Newspaper Page Text
BRYAN AND STEVENSON NOTIFIED Continued from Page 1. the Senate a treaty which recognized the independence of Cuba, but pro? vided for the cession of the Philippine Islands to the United States, the men? ace of Imperialism became so appa? rent that ninny preferred to reject the treaty and risk the ills that might fol? low rather than take the chance of correcting the errors of the treaty by the independent action of the country. THE TREATY WITH SPAIN. I was among the number of those who believed it better to ratify the treaty and end the war, release the volunteers, remove the excuse for war expenditures, and then ^ive to the Fil? ipinos the Independence Which might be forced from Spain by a new treaty. In view of the criticism which my action aroused In seme quarters, 1 take this occasion to rc-stato the reasons given at that time. 1 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 He- question, when lie asked, "Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws'.'" 1 believe that we are now in a better position to wage a /Successful contest ngalnst Imperialism than we would have . been bad the treaty been rejected, with the treaty ratified, a clean-out issue is presented between a government by consent and a government by force, nnd Imperial? ists must bear the responsibility tor all thai happens until the question is settled. If the treaty had been re? jected, the opponents of imperialism would have been held responsible for any international complications which might have arisen before the ratifica? tion of another treaty. But whatever differences "f opinion may have exist? ed as to the best method of opposing the colonial policy, there never was any difference as to the great im? portance of the question, nnd there is no difference now as lo the course lo be pursued. The title of Spain being extinguished, we were at liberty to deal with the Fili? pinos according to American principles. The Bacon resolution, introduced a month before hostilities broke out at Manila, promised independence to the Filipinos on the some terms that It was promised to the Cubans. I supported this resolution nnd believe that Its adoption prior to the breaking out of hostilities would have prevented Mood shed, and that Its adoption at any sub? sequent time would have ended hostili? ties. If the treaty had been rejected, con? siderable time would have necessarily elapsed before n new treaty could have been agreed upon and ratified, and dur? ing that time the question would have been ngitutlng the public mind. If the Bacon resolution had been adopted by the Senate nnd carried out by the President, either al the time of the ratification of the treaty or at any time afterwards, it would have taken the question 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-Presldont, and from that time to this n Republican Congress has refused to take any action whatever in the matt. r. When hostilities broke out nl Manila. Republican speakers nnd Republican editors at once Sought to lav the blame upon those who hail delayed the ratifi? cation of the treaty, and during the progress of the war tin- same Republi? cans have accused the opponents of Imperialism of giving encouragement to the Filipinos. This in a cowardly evasion of responsibility. If it l.s rlghl for the Culled Stales to hold the Philippine Islands permanent? ly and Imitat.' the European empires In tiie government of the colonies, the Republican parly ought to state Its po? sition ami defend It, put it must ex? pect the subject rac.s to protest against .such a policy and to resist to the extent of their ability. The Fili? pinos do not need any encouragement from Americans now living. our winde history has been an encourage? ment, not only to the Filipinos, but to all who are denied a voice In their own government. If the Republicans tire prepared to censure nil who have used language calculated to make Fil? ipinos hate foreign domination, lei them condemn the speech of Patrick Henry, When he uttered that passion? ate appeal, "Give me liberty or give me dentil." he expressed a sentiment Which still echoes in the hearts of men. Let them censure Jefferson; of all the Statesmen of history, noire have used words so offensive to those who would hold their fellows In political bondage. Let them censure Washington,,who de? clared that the colonies must choose between liberty ami slavery. Or. If the Statute of Limitations has run hgalnsl the sins of Henry and Jefferson and Washington, let them censure Lincoln, whose Gettysburg speech will be quoted in defense of popular govern? ment when tin' present advocates of force nnd conquest are forgotten. Some one has sa'd that a truth once spoken can never be recalled, li Is true. It goes on and on. and no one run set a limit to Iis ever-widening in fluencc. But If It wer.