200 



CONGRESS. (ACQUISITION OF TERRITORY.) 



" Assume that we import an alien and novel 

 people numbering 10,000,000. Whether they are 

 to be citizens or are not to be such dropping 

 that branch of the inquiry they are at least 

 brought within ^ - TT - :i - 1 *~*~ w < 



the United States. We are re- 



sponsible for them to the world, and they are to 

 some extent supposed to be burdens to us. What 

 advantage can they be to this republic? Can they 

 furnish us anything that will tend to make us 

 more stable, more civilized, more enlightened? 

 Clearly not. Do we offer them a government of 

 their choice? Do they petition us asking that we 

 receive them? Do they seek for themselves and 

 their posterity the benefits of our civilization? 

 No; they repudiate our attempt to govern them; 

 they demand that they shall be permitted to fol- 

 low* their own way ; they insist they should solve 

 domestic and governmental issues for themselves, 

 and that they ought to be allowed to at least 

 experiment as to whether they are or are not com- 

 petent to sustain a government adapted to their 

 wants. They even intimate that we are to join 

 in international land grabbing, and that the Span- 

 ish war was for conquest not for humanity's 

 sake. 



" Mr. President, ought we to grant the Filipino 

 an opportunity? If we say that he is not fitted 

 to govern himself, by what process of reasoning 

 can we reach the conclusion that therefore, and 

 on that account, we ought to absorb him, espe- 

 cially when we announce in advance that we are 

 not acquiring possessions for the purpose of do- 

 minion or statehood? 



" When the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Vest] 

 and other Senators ask whether these people are 

 competent for admission into the family of States, 

 a negative response is at once heard. It is inti- 

 mated that perhaps they will be fitted ' some 

 day.' It is averred that if we can hold them at 

 all there is no limit capable of exact measure- 

 ment, and that therefore we may retain them 

 in our discretion even forever. We may never 

 determine, it is said, that they are of the elect 

 worthy of emancipation. Herein lurks the 

 danger of any assumption of responsibility." 



Mr. Carter, of Montana, argued against the 

 good policy of discussing such resolutions or vot- 

 ing on them while the treaty of peace was still 

 to be adopted : 



" Mr. President, I take direct issue with the 

 proposition that public interest, sound public 

 policy, or any aspect of the existing situation re- 

 quires or justifies a vote on any of these resolu- 

 tions at this session of Congress. We have here 

 presented a series of resolutions. That of the 

 Senator from Missouri brings up a question of 

 constitutional limitation upon the power of the 

 Federal Government to do or not to do certain 

 things set forth in the resolution. It is neither 

 useful nor is it at present necessary for the Senate 

 of the United States or the Congress of the coun- 

 try, if you please, to indulge in constitutional 

 interpretations. The theory of the Senator from 

 Missouri was evidently present in the mind of 

 every Senator who prepared a resolution touch- 

 ing this general question. The theory of those 

 who seek a vote on these resolutions is that be- 

 fore peace can be concluded with the Kingdom of 

 Spain under the terms of the pending treaty the 

 United States Senate must vote a want of confi- 

 dence in the judgment, the discretion, the honor, 

 and the integrity of the American people. 



" It is apprehended by those who seek the pres- 

 ent consideration of these resolutions that a Con- 

 gress to assemble hereafter to deal with the terri- 

 torial acquisitions that may fall to us under and 

 by virtue of the treaty under consideration may 



depart from the traditions of our country, the- 

 traditions of our race, the letter and spirit of our 

 written Constitution, and launch the people of 

 the United States upon a wild and shoreless sea 

 of universal expansion, attended with tyranny 

 and oppression wherever the flag may go. Mr. 

 President, if such disposition should unhappily 

 be developed in this country, written constitu- 

 tions will not long restrain it, and resolutions of 

 Congress or of either branch will be but as ropes 

 of sand to stay the mighty tide. 



" The treaty under consideration requires no 

 interpretation of the purpose of the Government 

 of the United States or the people with reference 

 to the future of the Philippine Islands. Our fore- 

 fathers were compelled to meet the question of 

 the future disposition of populations at the time 

 of the ratification of the treaty of 1803, whereby 

 Louisiana was ceded to the United States. By 

 an article in that treaty it was expressly pro- 

 vided that the people of the territory annexed 

 should ultimately become entitled to and partici- 

 pate in all the privileges, benefits, and rights of 

 American citizens. 



" The same is true in reference to a clause in 

 the treaty of cession by Mexico, adopted in 1848. 

 By Article IX of that treaty it was provided that 

 any citizen of the republic of Mexico residing 

 w r ithin the territory ceded might within the period 

 of one year elect to retain his citizenship in the 

 republic of Mexico or become a citizen of the 

 United States. After the lapse of the year, ac- 

 cording to the terms of the treaty, the individuals 

 residing within the ceded territory, now known 

 as New Mexico, Arizona, and California, became 

 entitled to full participation in and enjoyment 

 of the rights and privileges of citizens of the 

 United States. In the pending treaty no such 

 provision occurs. Under its terms the mere sov- 

 ereignty of Spain is ceded to the republic of the 

 United States. There is no promise in the treaty 

 to Spain, there is no obligation existing to any 

 power whatever to dispose of the Philippine terri- 

 tory or the people residing therein save and ex- 

 cept as the enlightened judgment and acute con- 

 science of the people of the United States may 

 in the future direct. 



" Mr. President, the people of this country will 

 be as good a class of people twelve months hence 

 as they are to-day, and, according to our gen- 

 eral theories of progression, they may be a better 

 class of people. The Congress of the country 

 will probably be as safe a body, all things con- 

 sidered, as the present Congress. By what right, 

 or authority, for what useful purpose, is this- 

 Congress now sitting, soon to expire, to under- 

 take to tie the arms of the Government or to 

 mortgage the privileges of the future, to under- 

 take to limit the sphere of usefulness or the field 

 of legitimate action for a Congress that is to 

 follow? There is nothing in this treaty that re- 

 quires it. By virtue of the ratification of the 

 treaty the Government of the United States will 

 be left without restraint of any kind, character, 

 or description with reference to the Philippine 

 Islands and the people who inhabit that archi- 

 pelago. For what needful purpose then, Mr. 

 President, does the present Congress insist upon 

 the determination of a policy to be pursued in 

 those islands? " 



Mr. McEnery, of Louisiana, presented Feb. 6, 

 in the Senate, the following joint resolution: 



" Resolved by the Senate and House of Repre- 

 sentatives of the United States of America in 

 Congress assembled, That by the ratification of 

 the treaty of peace with Spain, it is not intended 

 to incorporate the inhabitants of the Philippine- 



