LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 ii nil ill i in i hi! 
 
 027 531 526 6 , 
 
r £;sv& 
 
 
 DS 681 
 
 r- 5 
 
 .U4 C6 
 Copy 1 
 
 Policy Relative to the Philippine Islands. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 HON. ALEXANDER S. CLAY, 
 
 of georgia, 
 
 In the Senate of the United States, 
 
 Thursday, March 1, 1900, 
 
 On the joint resolution (S. R. 53) defining the policy of the United States rela- 
 tive to the Philippine Islands, introduced by Mr. Beveridge January 4, 
 1900, as follows: 
 "A joint resolution (S. R. 53) defining the policy of the United States relative 
 to the Philippine Islands. 
 "Resolved bxj the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of 
 America in Congress assembled, That the Philippine Islands are territory be- 
 longing to the United States; that it is the intention of the United States to 
 retain them as such and to establish and maintain such governmental control 
 throughout the archipelago as the situation may demand." 
 
 Mr. CLAY said: 
 
 Mr. President: In addressing myself to the resolutions which 
 have just been read. I speak from the standpoint of one who voted 
 in favor of the ratification of the treaty. The remarks which I 
 shall make, however, will be perfectly consistent with the views 
 I entertained and expressed before and at the time the treaty was 
 ratified. The reasons which induced me to cast that vote were 
 fully explained at the time, and I do not deem it necessary lo reit- 
 erate those views. I took occasion then to announce on the floor 
 of the Senate that I favored a declaration on the part of Congress 
 setting forth fully that it was not the purpose of our Government 
 to hold and govern the Philippine Islands permanently against the 
 consent of their population, but, on the contrary, we should give 
 to them every assurance by legislative action that our purpose 
 was to grant them independence and to assist them in forming a 
 government which shall be free and independent, one suitable to 
 their conditions and surroundings, one capable of maintaining 
 law and order, one fully capable of discnarging international obli- 
 gations, and a government that would enable them to realize the 
 best aspirations of the people of those islands. 
 
 During the discussion of the treaty no Senator, so far as I re- 
 memberT belonging to either political party contended on the floor 
 of the Senate that our Government should permanently retain 
 these islands and govern them against the will of the inhabitants. 
 If such a purpose was entertained by either the President or any 
 member of the Senate, no expression indicating such purpose can 
 be found in the record of the public debates or in any official 
 paper from the executive branch of the Government. 
 
 1 remember well the substance of an expression that came from 
 the senior Senator from Ohio [Mr. ForakerJ , and which appar- 
 ently met the approval of those most ardently in favor of the rati- 
 4273 1 
 
 
2 
 
 fication of the treaty. The Congressional Record contains the 
 language of the honorable Senator. I repeat his exact words: 
 
 I do not understand anybody to be proposing to take the Philippine Islands 
 with the idea and view of permanently holding them and denying to the peo- 
 ple there the right to have a government of their own, if they are capable of 
 it and want to establish it. I do not understand that anybody wants to do 
 that. I have not heard of anybody who wants to do that. The President of 
 the United States does not, I know, and no Senator in this Chamber has made 
 any such statement. 
 
 Now, mark you, Mr. President, this is very strong language, 
 coming from the distinguished Senator from Ohio, the home of 
 the President, and used on the floor of the Senate just before the 
 vote was taken on the ratification of the treaty. Mark you. the 
 Senator declared that he knew that the President of the United 
 States did not intend permanently to hold these islands and to 
 deny to the people the right to have a government of their own. 
 
 The junior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Lodge] delivered 
 an eloquent and forcible speech in favor of the ratification of the 
 treaty. 
 
 I have taken the trouble to read it most carefully, and the lan- 
 guage used upon the occasion could have but one interpretation. 
 After the treaty was ratified, his views, as expressed at that time, 
 were in favor of legislation by Congress granting to the Filipinos 
 the right of self-government. To show that my construction of 
 his language is correct, I quote from his speech delivered in the 
 Senate his exact language as to the future government of the 
 Filipinos. He said: 
 
 Suppose we ratify the treaty. The islands pass from the possession of 
 Spain into our possession without committing us to any policy. I believe we 
 shall have the wisdom »ot to attempt to incorporate those islands with our 
 body politic or make their inhabitants a part of our citizenship. I believe 
 we shall have the wisdom, the self-restraint, and the ability to restore peace 
 and order in those islands and give their people the opportunity for self-gov- 
 ernment and for freedom under the protecting shield of the United States 
 until the time shall come when they shall stand alone. 
 
 The junior Senator from Massachusetts also said in the same 
 speech: 
 
 I want no subject races and no vassal States. That we had by the fortunes 
 of war assumed a great responsibility in the Philippines; that we ought to 
 give to those people an opportunity for freedom, for peace, and for self-gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 I waut to get this country out of war and back to peace. I want to get the 
 disposition and control of the Philippines out of the hands of the war power 
 and place them where they belong— in the hands of Congress and the Presi- 
 dent. I want to enter into a policy that shall enable us to give peace and 
 self-government to the natives of those islands. The rejection of the treaty 
 makes all of these things impossible. 
 
