CONGRESS. (THE CUBAN AND PHILIPPINE POLICY.) 



171 



. leaders seem devoid of all gratitude to the United 

 States for the many millions of dollars \ve have 

 spent in their behali makes me suspicious of what 

 Cuba's fate may be when wholly committed to 

 their hands. 



"I want Cuba fairly treated; but I want my 

 own country fairly treated also. What have we 

 done for Cuba? We found her people dying of 

 starvation in prison pens, or slaughtered by a 

 merciless foreign soldiery ; and we have driven 

 out these soldiers, opened the prison doors, and 

 made every Cuban free, and fed them generously 

 from our own table. We found the Cubans de- 

 prived of all voice in their own government, and 

 we have turned their oppressors out of power and 

 given all of the municipal offices to the Cubans 

 themselves. 



" We found Cuba desolated by fire and sword 

 from one end of the island to the other, and we 

 have brought peace and law r and order, and opened 

 to every man full opportunity to honorably and 

 easily earn his own living. In a word, Mr. 

 Speaker, we found Cuba a hell, and we are fast 

 converting it into a paradise. 



"And shall we have no right to guard this island 

 and see to it that disorder shall not take the place 

 of order, and see to it that the island, by unwise 

 treaties, be not given over to our enemies, and to 

 see to it that the yellow fever does not use its 

 shores as a base from w r hich to invade our country 

 and destroy our people? 



"This is all that the Senate amendment pro- 

 poses to do, and if we should let Cuba go out of 

 our hands without guarantees for our. Own protec- 

 tion, we should be derelict in duty, false to our 

 own people, and deficient in that foresight which 

 belongs to prudent statesmanship. 



" Next, as to the Philippines. The Senate 

 amendment proposes to give the President gen- 

 eral authority to govern the Philippine Islands. 

 I do not propose to discuss this amendment in de- 

 tail. It is sufficient for me to call attention to the 

 fact that it is, in substance, the same as the 

 authority given by Congress to President Jeffer- 

 son to govern Louisiana, and to President Monroe 

 to govern Florida; and if it was no crime in those 

 Congresses to grant such power, surely it can be 

 no crime in this Congress. . Jefferson was the 

 founder of the Democratic party, and James Mon- 

 roe was one of its great apostles, and yet it was 

 deemed all right in their day to grant them full 

 power to govern Louisiana and Florida, then 

 newly acquired foreign territory." 



Mr. Lentz, of Ohio, said: 



" Mr. Speaker, to be or not to be free is the 

 question Cuba is asking in the beginning of 1901, 

 just as she was asking this question about three 

 years ago. But when she was asking it in 1898 

 she had in mind the question of freedom from a 

 hereditary despot. To-day asking it she has in 

 mind the tyranny of a majority, and that majority 

 having been secured by bribery and falsehood and 

 other means of corrupting the voters of the land. 

 To lie or not to lie is the question before the Ameri- 

 can people. We told Cuba and the world that our 

 war against Spain was neither for conquest nor 

 for the acquisition of territory, but purely in the 

 cause of liberty and humanity. In that declara- 

 tion we gave the Filipinos, just as much as the 

 Cubans, a bond that we would use our strong 

 arm to secure for them the right of self-govern- 

 ment. Why is it that those who are now fattening 

 in the land because this Government keeps its 

 bond to pay principal and interest on Government 

 debts express no concern or solicitude \vhatever 

 that this solemn bond should be kept, as we 

 pledged ourselves to do on that night when we 



declared that the people of Cnhii, ';ue, and of 

 right ought to be, free.' 



" I am not alone concerned ;il>onl. the suf-rilic-e of 

 our own character and reputation in tin-, betrayal 

 of the people of Cuba and of the Philippine l.-hinds, 

 but I am much more concerned about the ^i.uluul 

 dry-rot that is taking place in the American con- 

 science. We could afford to be guilty of HMO -iii< -ing 

 unnecessarily some of our young man hood, but 

 we can not afford to violate practically all of the 

 ten commandments in this brutal and murdernus 

 warfare which we are making in the Philippine 

 Islands. The lack of moral growth and the abso- 

 lute hardening and degrading of American con- 

 science that is manifest to-day is the greatest 

 menace to American liberty and American prog- 

 ress that this republic has ever seen. The en- 

 croachment made upon liberty by Nicholas Biddle 

 and his greedy associates in the days of Andrew 

 Jackson and the threatened destruction of the 

 Union by the slavocracy in the day of Abraham 

 Lincoln are diseases of minor importance when 

 compared with the tyranny and criminal aggres- 

 sion now manifest in every act and every word of 

 those w r ho favor the present policy of the Federal 

 Government." 



Mr. Littlefield, of Maine, who may be consid- 

 ered as representing more moderate opinions, said : 



" Mr. Speaker, this bill, as the House is com- 

 pelled to act upon it, is a striking illustration of 

 a most vicious and iniquitous practise in national 

 legislation. An army bill which must be passed 

 in order to provide for absolutely necessary ex- 

 penditures comes down from the Senate with a 

 large number of amendments which originated in 

 the Senate, and in order to pass the bill under the 

 rule just adopted we are compelled to vote for all 

 the amendments whether they do or do not meet 

 our approval. This is a method invariably 

 adopted for securing the passage of obnoxious 

 measures which otherwise would not meet with 

 the approval of the House. The principal measure 

 is simply used as a vessel to sustain cargoes that 

 otherwise would sink of their own weight. 



"This. bill has two amendments of great mo- 

 ment, of far-reaching consequences, that have 

 never been considered by any committee on the 

 part of the House, and must be accepted after 

 only two hours of debate. One relates to the 

 Philippine Archipelago, one to Cuba. While I 

 have grave doubts as to our constitutional right 

 to delegate legislative power, as is clearly con- 

 templated by the Philippine amendment, I should 

 vote for the bill with this amendment if I could 

 do so without at the same time being obliged to 

 vote for the Cuban amendment, in which I do not 

 believe. The Philippine amendment contemplates 

 a change from military rule to civil rule, and is 

 an advance over existing conditions. It does not 

 add to, but limits executive power. 



" I am firmly of the opinion that the person or 

 persons that may discharge the duties devolved 

 upon them by this amendment will be restrained 

 and controlled therein by all of the constitutional 

 limitations and guarantees protecting life, liberty, 

 and property. I do not for a moment believe that 

 they can, even if they desired, exercise absolute, 

 arbitrary, autocratic power. We may have occa- 

 sion to remember that by this amendment we 

 legislate for the Philippines. While I should vote 

 for this amendment if it stood alone, I believe that 

 a form of Territorial government following the 

 lines of the Territorial governments created for 

 Louisiana in 1804 and Florida in 1822, would, 

 from every consideration, be much more desirable. 

 It would commit us to nothing to which this 

 amendment does not commit us, and it could not 