- possible to ob? literate every word written or spoken In defense of the principles set forth In the Declaration of Independence, a war of conquest would still leave its legacy of perpetual hatred, for It was God himself who placed in every hu? man heart the love of liberty. lb' never made a race of people so low In the scale of civilization or Intelli? gence that It would welcome n foreign master. CAREIilt OP EMPIRES. Lincoln said thnt the safety of this nation was not in Us 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 ibis spirit without planting the seeds of despotism at their own doors. Those who would have this nation enter upon a career of empire must consider; not only the effect of impe? rialism on the Filipinos, but tin y must tilso calculate Its effect upon our own nation We cannot repudiate the princi? ple of self-government in the Philip? pines without weakening thai principle here. Kvcn now we are beginning to see the paralyzing influence of imperialism. Heretofore, this nation lias been prompt to express its sympathy with those who were lighting for civil lib? erty. While our sphere of activity has been limited to the Western Hemi? sphere, our sympathies have not been bounded by the seas. We have felt it due to ourselves and to tho world, as well as to those who were struggling for the right to govern themselves, to proclaim the interest which our peo? ple have, from the date of their own Independence, felt In every contest be? tween human rlnhts nnd arbitrary power. Three-quarters of a century ago, when our natl1 was small, the struggles of Greece aroused our people, ocr plain DU AY. and Webster and Clay gave- eloquent expression to the universal desire for Grecian Independence. In 18'J6, all parties manifested a lively Interest In the success of the Cubans, but no\y> when a war Is In progress in South Africa, which must result In the ex? tension of the monnrchlul idea, or In the triumph of a republic, the advo? cates of Imperialism In this country dare not say a word In behalf of the Boers. SYMPATHY FOB THE BOERS, Sympathy for the Boers does not arise from any unfriendliness toward England; the American people are not unfriendly toward the people of any na? tion. This sympathy Is due to the fact that, ns stated in our platform, wo be? lieve In the principle of self-government and reject, as did our forefathers, the claims of monarchy. If this nation sur? renders its belief In the universal ap? plication of the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, it will lose the prestige 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 im? perialism with expansion, and have even dared to claim Jefferson as a supporter of their policy. Jefferson spoke so freely and used language with such precision that no one can be igno? rant of his views. On one occasion he declared: "If there be one principle more deeply rooted than any other In the mine! of every American, it Is that we should have nothing to do with con? quest." And again he said: "Conquest Is not In our principles; it Is Inconsis? tent with our government." FORCIBLE ANNEXATION. The forcible annexation of territory to be governed by arbitrary power differs as much from the acquisition <>f territory to be built up into States as a monarchy differs from a democracy. The Democratic parly 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 arc willing to bu come citizens and are capable of dis? charging their duties as such. The acquisition of th<; Louisiana territory, Florida, Texas and other ttacts which have been secured from timo to lime, enlarged tho republic, and the Consti? tution followed ttie Hag Into the new territory. It Is now proposed to seize upon distant territory, already more densely populated than our own conn try, and to force upon tho people a government for which there is no war? rant In our Constitution or our law.;. Even the argument that this earth be? longs to those who desire to cultivate It and have the physical power to ac? quire It. cannot be Invoked to justify the appropriation of the Philippine Is? lands by the United States. If the Is-' lands were uninhabited American Cit? izens would not be willing to go there and till the soil. The white ruce will hot live so near tbff equator. Other nations have tried to colonize In the same latitude. The Netherlands have controlled Java ror three hundred years, and yet to-day there are less than 6O.000 people of European birth scattered among 26,000.000 natives. After a century and u half of English domination In India. le?s than one twentieth of one per cent, of the peo? ple Of India are of English birth, and it requires nn army of TO.Otio British soldiers to take care of the tax collec? tors. Spain has asserted title to the Philippine Islands for three centuries, and vet. when our tleet entered Manila Bay," there were less than lo.ooo Span lards residing In the Philippines. A colonial policy means Halt we shall send to the Philippines a few traders, a few masters and a few office-holders, and an army larije enough to support the authority of a small fraction of the people while they rule the natives. EVILS OF IMPERIALISM, must have a large standing army as Its must have a large standing army at Its natural and necessary complement. The spirit which will Justify tho forci? ble annexation of the Philippine Isl? ands will justify the seizure