 Every Senator who spoke in favor of the ratification of the 
 treaty in legislative sessions except' two, who delivered constitu- 
 tional arguments, contended at that time that Congress should 
 take action in favor of self-government for the Filipinos after the 
 treaty was ratified. The senior Senator from Colorado, who was 
 an able and earnest advocate of the ratification of the treaty, took 
 strong grounds at that time in favor of future action by Congress 
 granting independence to these people. He said: 
 
 There are few people in the world incapable of self-government. I be- 
 lieve the people of Luzon are capable of self-government now. I beliove the 
 people of some of the islands are. I do not know but all are. Mr. President, 
 I keep in view this truth which I have stated, which I believe to bo a truth, 
 that the people are entitled to a government of their own making, and that 
 we have no right to say, " Your standard is so low you will create a govern- 
 ment which we can not affirm; therefore you can not have a government of 
 your own." They are entitled to only such a government as they themselves 
 can maintain; it must be one producing order and protection to persons and 
 property, for otherwise it is not a government at all. 
 4273 
 

 This is not all lie said. He continued: 
 
 We shall make a mistake if we make up our minds that we are going to 
 govern these people from here, that wo are going to govern them with Anglo- 
 Saxons whom we send out there from hore to administer the affairs of that 
 country. You will need 50,0U0 soldiers; in a little while you will need more, 
 for they are a great people. They are a poople who are willing to contend 
 for their liberty, and I believe it also to be an axiom that a people who will 
 fight for their liberty and who are willing to die for it are capable of main- 
 taining it. 
 
 To further demonstrate that those.who contended that the treaty- 
 should be ratified gave assurances immediately afterwards that 
 legislation would follow declaring it our purpose to deal with 
 these people as we had dealt with Cuba, I quote from the speech 
 of the junior Senator from Colorado, who said: 
 
 There are no questions, Mr. President, raised by these resolutions or their 
 amendments that could not be equally well and satisfactorily dealt with 
 after the treaty shall have been ratified. 
 
 The senior Senator from New York, who made a' speech in favor 
 of the ratification of the treaty, declared in the same speech that 
 there was no reason why an American Senator should misunder- 
 stand that we would approach the Philippine problem with any 
 other than the most benevolent intentions concerning the Fili- 
 pinos and their future. He said in substance that there is no 
 American in all this broad land who wishes any other fate to any 
 single native of the Philippine Islands than his free enjoyment of 
 a prosperous life. 
 
 In the exciting debate on the resolution declaring war against 
 the Government of Spain the senior Senator from Vermont, who 
 had just returned from the island of Cuba, delivered a remarkable 
 speech on the situation in that island, in which he said: 
 
 I am not in favor of annexation, not because I would apprehend any par- 
 ticular trouble from it, but because it is not a wise policy to take in any people 
 of foreign tongue and training and without strong guiding American ele- 
 
 The distinguished senior Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Thurs- 
 ton], speaking on the same subject, declared that— 
 
 I am unalterably opposed to any departure from the declared policy of the 
 fathers, which would start this Republic, for the first time, upon a career of 
 conquest and dominion, utterly at variance with the avowed purpose and 
 manifest destiny of our republican Government. 
 
 If such strong language could be used in regard to the popula- 
 tion of Cuba, how much stronger would be the force of an argu- 
 ment against the permanent retention of the population of the 
 Philippine Islands. If the views of Senators are consistent with 
 utterances heretofore made on the floor of the Senate, a majority 
 of the members of the Senate are against the permanent retention 
 of the Philippine Islands. The counsel and wisdom of President 
 Garfield was at one time highly esteemed by the Republican party. 
 Would it not be well for us to reflect and remember that he said: 
 
 We occupy a portion of the great North American zone which girdles the 
 world, and which has been the theater of the greatest achievements of civili- 
 zation, especially in the history of the Anglo-Saxon races, but should we ex- 
 tend our possessions into the tropical belt we would weaken the power of 
 our Government. 
 
 During the debate on the ratification of the treaty the senior 
 Senator from Delaware, probably closer to the Administration at 
 that time than any other Democratic Senator, speaking of these 
 islands, said: 
 
 Now we have them, it does not follow that we are committed to a colonial 
 policy or to a violation of those great principles of liberty and self-govern- 
 4273 
 
ment which must always remain American ideals if our own free institutions 
 are to endure. No country, and this country least of all, can afford to tram- 
 ple on its ideals. I have no fear that it will do so. 
 
 The distinguished Senator did not stop here, he went further: 
 
 I assure you, with some knowledge of whereof I speak, that the President 
 is committed to no policy calculated to discourage, much less strike down, 
 the aspirations of liberty-loving people all over the world. 
 
 The Senator was a member of the Peace Commission negotiating 
 the terms of peace at Paris, and was an earnest, able, influential 
 Senator in favor of the ratification of the treaty. At that time 
 all those who spoke for ratification took the position that when 
 Spain relinquished her sovereignty over the Philippine Islands and 
 ceded them to the United States such a course cleared the way 
 for the recognition of a Philippine republic by our Government. 
 
