4 Conservative *
TVE1JSTER ON EXPANSION.
Tlic 1'oHillonVliirli the Grout Orator
Took During the Mexican War.
I ain against all accessions of territory
to form new states. And this is no mat
ter of sentimentality , which I am to pa
rade before moss-meetings or before my
constituents at home. . . . It is a mat
ter of firm , unchangeable purpose. I
yield nothing to the force of circum
stances that have occurred , or that I
can consider as likely to occur. . I resist
today and forever , and to the end , any
proposition to add any foreign territory ,
South or West , North or East , to the
states of this Union , as they are consti
tuted and held together under the con
stitution. I do not want the colonists
of England on the North ; and as little
do T want the population of Mexico on
the South. . . . It is said we must take
territory for the sake of peace. We
must take territory. It is the will of
the president. . . . I speak of the pres
ident , as of all presidents , without dis
respect. I know of no reason why his
opinion , and his will , his purpose , de
clared to be final , should control us , any
more than our purpose , from equally
conscientious motives , and under as
high responsibilities , should control
him. . . . I say , sir , that , according to
my conscientious conviction , we are now
fixing on the constitution of the United
States , and its frame of government , a
monstrosity , a disfiguration , an enorm
ity. . . .
Arbitrary governments may have ter
ritories and distant possessions , because
arbitrary governments may rule them
by different laws and different systems.
Russia may rule in the Ukraine , and the
provinces of the Caucasus , and Kamt-
schatka by different codes , ordinances ,
or ukases. We can do no such thing.
They must be of us , part of us , or else
strangers. I think I see a course adopt
ed which is likely to turn the constitu
tion of the land into a deformed mon
ster , into a curse rather , than a blessing ;
in fact , a frame of an unequal govern
ment , not founded on popular represent
ation , not founded on equality , but on
the grossest inequality ; and I think
that this process will go on , or that there
is danger that it will go on , until this
Union shall fall to pieces. I resist it ,
today and always ! Whoever falters or
whoever flies , I continue the contest.
From Webster's Speech in the Senate ,
March 28 , 1848.
FREE TRADE WITH THE COLONIES.
The imagination of man could not
have conceived a more bizarre termina
tion of the late war , and the acquisition
of territory which followed it , than the
present controversy in the republican
party over the question of free trade
with Porto Rico. It should be remarked
in the first place that there never was
any need of our taking Porto Rico. Its
inhabitants were not complaining of
oppression. They had never asked our
assistance. It is true that they wel
comed us when we came. There is
hardly an island in the West Indian
group , British , Danish , or other , that
would not welcome a change. They
are all so desperately poor that they
want to try something new , and they
all feel instinctively that free trade with
the United States would be good for
them. This was the feeling of the
Porto Ricans when President McKinley
decided to carry the war to that island.
They manifested their joy in such an
exuberant way that the only glory
gained by General Miles came from his
excellent choice of a landing-place.
When once on terra firma , he found his
pathway was strewn with flowers. We
had never been asked to go there , but
when we had once come , the inhabit
ants threw their arms around us because
they believed that free trade with the
United States would be one of the re
sults of the embrace.
A Skeleton.
The time has come for sitting down
to this marriage feast , and now a skele
ton appears and takes the leading place
at the banquet. Its name is protection
to home industry. It comes to forbid
the bans. It says that the tobacco and
sugar and tropical fruits of this new
possession and of the other islands that
we have grabbed shall not come into the
United States duty free. Coffe may come
in , because coffee is already on the free
list and is not grown by us. So the
Porto Ricans are advised to grow coffee.
But coffee , like confidence , is a plant of
slow growth. It takes years to bring a
plantation to a productive state , and af
ter this is accomplished Porto Rico will
have no advantage in our market over
Brazil , or Venezuela , or Mexico. The
advice given to the inhabitants of our
new insular possession , even if followed ,
would not help them for a long time to
come. They might starve to death first.
What they want and must have is either
free trade with the United States or do
nations from our treasury or from priv
ate subscriptions until they can adapt
themselves to their new conditions.
A Change of Air.
When the plan of free trade was pro
posed last month by the president and
the secretary of war , it was so warmly
espoused by leading republican newspa
pers that it seemed likely to go through
congress with a rush. But there has
been a change of atmosphere , and this
has been manifested nowhere more
strikingly than in the columns of the
New York Tribune , which has made a
complete volte face on this question in
side of one week , and which now tells
the Porto Ricans that they have not
been annexed to this country and will
not be , and that "Porto Rico has no
concern with the laws of the United
States. " The fight has now been trans
ferred to the committee on ways and
means , with the hope of finding some
middle ground between free trade and
protection as regards the new posses
sions. We do not see any possible chance
of compromise. It is evident also that
the new reciprocity treaties have been
put in jeopardy by the Porto Rican
question.
The Open Door.
Another complication is looming up
in the distance , which must have been
foreseen by the administration long ago.
It is found in our demand for the "open
door" in China. The Philippine Islands
are in the same situation , legal and
constitutional , as Porto Rico. What
ever principle applies to one applies to
the other. If any rule of law requires
that the tariff system of the United
States shall be extended over Porto
Rico , it applies with equal force to the
Philippines. But our tariff system is in
absolute conflict with the "open door"
policy. It forbids the admission of
German , British , and French cotton
goods , for example , except at the Ding-
ley rates , which cannot be considered an
open-door policy. It was reported from
Washington the other day that one of
the foreign Powers , with which Secre
tary Hay has been negotiating , while
giving its assent to the "open door"has
replied that it would expect the same
principle to be applied by the United
States to the Philippines.
Contradicted.
This report was almost immediately
contradicted , but , whether it be true or
not , we may be quite sure that it will
come true very soon. The foreign pow
ers that have made lodgment on Chin
ese territory will not keep the door open
to our trade if we close the Philippines
to their trade. Moreover , we have made
a treaty with Spain by which we agree
to keep the door open to her trade with
the Philippines for ten years. How this
treaty can be reconciled with the clause
of the constitution which says that all
duties , imposts , and excises shall be
uniform throughout the United States
is a nut for the attorney-general to
crack. How this treaty can be recon
ciled on principles of equity and fairness
with differential duties in favor of Spain
and against England , Germany , Russia ,
etc. , is a nut for the secretary of state
to crack. The conclusion cannot be
avoided that the administration has in
volved itself in a tremendous tangle ,
legal , commercial , and political. Its
policy of imperialism , or expansion , has
brought it at loggerheads with the pro
tectionists and in conflict with the
constitution of the United States. It
tains also the germs of a quarrel with Eu
ropean powers over trade regulations in
Eastern Asia , New York Evening Post ,
