will trust foreigners. Tho American colon
ists, in order to secure their independence, were
willing to fight members of their own race, com
municants of their own church and thouo who
spoke their own language. Can anyono doubt that
tho Filipinos will resent as bitterly our attempt to
govern them, differing as wo do from them in
both language and race?
It is safe to say that a colonial policy In tho
Philippines will cost the American people at least
a hundred millions a year. If wo take Into con
sideration the Increase in the army and the navy
an Increase defended on the ground of our colonial
policy. Ten per cent of that money apent In tho
education of Filipinos in American colleges would
in a few generations bring more benefit to tho
Filipinos than we could bring in a thousand years
by a colonial system.
Doctor Winston overlooks entirely the enlight
ening Influence of self-government and the de
grading and demoralizing Influence of an alien gov
ernment such as we aro now administering, but the
question which Doctor Winston puts Is not tho
controlling question In this matter. Our country
has a great work to do and It could not afford to
give up that work, even if it could bo shown that
by so doing we would help the Filipinos. Our na
tion has been for a hundred years the exponent of
the doctrine of self-government. It has brought
untold good to the world by presenting a new
national ideal to mankind. So long as this na
tion administers a colonial policy it is impotent
to holp the cause of human liberty. If our na
tion endorses tho doctrine set forth by Doctor
Winston's unnamed visitor namely, that the F11I
Iplnos aro Incapablo of self-government It denies
the doctrine of the Declaration of Independence
and places a limitation upon the truths given to tho
world in 1770. The moment this country announce
to tho world that it has amended tho Declara
tion of Indepenoence, the moment that it de
clares that governments can In some instances de
rive their just powers from some other source than
the consent of tho governed, It ceases to be th
champion of tho doctrine of self-government and
the injury that would bo done to the world by a
modification of its position must bo weighed
against any gcl, real or Imaginary, that we could
confer upon tho Filipinos.
Not only must wo calculate the harm which
ar
1
vtS