 No one contended that such ratification precluded our Govern- 
 ment from taking immediate action favorable to the independence 
 of those people, but, on the contrary, freed us from complications 
 with Spain, settled the war, and thus cleared the way for favor- 
 able action by Congress for the future government of the Filipinos. 
 It is only of recent date that the secret purpose of those who now 
 declare that our Government shall change the policy of a lifetime 
 and deprive the people of their long-cherished hopes, has been 
 known to have existed from the beginning. I cast my vote in favor 
 of a declaration of policy looking forward to the independence of 
 these people, and subsequent events have demonstrated that we 
 made a serious blunder when we failed to pass such a resolution. 
 But, Mr. President, I do not care to devote too much of my time 
 to the past, but it is essential to understand the past in order to 
 prepare for the future. Let us trace the interesting history of our 
 connections with the Philippine people since the commencement 
 of the war with Spain, and let us see what were our relations 
 with this people from the time we met them until the breach 
 occurred, and" let us probe to the bottom and ascertain the causes 
 which led to hostilities, and then let us see, even at this late day, 
 if we can not apply a remedy that is just, that will restore peace 
 and preserve our honor and free institutions, and at the same time 
 grant justice to a struggling, helpless people. 
 
 Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet May 1, 1898. The city of 
 Manila surrendered to our Government on August 13 following. 
 The treaty of peace was ratified February 6, 1899. It has been 
 more than twelve months since the ratification took place, and 
 while it was openly avowed by those who led the fight in favor of 
 ratification that so soon as the treaty was ratified then would be the 
 time for Congress to take action for an independent government 
 for these people, not a word or line has come from them fulfilling 
 this promise!" They now have changed their plans and openly 
 avow that we shall maintain permanent dominion over the islands 
 and govern them forever as our dependencies by Americans and 
 absolutely denying them the right of seli'-government. No fair 
 and impartial mind can reach any other conclusion than that the 
 want of a fixed and just policy in keeping with the principles of 
 our Government, pointing out the manner in which we intended 
 to deal with this people, showing that we were a just and liberty- 
 loving people, is the prime cause of all the trouble heretofore and 
 now existing between the insurgents and our Government. 
 
 I have already said that Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet May 
 1, 1898. When'he was ordered to Manila the common American 
 mind knew scarcely anything about the Philippine Islands and 
 their population. We knew nothing about the relations existing 
 
 4273 
 
between the Government of Spain and these people. We soon 
 ascertained that practically the same condition of affairs existed 
 between the Filipinos and Spain that existed between Cuba and 
 the Government of Spain. We soon learned that the Filipinos 
 for hundreds of years had been rebelling against the Government 
 of Spain and were now, like the Cubans, righting for their inde- 
 pendence. A temporary peace had been made and the leader of 
 the insurgents was then in exile, but in reality a condition of war 
 existed between the insurgents and the Government of Spain. In 
 tracing our relations with this people let us remember that shortly 
 after Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet our consul-general, Mr. 
 Pratt, wired the Secretary of State, Mr. Day, after holding a con- 
 sultation with General Aguinaldo, that Aguinaldo, at his (Mr. 
 Pratt *s) instance, had gone to Manila to organize an insurgent 
 army to crush the Government of Spain on those islands and to 
 arrange with Dewey for cooperation with the insurgents. He 
 also wired, at the same time, Commodore Dewey that General 
 Aguinaldo would go to Manila and cooperate with American 
 forces if desired. We all know that Dewey replied promptly: 
 
 Tell Aguinaldo to come as soon as possible. 
 
 Our consul-general assured the Secretary of State that this in- 
 surgent leader was a man of ability and courage and worthy of the 
 confidence that had been placed in him. General Otis tells us 
 that the insurgent forces entered the city of Manila with our 
 troops on August 13— the day the city surrendered— and held joint 
 occupation with our forces. Up to this period the most cordial 
 and friendly relations existed between the insurgents and our sol- 
 diers. Both made common cause of battle against the ai my of 
 Spain. The leaders of the insurgents spoke most touchingly and 
 feelingly of the services rendered the Filipinos by the Americans. 
 They openly avowed that the Americans, not from mercenary 
 motives, but for the sake of humanity and the lamentations of so 
 many persecuted people, have considered it opportune "to extend 
 their protecting mantle to our beloved country." 
 
 They spoke of Americans as their brothers and as their liber- 
 ators. These people expressed to the United States, time and 
 again, their deep and sincere gratitude for the efficient and disin- 
 terested protection which our country had given them to help 
 them shake off the yoke of the cruel and corrupt Spanish domina- 
 tion. Thus far, at every stage of our intercourse with these peo- 
 ple, the most amicable relations existed, and there was not the 
 least possible friction. Even as late as the 22d of October, 1898, 
 the insurgents declared that more than ever the Filipinos desired 
 to live in peace and perfect harmony with the Americans. Their 
 leaders declared that when it was possible for a formal conven- 
 tion to pacify and harmonize the interests of the two peoples, 
 then the suspicion of the masses of the insurgents would disappear. 
 Actual hostilities between the insurgents and our army did not 
 commence until February 5, 1899, the day before the peace treaty 
 was ratified. 
 
 Let us, however, Mr. President, not forget that our Govern- 
 ment knew before the army of the insurgents cooperated with 
 our soldiers to destroy Spanish sovereignty in those islands that 
 the Filipinos aspired to independence. At every step in the his- 
 tory of the cooperation of the American and insurgent forces the 
 representatives of our Government were put on notice that the 
 Filipino people would expect and demand at the hands of Ameri- 
 cans their absolute freedom and independence when the Spanish 
 
 " 4373 
 
6 
 
 Government ceased to have authority and jurisdiction over the 
 islands. General Otis said to them: "I will assure the people 
 of the Philippine Islands the full measure of individual rights 
 and liberties which is the heritage of a free people." Every com- 
 munication addressed to our consuls or generals put our Govern- 
 ment on notice that the Filipino people would never be satisfied 
 with anything less than absolute independence. We knew this 
 fact when Aguinaldo was landed in our war ship. We knew it 
 when we asked him to organize the insurgent forces and to coop- 
 erate with our Army. We knew it when both armies cooperated 
 together and forced the surrender of the city of Manila, and the 
 leaders of the insurgents were encouraged by the representatives 
 of our Government, especially by Consul-General Pratt and our 
 consul, Mr. Williams, as well as by General Anderson and Gen- 
 eral Otis. 
 