of other islands and the domination of other peoples, and with wars of conquest we can expect a certain, if not rapid, growth of our military establishment. That a large permanent Increase in out regular army is intended by the Repub? lican leaders is not a mere matter Of conjecture, but a matter of fait. In his message of December 6th, 189S, the President asked for authority to In? crease the standing army to 100,000. In lSin'i the army contained about 2*i,000 men. Within two years the Presi? dent asked for four limes that many, und a Republican House of Representa? tives complied With the request after tlie Spanish treaty had been signed, and no country was at war with the United States. If such nn army Is de? manded when an Imperial policy Is con? templated, but not openly avowed, what may be expected If the people en? courage the Republican party by en dorslng Us policy nt the polls? A large standing army is not only a pecuniary burden to the people and. If accom? panied by compulsory service, it con? stant 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 people and turn the thoughts of our young men from the arts of peace to the science of war. The government which relies for Its defence upon Its citizens Is more likely to be just thai one which has at call a large body of professional soldiers. A small standing army nnd 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 tho 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 no longer required- men who fight when the country needs fighters and work when the country needs workers. ASSUMPTION OF REPUBLICANS. The Republican platform assumes that the Philippine Islands will be retained under American sovereignty, and we have a right to demand of the Republican leaders a discussion of the future status of the Filipino. Is be to be n citizen or a subject? Are wo to bring into the body politic eight or ten million Asiatics, so different from us in nice and history that amalgama? tion is impossible? Are they to share wiih us In making the laws and shap? ing the destiny oi this nation? No Re? publican of prominence has been bold enough to advocate such a proposition? The Ah Enery resolution, adopted by the Senate immediately after the rat? ification for the treaty, expressly ie-g ntives this Idea. The Democratic plat? form described the situation when It says that the Filipinos cannot be cit? izens without endangering our civiliza? tion. Who will dispute it? And what is the alternative? If the Filipino is not to be a'Citizen, Shall we make him a subject? On that question the Dem? ocratic platform speaks with empha? sis, it declares that the Filipino can? not be a subject without endangering our form of government, a Republic can have no subjects. A SUbjci t Is possible only In a government resting upon force, he is unknown in a Gov? ernment deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed. The Rc p?bllban platform says that ''The largest measure or self-government consistent With, their welfare and our duties shull be secured to them (the Filipinos) by law." This Is a Strange doctrine for a government which owes Its very existence to the men who of? fered their lives as a protest against government without consent and tax? ation without representation. In what respect does the position of the Re? publican party differ from the position taken by the English Government in 1770? Did not the English Government promise a good government to the col? onists? What King ever promised a bad government to his people? dm not the English Government promise that the colonists should have the largest measure of self-government consistent with their welfare and English duties? nid not the Spanish Government prom? ise to give the Cubans the largest measure of self-government consistent with their welfare and Spanish duties? The whole difference between a mon? archy and a Republic may be sum? moned up In one sentence. In a mon? archy the King gives to the people, what he believes to be a good govern? ment: In a Republic the people secure for themselves what they believe to be a good government. The Republi? can party has accepted the European Idea and planted Itself upon the ground taken by George III., and by every ruler Who distrusts the capacity of the people for Bclf-government, or denies them a voice in their own af? fairs. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. The Republican platform promises that some measure of self-government Is to be given to the Filipinos by law: but, c\ou 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 1'resident has been the only law : In the Philippine Islands wherever the j American authority extends. Why does i the Republican party hesitate to legls J late upon the Phtrippthe question? Because a law would disclose the radl I cal departure from history and prece I dent contemplated by thoye who con? trol the Republican party. The storm of protest which greeted the Porto Rl can bill was an indication of what may be expected when the American people are brought face to face with legislation upon this subject. If the Porto Rldans, who welcome annexa? tion, nre to be denied the guarantees of our constitution, what is to be the lot of the Filipinos who resisted our authority? If secret Influences could c omi-. i i) disregard of our plain duty toward friendly people, living near pur shores, what treatment will those same Influences provide for unfriendly people 7.i?nt miles nwny7 If, In ibis country. where (be people ha\e a rlglll to Vole. ? Republican leaders dare not take the I Bide of the people against the great monopolies which have grown up with- j In the last lew years, how can they be trusted t,, protect the Filipinos from the corporations which are wait? ing to exploit the islands? CITIZBNSHIP. Is the sunlight of tun citizenship to be enjoyed by the people of the United States and the twilight of scmt-citl scnshlp endured by the people i>i Porto Rico, while, the thick darkness nt per? petual vassalage covers the Philip? pines? The Porto Rico tariff law as? sorts the doctrine that the operation of the Constitution is confined to the forty-five Stales. The bemocrtttiu party disputes this doctrine and de? nounces it ns repttgnunt to both the letter and spirit of our organic law. There Is no place in our system of government for the deposit of arbi? trary and Irresponsible power. That the leaders of a greal party should claim for any President or Cotlgress the right to treat millions of peole as mere "possessions" and deal with them unrestrained by the Constitution or the Rill of Rights, shows how far we have already departed from the an? cient landmarks, and Indicates what may be expected If this nation delib? erately enters upon a career of em? pire. The territorial form of govern? ment Is temporary and preparatory, and the chief security a citizen of a territory has Is found in the fact that he enjoys the t- lino constitutional guarantees and Is .subject to the same general laws as a citizen of a State. Take away Ibis security and his rights will be violated and his Interest sncrl liced. This is the evil of the colonial System, no matter by What nation It Is applied. OUR TITLE To Till-: PHILIPPINES. What is our title to the Philippine Islands? Do we lud I them by treaty or by conquest? id.I we buy them or did WO take them? I lid we purchase lite people? if not, how did we secure title to them? Wcro they thrown In with the land? Will the Republicans say that Inanimate 'earth has value and When that earth is moulded by the divine hand and Stamped with the likeness of the creator it becomes a fixture and passe swlih the scut? If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, 11 is Impossible to secure title to people, either by force or by purchase. We could extinguish Spanish titles by treaty, but it we hold ti'.le wb must hold ti by Borne method consistent with our Ideas of government. When we made allies, of the Filipinos and armed them to (lgltl against Spain, we dis? puted 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 bad. an.I her title was based on force alone. We csrnnot defend suc h n title, but as Spain g:ive ?us a quit claim deed, we cm honorably turn tie- property over lo the party In possession. Whether any American of? ficial gave the Filipinos moral assur? ance of Independence is not material. There can be no doubt that we accept? ed and Utilised the services of the Flll nos and dial when we did so we had full knowledge that they were lighting for their own independence, and I sub? mit that history furnishes no example or turpitude baser than ours if we substitute our yoke for the Spanish yoke. REASONS FOR SUPPORTING IM? PERIALISM] Let us consider briefly the reasons which have been given in support of an imperialistic policy, They say that It is our duty to hold the Philippine islands. Cut duty is not tin argument, it is a conclusion. To ascertain what our duty is. in any emergency, we must apply well settled and generally accepted principles. 11 is our duty to avoid stealing, no matter \vh6thor the thing to lie stolen is of greal or little Milue. It is our duty to avoid killing a human being, no matter where the human being lives or to what race or class be belongs. Every one recognizes the obligation Imposed upon Individ? uals to observe both the human and moral law, but as some deny the ap? plication "f those laws to nations, it may not lie out of place tr, quote the opinion of others. Jefferson, than whom there is no higher political au? thority, said: "i know or but one code of morality for men, whether acting singly or col leoti) ely." Franklin, whoso learning, wisdom and virtue are a part or the priceless Jcsucy bequeathed to us from the rev olutlonnry days, expressed the same Idea in even stronger lungungc when lie said: "Justice Is as strictly due between neighbor nutlons us between neighbor citizens. A highwayman is as much u robber when he plunders in a gang us when singly; and the nation that makes an unjust war 1? only a great gang.'' Men may dare to do In crowds what they would not dare to do ns Individ? uals: but the moral character of an act Is not determined by the number or those who join In it. Force