6 Conservative *
In hta annnal
PRESIDENTIAL
to congress -
POWERS.message
gress in December ,
1900 , the president claimed constitu
tional authority for the military opera
tions in the Philippines and used this
language to define his powers :
"I stated my purpose , ( in his last
message ) , until the congress shall have
made the formal expression of its will ,
to use the authority vested in me by the
constitution and the statutes to uphold
the sovereignty of the United States in
those distant islands as in all other places
where our flag rightfully Jloats , placing ,
to that end , at the disposal of the army
andthe _ navy , all the means which the
libe'rality of "the congress and the people
have provided. "
The provision of the constitution to
which the president refers reads as
follows :
"The congress shall have power to
provide for calling forth the militia to
execute the laws of the Union , suppress
insurrections and repel invasions. "
In accord with this section the con
gress of 1795 passed the act referred to
by the president.empowering him to use
the military force of the country in the
cases cited.
This declaration of the president that
the section of the constitution and the
statute of congress
Constitution
in accord therewith
Follows
with , relative to
the suppression of insurrection , apply to
the Philippines , "as in all other places
where our flag rightfully floats , " is an
acceptance of the doctrine that the
"constitution follows the flag. " For if
one provision of the constitution applies
to the Filipinos all others apply. If he
must suppress an insurrection in the
Philippines in accord with the constitu
tion he must exercise the power of taxa
tion in the manner prescribed by the
constitution. The constitution was in
tended to limit the authority of the
president as well as to give him a grant
of powers. He cannot consistently
assume powers granted by the constitu
tion in dealing with the Filipinos , with
whom we are at war , and at the same
time decline to recognize constitutional
limitations in dealing with the Porto
Bicans with whom we are at peace.
In the same message the president
incorporated his instructions to the
Philippine corn-
, , ,
Bin of Rights. . . * . . . .
mission in which
the following pledges to the Filipinos
are enumerated :
"At the same time the commission
should bear in mind and the people of
the island should be made plainly to
understand , that theie are certain great
principles of government which have
been made the basis of our governmental
system which we deem essential to the
rule of law and the maintenance of
individual freedom , and of which they
have , unfortunately , been denied the
experience possessed by us ; that there
are also certain practical rules of govern
ment which we have found to be essen
tial to the preservation of these great
principles of liberty and law , and that
these principles and these rules of
government must be established and
maintained in their islands for the sake
of their liberty and happiness , however
much they may conflict with the customs
or laws of procedure with which they
are familiar.
"Upon every division and branch of
the government of the Philippines
therefore must be imposed these in
violable rules :
' 'That no person shall be deprived of
life , liberty , or property without due
process of law ; that private property
shall not be taken for public use without
just compensation , etc. "
If paternal assurances and pretty
promises , couched in pleasing verbiage ,
, , . , . , , could end the
. _ . .
Distrust of Filipinos. , , . . . . ,
Philippine war it
should have ceased the moment the
message of the president reached the
island. But the Filipinos are not fight
ing because they are unwilling to
receive the privileges and liberties de
scribed by the president in his letter of
instructions. Their hostility is due in a
great measure to their distrust of the
sincerity of our government and a
general conviction that we will not do
what the president says we will do. Our
refusal to recognize a plain duty in
dealing with the Porto Eicans was an
unwise , an injudicious precedent. It
tended to confirm the suspicions of the
Filipinos. Their unhappy experience
with Spanish tyranny and duplicity
taught them to be suspicions of all men.
Hence the necessity of our government
acting at all times in the best of faith ,
fulfilling to the letter every promise and
assurance and thus by kind acts and
honorable dealings establishing ourselves
in the confidence of the Filipinos. But
instead of trying to remove their dis
trust we are doing all we can to confirm
and intensify it.
Only a few days ago one of the "great
principles of government" so feelingly
referred to by the
Broken Promises. . , .
president was
openly disregarded by the commander-
in-chief of the army in the Philippines.
An American citizen residing there was
"deprived of liberty" and expelled from
the islands by order of General Mao-
Arthur and without "due process of
law. " Of what avail is it to assure the
Filipino that he will not be deprived of
liberty or property without "due process
of law" if at the first opportunity we
prove our assurance meaningless by
openly violating it. What care the
Filipinos for the pledges of the president
if a despotic military authority is per
mitted to defy them with impunity.
The too frequent disregard of solemn
promises makes the work of pacification
in the Philippines peculiarly difficult.
How may we hope to induce the Filipinos
to trust us when we compel them to
distrust us ? How may we hope to
secure their permission to establish for
them , to use the language of the presi
dent , "a government designed not for
our satisfaction but for the happiness ,
peace and prosperity of the people of the
Philippine islands" when the represen
tatives of American authority in the
Philippines ruthlessly violate "the great
principles of government which have
been made the basis of our governmental
system which we deem essential to the
rule of law and the maintenance of
individual freedom. " And still more
shocking are our shame and humiliation
after these "great principles" have been
specifically promised to the Filipinos.
There is in the
A GOOD . . _
PRECEPTOR , opinion of THE
OONSERV A T IV E
no journal in the city of New York
which should receive the patronage of
the very best citizens without regard
to paity or church affiliations except
the New York Evening Post.
In economics , in morals and in right-
living , with a due regard to the sacredness -
ness of the home-hearth , the Evening
Post is a faithful and righteous pre
ceptor.
MR. CARNEGIE ON WAGES AND
LABOR.
Anything that Mr. Andrew Carnegie
has to say on the matters of labor and
capital is always interesting. Mr.
Oarnegie is one of the richest men in the
world , and also one of the largest em
ployers of labor.
In a recent newspaper contribution
Mr. Oarnegie said this when speaking of
the great reduction in the cost of steel ,
three pounds being made for 2 cents :
"There is one element of cost , how
ever , which every student of sociology
will rejoice to know has not been
cheapened , and that is human labor. It
has risen , and the tendency is to higher
earnings per man. In one of the largest
steel works last year the average wages
per man , including all paid by the day ,
laborers , boys , mechanics , exceeded $4
per day for 811 days. Fewer men
being required , the labor cost per ton is
less , and , contrary to the opinion often
expressed , these men are of a higher
quality as men. It is a mistake to sup
pose that men are becoming mere
machines. "
Mr. Oarnegie here states only general
facts which all statisticians recognize.
The price of labor is steadily rising ,
although the products of labor are
steadily decreasing in price. The result
is beneficial in every way. Laborers
form much the largest body of con
sumers , and if the commodities they
buy become cheaper and the wages they
receive larger , they are bound to be
benefited. Louisville Courier-Journal.