 While it is true that Secretary Day notified the representatives 
 of our Government not to enter into any alliance with the insur- 
 gents which might in any way complicate our Government and 
 disavowed such acts of our representatives, these facts were never 
 communicated to the leaders of the insurgents. Silence upon the 
 part of our Government under such circumstances was calculated 
 to lead the Filipino people to expect that their most cherished 
 hopes would be realized, and good faith on the part of our Gov- 
 ernment demands that we shall not in any manner thwart their 
 laudable aspirations. 
 
 Mr. President, why did the Filipino people become suspicious 
 of the Americans? Why did the suspicion ripen into anger and 
 hate, culminating in open hostilities between the insurgents and 
 our soldiers, resulting in the loss of many precious lives and the 
 expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars? Could Congress 
 have, by a timely, wise, and conservative course, prevented this 
 deplorable condition of affairs? Can Congress now, by prompt and 
 decisive action, preserve the honor of our Government, save un- 
 tarnished our free institutions, and at the same time put an end 
 to this war? 
 
 I will confess that the complications are more serious at this 
 time than they were on the 6th of February last, but still prompt 
 action upon our part even at this late hour will solve this complex 
 problem. Mr. President, I do not insist that all of the suspicions 
 the Philippine people entertained against our Government were 
 well founded, but we must remember that these people had been 
 oppressed by the Spanish Government for nearly three hundred 
 years. They were suspicious, jealous, almost crushed, and dis- 
 trustful, and a brave, generous, and patriotic people like the 
 Americans should have made proper allowances for their many 
 weaknesses. Intelligent and thoughtful public officials of our 
 Government should have taken into consideration all the surround- 
 ings of these people— their prejudices and peculiar environments— 
 in every step taken after we landed upon these islands until all 
 differences between the insurgents and our Government had been 
 fully settled. But I must answer the question, Why did they 
 become suspicious and turn from friend to enemy? 
 
 I will let one speak in answer to this question, an American 
 general, who was on the islands, came in contact with these peo- 
 ple daily, was fully acquainted with their habits and aspirations. 
 He certainly ought to be better authority on this subject than the 
 eloquent junior Senator from Indiana, who spent a few weeks 
 conversing with the Filipinos within the ranks of our own Army, 
 
 4373 
 
and who knows absolutely nothing of the rural population or those 
 in rebellion against our Government. General Otis ought to be 
 good authority on this subject. After going on to state that the 
 Filipino people had grown more suspicious of the friendly char- 
 acter of the Americans and were gradually becoming hostile to 
 our soldiers and Government, he summarizes the causes of their 
 gradual estrangement to our soldiers and Government, and he 
 tells us— 1 quote his exact words: 
 
 Repeated conferences were held by us with influencial insurgents, whose 
 chief aim appeared to be to obtain some authoritative expression on the 
 intent of the United States with regard to the Philippines, and complained bit- 
 terly that they were unable to discover anyone who could speak ex-cathedra. 
 They asserted that theirs was a government de facto, which had the right to 
 ask an expression of intent from the United States Government. 
 
 They insisted after the war was over and Spain ceded the is- 
 lands to the United States that they wanted an expression on the 
 part of our Government as to what disposition we proposed to 
 make of them — what assistance we proposed to give them in or- 
 ganizing a government. They asked specially that we deal with 
 them in the same friendly and magnanimous way in which we 
 declared we would deal with Cuba. They did not insist that we 
 withdraw our Army or our Navy from those islands. All they 
 asked was an expression of opinion on the part of our Govern- 
 ment that, we intended to grant them independence and self- 
 government. They complained that the United States offered 
 nothing advantageous to the Filipinos, who had expended so much 
 blood and treasure for their independence. They began to have 
 suspicions that the United States were to replace the odious domi- 
 nation which Spain had exercised for centuries. 
 
 They discussed among themselves the silence on the part of our 
 Government as to the course we intended to pursue, and, whether 
 right or wrong, they reached the conclusion that they had ex- 
 changed a Spanish for an American master. General Otis tells 
 us again that the masses of these people believe that certain words, 
 as " sovereignty of the United States, "had peculiar meaning disas- 
 trous to their welfare and significant of future political domina- 
 tion like that from which they, had been recently freed; that this 
 arose because they insisted that the United States had not shown 
 by affirmative action the policy we intended to pursue toward 
 them. Trace, if you will, the reports of every respectable repre- 
 sentative of our Government from the time Dewey won his fa- 
 mous naval victory till the conflict between the insurgents and 
 our soldiers, and but one conclusion can be reached, and that con- 
 clusion is that the great bulk of the Filipino people are a unit 
 against annexation and in favor of a Filipino government, formed 
 and put in operation by their own people. Mr. Wilcox, paymaster 
 in the United States Navy, also Mr. Sergeant, whose high char- 
 acter is vouched for by Admiral Dewey, tell us that there is much 
 variety of feeling among the Filipinos with regard to the debt of 
 gratitude they owe the United States. 
 