can de? fend a right, but force has never yet created a right. If- It was true, us de? clared in the resolution of Interven? tion, that the Cubans "are, and of right ought to be. free and Independent," (language taken from the Declaration of Independence) It is equally true that the Filipinos "are, and of right ought to be. free and Independent." The right of the Cubans to freedom was not based upon their proximity to the I'tilted States, nor upon the language which they spoke, nor yet upon the race or races to which they belonged. Congress by a practically unanimous vote declared that the principles enun? ciated at 1'hlladolphia in 177f> were still alive and applicable to the Cubans. THE CUBANS AND FILIPINOS. "Who will draw a line between the natural rights of the Cubans and the Filipinos? "Who Will say that the former have a right to liberty and the latter have no rights which we are bound to respect? And. If the Filipinos "are and of right ought to he free and independent," what right have we to force our government upon them with? out their consent? Before our duty can bo ascertained, and when their rights arc once determined, it Is as much our duty to respect those rights as It was the duty of Kngland to respect the rights of the American colonists. Kighls never contllct; duties never clash. Can it be our duty to usurp political tights which belong to others? Can It be our duty to kill those who, following the example of our forefath? ers, love liberty well enough to fight for it? - Some poet has described the terror which overcame a soldier who. In the midst of battle, discovered that he had slain bis brother. It is written: "All ye are brethren." Let us hope for the coming of the day when human life? which, when once destroyed cannot be I 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: If It Is said that we have assumed be? fore the world obligations which make It necessary for us to permanently maintain a government In the Philip pine Islands. I reply, flrst, that the highest obligation of this nation Is to I be true to itself. No obligation to any I particular nation, or to nil nations com- i blued, can roqulro the abandonment of our theory of government and the sub- ' Btitullon of doctrines against which our i whole national life has hon a protest. 1 And. second, that our obligations to the ' Filipinos, who inhabit tho Islands, are 1 greater than any obligation which we : can owe to foreigners who have a tem? porary residence In the Philippines or desire to trade there. A FALSE DOCTRINE. 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 <>r them. Admi? ral Dewey, in an official report to the Navy Department, declared the Fili? pinos are more capable of self-govern-' ment than the Cubans, and said that I he based his opinion upon a knowledge i of both races. Hut 1 will nol rest the ? ?se upon the relative advancement of the Filipinos. Henry Clay, In defend Ing the rights of the people of South America to self-government, said: "It is the doctrine of thrones that nmn is too Ignorant to govern him? self. Their partisans assert bis inca? pacity In reference to all nations; If they cannot command universal assent 10 the proposition. It Is then remanded to particular nations, und our pride and our presumption loo often make converts of us. I contend that It Is to arraign the disposition of Providence Himself to suppose that He has cre? ated beings Incapable of governing themselves and to be trampled on by I kings. Self-government Is the natural government <>f man." Clay was right. There are degrees of prollclency In the art of self-govern? ment, hut it is a reflection upon the Creator to say that lie donh'd to any people the capacity of self-govern? ment Once admit that some people are capable of self-government and that others are not. and that tho capa? ble poplo have a right to seize upon and govern the Incapable, and you make force?brute force?the only foundation of government and invite i the reign of the despot. I am not i willing to believe that an all-wise and nn all-loving Ood created the Filipinos i atid then left them thousands of years ? helpless until the Islands attracted the attention of European nations. Tili: FL AO. Itepuhllenns ask: "Shall we haul down Hie (lag that lloals over our dead In the Philippines?" The same ques? tion might have been asked when the American flag floated over Chapnlte pee and waves over the dead who fell there; but the tourist who visits the city of Mexico finds there a national cemetery owned by the United and cared for by an American citizen. Our flag still lloais over r.nr dead, but when tho treaty with Mexico was signed. American authority withdrew to the Kio Grande, and I venture the opin? ion that during the last tlfty years the people of Mexico have made more progress under the stimulus of Inde? pendence and self-government than they would have made under a carpet? bag government held In place by bayo? nets. The United States and Mexico, friendly republics, are each stronger and happier than they would have been j had the former been cursed and the . latter crushed