 In every town they said we found those who said our nation saved 
 them from slavery and others who claimed that without our inter- 
 ference their independence would have been won. These same 
 gentlemen tell us that on one point, however, they are united, 
 viz, that whatever our Government may have done for them it 
 has not gained the right to take their islands and annex them. 
 General Otis tells us in his reports that this feeling is so strong 
 among the natives that even the women gave him to understand 
 that after all the men were killed off the islands they were prepared 
 4273 
 
to shed their patriotic blood for the liberty and independence of their 
 country. In the same connection he says the leaders of the in- 
 surgents have made repeated efforts to secure some marks of rec- 
 ognition for their government from American authorities, that 
 their cry for liberty and independence and the vile aspersions of 
 the motives of the United States have stirred up distrust and fear 
 of the Americans. They claim not to understand the silence on 
 the part of our Government. 
 
 Our paymasters of the Navy, Mr. Willcox and Mr. Sergeant, 
 who traveled more than 600 miles through these islands, coming 
 in daily contact with the natives, and traversing more than seven 
 provinces, endeavoring to obtain an accurate account of the re- 
 sources of the country as well as to familiarize themselves with 
 the habits, disposition, intelligence, and every possible character- 
 istic of the people, make a report worthy of the thoughtful con- 
 sideration of every patriotic, liberty-loving American. In describ- 
 ing the sentiment among those people toward Americans they 
 said: Already the hope was fading that freedom from Spain meant 
 freedom of government; that the feeling toward Americans was 
 changing, and we saw its effect in the cold manner of the people 
 and in their evident desire to hustle us along by the most direct 
 road to Manila. These gentlemen tell us that at first these people 
 had absolute confidence in Americans and hailed us as the cham- 
 pions of liberty. Gradually they drifted away from us, lost con- 
 fidence in our patriotic purposes, all because the American Gov- 
 ernment gave them no positive assurance of final independence. 
 
 If every voter of the United States could read and understand 
 the desire and struggles of these oppressed people, their appeals 
 to us for that liberty for which our fathers fought, the tyranny 
 and oppression which they had suffered and endured at the hands 
 of Spain, and could then pursue closely their conduct and deport- 
 ment from the surrender of Manila till hostilities begun, the 
 American people, true to the traditions of our fathers, would 
 grant to them, not grudgingly, but cheerfully and willingly, 
 justice, liberty, and the right of self-government. I assert now, 
 after careful consideration of the reports of Generai Otis, General 
 Merritt, Admiral Dewey, as well as the reports of every other re- 
 spectable representative our Government had on those islands, 
 that hostilities could have been prevented if our Government at 
 the proper time had given positive assurances that we intended that 
 this people should be free and independent. Congress has now 
 been in session for months. The President said that this prob- 
 lem was one for Congress to solve. If we adjourn without taking 
 action, those who have charge of the Government and are respon- 
 sible for its administration will not only be responsible for the 
 continuation of this war, but will by their silence have continued 
 the perpetration of an irreparable wrong upon a helpless, strug- 
 gling people, and will have traduced the good name and character 
 of a Republic that has illustrated constitutional freedom in all its 
 beneficence and power and which has always been our priceless 
 inheritance. 
 
 Mr. Burke, in his celebrated speech in favor of conciliation 
 with America, declared that when England crushed out the aspira- 
 tion of her colonies for liberty she struck a serious blow at her 
 own institutions. Who can forget the famous words of the im- 
 mortal Burke, when he said: 
 
 For in order to prove that the Americans have no right to their liberties, 
 we are every dav endeavoring to subvert the maxims which preserve the 
 whole spirit of our own. To prove that the Americans ought not to be free, 
 4273 
 
we are obliged to depreciate the value of freedom itself ; and we never seem 
 to gain a paltry advantage over them in debate without attacking some of 
 those principles or deriding some of those feelings for which our ancestors 
 have shed their blood. 
 
 Will not Americans endanger the free institutions of America 
 and depreciate the value of freedom and republican institutions 
 when we wrench from 10,000,000 people their country and ar- 
 rogate to ourselves the right to appoint their public officers, to 
 make and execute their laws, against the will and consent of the 
 inhabitants? These islands contain a population more than three 
 , times as large as ours when we won our independence from Eng- 
 land. Do you suppose this vast population will consent for the 
 United States to appoint their officers, to own their country, to 
 make and execute their laws without a struggle for years? If 
 you do you have not been observant of the history of nations. 
 The senior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] told us the 
 other day that God made all nations of the world capable of 
 being influenced by the sam motives, and that the love of liberty 
 does'not depend upon the color of the skin, but depends on hu- 
 manity. The Senator declared that these people were God's chil- 
 dren, and that a universal Father had implanted in their bosoms 
 the same love of liberty and justice that we possess. The senti- 
 ments so beautifully expressed ought to find a ready response in 
 the hearts of the American people. 
 
 I believe, even at this very hour, if Congress, with the approval 
 of the President, will declare that the United States will assure 
 the people of the Philippine Islands the full measure of individual 
 rights and liberties which is the heritage of a free people, this wise, 
 just, and friendly action will immediately end the war and secure 
 to us the lasting gratitude and the honorable friendship of this 
 people. If such action fails to accomplish this purpose, then we 
 shall have done our duty and our course will be in keeping with 
 reason and justice. In the solution of this question we are bound 
 to consider the temper and character of these people. A love of 
 freedom is the predominating feature which marks their lives since 
 their early history; they are suspicious and restive, especially 
 whenever they believe an attempt is being made to deprive them 
 of self-government. These facts must be taken into consideration 
 in dealing with these people. 
 