by an Imperialistic pol i lev. disguised as "benevolent assimila? tion." CAN WE GOVERN COLONIES. "Can we not govern colonies?" wc are asked. The question Is not what we can do, but what we ought to do. This nation can do whatever it desires to do, but It must accept responsibility for what it does, if the Constitution stands in the way, tho people can amend the Constitution. I repeat, the nation can do whatever It desires to do. but It can | not avoid the natural and legitimate ; results of its own conduct. The young ! man upon reaching his majority can do J w hat he pleases. lie can disregard Hie ! teachings of his parents: he can tram ; pie upon nil that he has been taught to , consider sacred; he can disobey the j laws of the State, the laws of society I and the laws of Ood. He can stamp failure upon his life and make his very existence a curse to his fellow men. and he i an bring his father and mother In sorrow to the grave: but he cannot an? nul the sentence: "The wages of sin is death." And so with this nation. It is of age and it can do what It p.leases: it can spurn the traditions of the past; it can repudiate the principles upon which the nation rests: it can employ force Instead of rc:.son: It can substi? tute might for right: it Can conquer weaker icopic; it can exploit their lands, appropriate their property and kill their people: but It cannot repeal tlyp moral law or escape the punish? ment decreed tor the violation of human lights. "Would we tread In the paths of ty? ranny. Nor reckon the tyrnnt's cost? Who taketh another's liberty ills freedom Is also lost. Would we win as the strong have ever won. Make ready to pay the debt. For the God who reigned over Babylon Is the God who Is reigning yet." Some argue that American rule in the Philippine Islands will result in the better education of the Filipinos. Be not deceived. If we expect to main? tain u colonial policy, we shall not find It lo our advantage to educate the peo? ple. The edueuted Filipinos are now In revolt against us, and the most ig? norant ones have made the least re? sistance to our domination. If we are to govern them without their consent and give them no voice in determining the taxes which they must pay. we dare not educate them, lest they learn to read the Declaration of Independ? ence und the Constitution of the United States und mock US for our in? consistency. ARGUMENTS OP IMPERIALISTS. The prlnclpul arguments, however, advanced by those Who enter uptfn a defense of Imperialism are: First: That we must Improve Abe present opportunity lo become a world power and enter into International pol? itics. Second: That our commercial Inter? ests In the Philippine Islands and In the Orient make It necessary for us to hold the Islands permanently. Third: That the spread of the Chris? tian religion will be facilitated by a colonial policy. Fourth: That there Is no honorable retreat from the position Which the nation has taken. The first argument Is addressed to the nation's pride and the second to the nation's pocket-hook. The third Is Intended for the church member and the fourth for the partisan. It Is a sufficient answer to the first argument to sny that for more thnn a century this nation has been a world power. For ten decades It has been the most potent Influence In the world. Not only has It been a world power, but It has done more to affect the poll- : tics of the human race than all the Other nations of the world combined. Because our Declaration of Indepen dence was promulgated, others have Of lTTil fought for liberty. Others have ] of 1771! fought for liberty others have' fought for it: because our Constitution was adopted, other constitutions have: been adopter). The growth Of the prill clple of self-government, plante I on American soil, has been the over? shadowing political fact of the nine? teenth century. It has made this na? tion conspicuous among the nations, und given it a place in history such as no other nation lias ever enjoyed. Nothing has ben able to cheek the-on ward march of this fdon. I am not willing that tills nation shall cam aside the omnipotent weapon of truth to seize again the weapon of physical warfare-. I would not exchange the glory of this republic for the glory of all the empires that have risen and fallen since time began. The permanent chairman of the last Republican National Convention pre? sented tip. pecuniary argument in all its baldness, when he said: "We make no hypocritical pretenses of being Interested in the Philippines solely on account of others. While wo regard tin- welfare of those people as a sacred trust, we regard the welfare of the American people first. We see our duty to ourselves as well ns to others. We believe in trade expansion. By every legitimate means within tin- pro? vince of government and constitution, we mean to stimulate the expansion of our trade and open new markets." Till-: COMMERCIAL ARGUMENT. This Is the commercial argument. U Is based upon the theory that war can be rightly waged for pecuniary ad? vanl?ge, 11 mi that it Is profitable to I purchase trade by force und violence. I Franklin denied both of these proposi? tions. When Lord Lowe asserted thai : the acts of Parliament, which brought on the Revolution, were necessary to ! prevent American trade from passing into foreign channels, Franklin replied: "To me It seems that neither the ob? taining nor retaining of any trade, bow valuable soever, is an object for which m.-n may justly spill each other's blood: that the true and sure means of ex? tending ami securing commerce are the goodness and cheapness of com I moditlcs. and that the profits of no trade- can ever be equal to the expense of compelling it and holding it by ilects and armies. I consider this war against us, therefore, as both unjust ami unwise." 1 Place the philosophy of Franklin against the sordid doctrine of those who would put a price upon the life of an American soldier ami justify a war of conquest upon the ground that It will pay. The Democratic party !s in fawn- of the expansion of trade. It wotitd extend our trade by every legiti? mate ami peaceful means: but it Is not w illing to make merchandise of human blood. But a war of conquest is ns unwise as it Is unrighteous. A harbor and coal? ing station in the Philippines would answer every trade and military ne? cessity, ami such a concession could have been secured nt any time without difficulty. NOT NECESSARY To TRADE. It is not necessary to own people in order to trade with them. We carry on trade to-day with every part of the world, and our commerce has expanded ' more rapidly than the commerce of any , European empire. We do not own Japan or China, but wo trade with ; their people. We have not absorbed the republics of Central and South Amer? ica, but we trade with them. It has not been necessary to have any politi? cal connections with Canada or the na? tions of Europe In order to trade with , them. Trade cannot be permanently i profitable unless It is voluntary. When j trade Is secured by force, the cost of securing it and retninlng it must be |taken out of the profits, and the profits nro never large enough to cover the I expense. Such a system would never be defended but for the fact that Iho ?expense Is borne by all the people, while !the profits are enjoyed by the few. I Imperialism would be profitable to i the army contractors: it would be pro? fitable to the ship-owners, who would ! carry live soldiers to the Philippines ! and bring dead soldiers back: it would j be profitable to those who would sieze I upon the franchises, and it would be ! profitable to the officials whose salaries i would he fixed here nnd paid over I there: but to the farmer, to the labor i ing man. and to the vert majority of 1 tho^e engaged in other occupations. It ! would bring expenditure without re? turn nnd risk without reward. Farmers and laboring men have, as ; a rule, small Incomes, nnd. under sys I terns which place the tax upon con I sumption, pay more than their fair i share of the expenses of government. I Thus, the very people who receive) ! least benefit from Imperialism will be Injured most by tho m'.'Jtary burdens j which accompany it. EVILS TUB FARMER SHARES. In addition to the evils which he and the farmer share In common, the la? boring man will be the first to suffer If Oriental subjects seek; work In the United States; tho first to Buffer If American capital leaves our shores to employ Oriental labor In the Philip? pines to supply the trade of China and Japan; the first to suffer from the vio? lence which tho military spirit arouses, and the first to suffer when the methods of Imperialism are applied to our own government. It is not strange, therefore, that the labor organizations have been quick to note the approach of these dangers and prompt to protest against both militarism und Imperialism. THE RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT. The pecuniary argument, though more effective with certain classes, Is not likely to be used so often or pre? sented with so much emphasis as the religious argument. If what has been termed the "gun-powder gospel" were used against tho Filipinos only. It would be a sufficient answer to say that a majority of the Filipinos are now members of one branch of the Christian church; but the principle In? volved is one of much wider applica? tion and challenges serious considera? tion. The religious argument varies in po slttveness from a passive belief that Providence delivered the Filipinos Into our hands for their good and our glory, to the exultation of the minister, who said that we ought to "thrash tho natives (Filipinos) until they under? stand who wo are," and that "every bullet sent, every cannon shot and flag waved means righteousness." We cannot approve of this doctrine In one place unless we are willing to apply It everywhere If there Is pol son in the blood of the hand It will ul? timately reach the heart. It Is equally true that forcible Christianity, if planted under tho American flag In the far-away Orient, will sooner or later be transplanted upon American soli. If true Christianity consists In carry? ing ..tit In our dally lives the teach? ings of Christ, who will