 Two remarkable speeches have been made on the other side of 
 this question, one by the junior Senator from Indiana, discussing 
 the commercial side of this question, and the other by the junior 
 Senator from Vermont, reviewing the situation from a legal and 
 constitutional standpoint. Together they reached the conclusion 
 that these islands are a rich and promising country, that the 
 United States must keep and govern them forever, and can do so 
 without any constitutional limitations whatever. The Senator 
 from Indiana spoke eloquently of the salubrity of the climate, 
 fertility of the soil, and the great mineral wealth of these posses- 
 sions, but in the same connection he tells us that the ten millions 
 of people who inhabit these islands are a barbarous race. Con- 
 tinuing his remarks, he says the Filipino is the South Sea Malay 
 put through a process of three hundred years of superstition and 
 religion, dishonesty in dealing, disorder in habits of industry, and 
 cruelty, caprice, and corruption in government. He does not stop 
 here; he gives it as his own belief that there are not a hundred 
 men among this vast population capable of comprehending what 
 Anglo-Saxon government means. 
 
 If the Senator's information be reliable, does he calculate for a 
 minute what a responsibility our Government assumes when we 
 4273 
 
10 
 
 become responsible for the future government of this barbarous 
 and ignorant race on the other side of the world, 10,000 miles away 
 from our Capitol; especially, Mr. President, when this people 
 have been conquered by our soldiers and have become embittered 
 against the American people and look upon us with the same 
 jealousy and hatred they have so long cherished toward Spain? 
 Why, the eloquent Senator tells us that these people have fought 
 Spain so long for their liberty that insurrection has become a 
 fixed habit with them. 
 
 Did the Senator ever contemplate that when we take the islands, 
 together with their rivers, harbors, their minerals, and all the 
 wealth so graphically pointed out by him, we necessarily take 
 with them the very population which he describes as ignorant, 
 barbarous, dishonest, indolent, corrupt, treacherous, and incapa- 
 ble of understanding the elementary principles of Anglo-Saxon 
 government? You can not separate the country from the popu- 
 lation; when you take one you become responsible for the other. 
 
 I will not say, however, that I place the same low estimate on 
 this people as the Senator from Indiana doe3. Neither does his 
 estimate correspond with the great weight of testimony of those 
 who have made extensive investigations as to the intelligence, 
 education, character, and capacity for self-government of the 
 population of these islands. Our consul, Mr. Williams, said in 
 his report to the Secretary of War: 
 
 While the Spaniards barbarously and ciuielly slaughtered the Filipinos, 
 even women and children, the insurgents, on the contrary, followed Ameri- 
 can example— protected the helpless, nursed, fed, and cared for Spaniards 
 taken as prisoners and for the wounded as they cared for those who had 
 fallen from their own ranks. 
 
 Admiral Dewey, in his report to the Secretary of War, said that 
 in his opinion these people are superior in intelligence and more 
 capable of self-government than the natives of Cuba, and said he 
 was familiar with both races. He declared: 
 
 The greater number seem to be able to read and write. In Manila are 
 many thousands of educated natives who are merchants, lawyers, doctors, 
 and priests. They are well informed and have accumulated property. 
 
 It can not be contended that we are to hold these islands for 
 future homes for the American citizen. A careful study of the 
 territory and its population will show this to be impossible unless 
 we should exterminate the natives, or, by reason of our cruelty 
 toward them, they should abandon the islands. 
 
 The present density of the population precludes the idea of 
 American homes and American communities being built up there. 
 These islands have been variously estimated at from 1,200 to 1,800 
 in number. The important ones, however, are less than a dozen 
 in number. Two-thirds of the population reside on six islands. 
 All of the islands except about a dozen are exceedingly small and 
 are of no value. The important islands are as follows: Luzon, 
 Panay, Cebu, Leyte, Bohol, and Negros, with an area of 59,800 
 square miles and with a population of 5,422.000. It can be readily 
 seen that the population of the islands named is nearly 50 per cent 
 greater than in Illinois or Indiana. We are told that in many of 
 the provinces the density of the population exceeds 200 per square 
 mile, and is greater than any of the United States, except Massa- 
 chusets and Rhode Island. This is not a vast wilderness, unin- 
 habited, where the American youth, by enterprise and industry, 
 is to build cities and plant American homes. The present popu- 
 lation precludes any such idea. Suppose the views of the junior 
 Senator from Indiana should triumph, and we conquer these peo- 
 4273 
 
11 
 
 pie and force them to submit to American arms and to receive 
 American government, how long, Mr. President, does the honor- 
 able Senator think they will stay conquered? 
 
 Remember, the population is between eight and ten millions and 
 they have surrendered to American authority and accepted Amer- 
 ican government by the force of an American army and navy. 
 Sixty-five thousand American soldiers and sailors crossed the ocean 
 and conquered them. I admit that we can conquer them, but how 
 long will they stay conquered? How long before we will have to 
 conquer them again? They will remain in subjection to our Gov- 
 ernment just so long as we keep an army on the islands and a navy 
 in their harbors strong and powerful enough to keep down insur- 
 rection. When our ships sail home freighted with our gallant 
 soldiers, this conquered race of Malays will rise up again in insur- 
 rection against American rulers, American authority, and kill and 
 murder your governor-general sent there to make and execute laws 
 for them against their will. You will find it necessary to send an 
 army to conquer them again and again. Experience will demon- 
 strate to us the necessity of keeping them perpetually conquered. 
 Sir, do we want a race of people that we must keep perpetually 
 conquered by arms? Do we want a race of people that are hostile 
 to our Government? 
 
 Do we want a race of people annexed to the United States and 
 governed by the United States who will be perpetually at war 
 with us, continuously in a state of insurrection against our Gov- 
 ernment and against our laws and sovereignty? Do we want a 
 race of people that can never become American citizens, a race of 
 subjects that shall never be the recipients of our free institutions, 
 just and equal laws? Our matchless progress we owe to our rep- 
 resentative free institutions, with equal rights, equal justice, and 
 equal laws for every possible condition of our fellows. The laws 
 of inequality should find no place upon our statute books. Here 
 a homogeneous people are devoted to the flag of their country. 
 They obey the laws, meet patriotically every duty they owe their 
 country, because the spirit of justice, liberty, and equality has 
 marked every step in our career. The Senator from Indiana 
 made another remarkable statement on the floor of the Senate. 
 He claimed to have studied Spain's military history on these 
 islands. To my surprise, he tells us Spain's military operations 
 were too lenient, not sufficiently vigorous and aggressive to con- 
 quer these people. He complained that Spain was always treating 
 with the rebels while they fought them. The inference to be 
 drawn from his argument is that Spain should have been more 
 cruel, more exacting, and more oppressive in her military opera- 
 tions against this helpless people. 
 
 The Senator tells us that the United States must not adopt the 
 lenient course pursued by Spain, but we must be firm and rule 
 them with an iron hand. Is it possible, Mr. President, that we 
 have sounded such a depth in the decline of political administra- 
 tions that we complain of the mercy, kindness, and leniency of 
 the Spanish Government toward her struggling colonies and point 
 out a pathway of tyranny, oppression, fire, and sword for the 
 future control and government of the Philippine people? Less 
 than two years ago the senior Senator from Vermont returned 
 from Cuba and fired the hearts of the American people on account 
 of the cruelty, suffering, starvation, and death inflicted b> the 
 Spanish soldiers on the helpless women and children of the Cuban 
 people. The wires flashed this tale of horror and suffering to 
 every American home, and the American people, true to their 
 
 4273 
 
12 
 
 traditions, responded in pnrse and blood to save this struggling, 
 starving people from the cruelty of Spain. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, in less than two years the Senator from 
 Indiana tells us that the American people must not tread in the 
 pathway of leniency pursued by the kind, generous, and merciful 
 Government of Spain, but, on the contrary, while we went to 
 i war and sacrificed hundreds of lives and millions of money to give 
 freedom to Cuba, we must reverse our conduct in dealing with 
 the Filipinos, who were struggling under the same burdens and 
 abuses that had cursed the people of Cuba. Such inconsistency 
 is without a parallel, and brands the statement as false and hypo- 
 critical that the United States Government went to war for the 
 sake of humanity. 
 
 Mr. President, I prefer the remedy suggested by the senior Sena- 
 tor from Massachusetts, "Justice, righteousness, duty, and free- 
 dom the only sure foundation of empire," to the remedy of fire 
 and sword pointed out by the eloquent Senator from Indiana. 
 The junior Senator from Indiana intersperses his argument with 
 numerous Biblical quotations, but there is an entire absence 
 throughout his remarkable speech of that blessed spirit of our 
 Lord and Master which characterized His memorable Sermon on 
 the Mount, " Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men 
 should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law and 
 the prophets." It may be possible in this day of avarice, greed, 
 selfishness, and commercialism that this Golden Rule shall no 
 longer measure the conduct of either individuals or nations. The 
 Senator from Indiana tells us that just beyond the Philippines are 
 China's illimitable markets. He asked the question, " Where shall 
 we turn for consumers of our surplus?" He says, ' ' Geography an- 
 swers the question; China is our natural customer; the Philip- 
 pines, " he claims, ' ' give us a base at the door of all the East. " He 
 also said, "Nothing is so natural as trade with one's neighbors." 
 He then tells us that the Philippines make us the nearest neigh- 
 bor of all the East, and that nothing is more natural than to trade 
 with those you know. He closes this part of his enticing picture 
 with the statement that the Philippines bring us face to face with 
 the most sought-for customers in the world. This fanciful and 
 illusory picture will not stand the test of logic and reason. There 
 is quite a difference between commercial and territorial expan- 
 sion. One does not necessarily follow the other. I favor com- 
 mercial expansion, but oppose the latter where applied to terri- 
 tory beyond the Western Hemisphere. The proposition that we 
 must own vast tracts of land, populated by a race of people that 
 can never assimilate with our people, adjacent to Asia, across the 
 Pacific, to induce the teeming millions of China to become our 
 customers is absurd and is not supported by the laws of trade and 
 commerce. 
 