say that we are commanded to civilize with dyna? mite and proselyte with the sword? He who would declare tho Divine will must prove bis authority clthor by Holy Writ or by evidence of a special dispensation. The command, "Go yo Into all the world and preach the gos? pel to every creature" has no galling gun attachment. When Jesus visited a village of Samaria and the people re? fused to receive Him, some of the dis? ciples suggested that fire should be called down from heaven to avenge the Insult; but the Master rebuked them, and said; ' Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of; for the Son of Man Is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." Suppose ho bad said: "We will thrash them until they understand who we ate," how dlf r< rent would have been the history of Christinn I ty. Compare, If you will, the swaggering, bullying, brutal doctrine of Imperialism with the Golden Rule and the commandment, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor us thyself." LOVE THE NAZARBNE'S WEAPON. Love, not force, was the weapon of the Nazarene; sacrifice for others, not the exploitation of them, was His method of reaching the human heart. a missionur.v recently told me that tho Stars and Snipes once t.uvcd his lire because his at s..i a.<i recognized our Hag its a Huh thai had no blood upon it. Let It be known that our mission? aries are set king souls instead of Sov? en i..lily: let It be known that Instead of being the ndwnce guard of con? quering urimes. they are going forth to In p und to uplift, having their loins girt about with truth and their feet shod with the preparation of the Gos? pel ol Pence, wearing tho breast-plate of Righteousness, and carrying tho sword of the Spirit; let It be known that they are the citizens of a nation which respects the rights of the citi? zens of other nations as carefully us it protects the rights of Its own citi? zen:-, and the welcome given to our missionaries will be more cordial than the welcome extended to the mission? aries of any other nation. Tho argument, made by some, that It was unfortunuto for the nation that it had anything to do with the Philip? pine Islands, but that the naval vic? tory at Manila made the permanent ac? quisition of those Islands nee tSdury, 1h also unround. We won a victory at Santiago, but that did not compel us to hold Cuba. The shedding of Ameri? can blood in the rhiltppine islands does not make it Imperative that wo should retain possession forever; American blood was shed at Sun Juan Hill and El Caney, ami yet the Pres Idcul has promised the Cubans inde? pendence. The fact that the American ling floats over Manila does not compel us to exercise perpetual sovereignty over lite Islands; that Mag waves over Havana to-day, yet the President has promised to haul it down when the Hag <d' He- Cuban Republic Is ready to rise in l's place. Retter a thousand times that our Hag in tho Orient give way to a Hag representing the Idea of self government than that the Hag of this Republic should become tho Hag of an empire. AN EASY SOLUTION. There is an easy, honest, honorable solution of the Philippine question. It is set forth In llio Democratic platform and it la submlttod with confidence to the American people. This plan I un? reservedly Indorse. If elected, I shall convene Congress in extraordinary ses? sion as soon as 1 am Inaugurated, and recommend an immediate declaration of lie- nation's purpose, first, to estab? lish a stable form of government in the Philippine islands, just as we are now establishing a stable 'form of govern? ment in the island of Cuba: second, to give independence to the Filipinos, Just as we have promised to give Independ? ence to (be Cubans: third, to protect ti e Fllli Inos from outside interfero.n? 2 while they work out their destiny. Just as we have protected the Republics of Cen rnl and South America, and are, by the Monroe Doctrine, pledged to protect Cuba. An European protecto? rate often results in the exploitation of the ward by tho guardian. An American protectorate gives to the na? tion protected the advantage of our strength, without making it the vic? tim of our greed. For three-quarters of a century 11..' Monroe Doctrine has bet n a shield to n-ighborlng Republics, and vet it has imposed no pecun ary burden upon us. After the Flllplnoa had aided us !n the war against Spain, we could not honorably turn them over to their former masters; we could not leave them 10 be the victims of the ambit Ions designs of the European na? tions, and since we do not desire to ke them a part of us. or to hold them ns subjects, we propose that the only alternative, namely, to give them lnd<pendence and guard them against molestation from without. A COMPLACENT PHILOSOPHY. When our opponents nro unable to defend their position by argument they fall back upon the assertion that It Is Destiny, and insist that we must sub? mit 10 it. no matter how much It vio? lates moral precepts and our principles of government. This is a complacent philosophy. It obliterates the distinc? tion between right and wrong and Continued on Page 7S