 No Senator upon this floor is more anxious to enlarge our mar- 
 kets and to induce the vast population of China to purchase our 
 surplus products of farm and factory, so as to give employment to 
 labor and enhance the value of both the raw material and finished 
 product of producer and manufacturer, than myself. Wars, en- 
 tangled alliances, domestic insurrection, are not the proper means 
 to induce foreign consumers to buy our goods and wares and to 
 become our customers. The laws of business, commerce, and 
 trade, friendly alliances, cheapness and quality in comparison 
 with other countries contending for the same trade and business, 
 are elements that must shape and regulate the volume of our busi- 
 ness with other countries. Jefferson taught us that peace, com- 
 4273 
 
13 
 
 merce, and honest friendship with all nations went hand in hand 
 together. But they tell us now that the teachings of Jefferson are 
 not applicable to the times. These teachings are not in keeping 
 with the advanced ideas of our political bosses. We can not sur- 
 pass Europe in the race for wealth aud foreign trade by exhaust- 
 ing our resources in internal quarrels, or in unjust and unprofit- 
 able wars, waged to acquire and govern uncongenial races who 
 can never become adapted to our laws and political institutions. 
 If we desire the trade of China, we must make it to the interest of 
 her people to trade with us. We must study their markets, the 
 wants and demands of their people. We must cheapen transporta- 
 tion by the construction of the Nicaraguan Canal; build up our 
 merchant marine; take every possible advantage of the laws of 
 trade and commerce to meet promptly the keen competition of 
 England, Germany, France, or any other foreign country seeking 
 to extend its trade to the markets of China. 
 
 These rules, applicable to business principles and common sense, 
 are the only means that will give to the American farmer and 
 manufacturer foreign markets for American products. Neither 
 do 1 agree to both propositions that if we keep the Philippines 
 we will be neighbors to China and that it will be natural for our 
 neighbors to trade with us. The course that we are pursuing 
 toward the Philippine people will be just the reverse of the prop- 
 osition stated by the Senator from Indiana. Certainly we can not 
 expect to enlarge our volume of business with the Philippine peo- 
 ple by waging war against them. A magnificent opportunity 
 came to us when Spain surrendered her claim to the Philippine 
 Islands to the United States for us to lay the foundation for large 
 and continued commercial dealings with the population of the 
 Philippine Islands. These people at that period, full of gratitude 
 for the services which we had rendered them in achieving their 
 supposed independence, would naturally have come to our mar- 
 kets to make purchases rather than to any other country in the 
 world. They then esteemed us with that affection which we felt 
 toward France at the close of the Revolutionary war. If we had 
 granted to them their most cherished hopes, given them our sym- 
 pathy, encouragement, and aid in framing a constitution and 
 putting in operation a government suitable to their wants, de- 
 mands, and conditions, then the laws of gratitude would have 
 made these people our customers against the markets of the world 
 for all time to come. 
 
 They are neighbors to China, coming almost in daily contact 
 with the Chinese markets. Trading daily with the United States, 
 and recognizing us as their friends and benefactors, they would 
 have planted the good name, high character, and commercial ad- 
 vantages which we enjoyed at the hands of the Philippine people 
 into the hearts, consciences, and business of the population of 
 China. Does any reasonable man contend that we can enlarge 
 our business and commercial transactions with the Filipinos by 
 waging war against them, embittering them against us now and 
 for all time to come? Is it possible for any student of the laws of 
 trade and business to contend that if the Filipino people are con- 
 quered and kept in subjection to American authority by our sol- 
 diers, that such a course would enlarge our trade with China? 
 If this population of 10.000,000 people should learn to hate us, 
 constantly being in insurrection against us, charge us with being 
 their oppressors, as they did Spain, would it not be natural for this 
 feeling of hate and distrust to be transplanted upon the shores of 
 China, who in all probability would sympathize with their strug- 
 4273 
 
14 
 
 gling neighbors? If we desire the trade of the Philippines and 
 the trade of China, let us by all means keep the Filipinos our 
 friends and treat them as our neighbors. The argument advanced 
 by the Senator from Indiana falls to the ground when brought to 
 its final analysis, and the reverse of the proposition stated by him 
 would certainly follow. It is conceded on all sides that this pop- 
 ulation is never to be organized into States and to be treated as 
 American citizens, but we are to hold them, make laws for their 
 future government, appoint Americans for their officers to cross 
 the ocean and rule this people. 
 
 This 10,01)0,000 of population, located 10,000 miles away from our 
 capital, are to be wards without any right to have an organized 
 government of their own, but, on the contrary, their laws are to be 
 made and their rulers appointed at Washington, on the opposite 
 side of the world from them. It is not denied that never in the 
 history of our Government has such a problem been presented 
 to us for solution; never before have we undertaken to acquire 
 territory and govern a race of people to whom we did not intend 
 to extend all of the privileges granted to American citizens. Until 
 during the present time the,proposition to acquire a people foreign 
 to us in race, foreign to us in religion, unsuited to American in- 
 stitutions, and to force a government on them that they did not 
 want, would not have been tolerated by the American people. A 
 desire for liberty, justice, self-government, freedom, and equality 
 gave birth to this Republic. If we now change the only Govern- 
 ment in the world that guarantees absolute freedom and equality 
 to all of its citizens, recognizing the right of any people to form 
 their own government, then, Mr. President, this Republic, that 
 has been reared by more than a century of patriotic labor and sac- 
 rifice, will no longer be the Government of Washington, Jefferson, 
 Madison, Jackson, and Abraham Lincoln. The spirit of justice, 
 equality, and freedom which has characterized its history, result- 
 ing in the noblest achievements ever recorded in man's struggle 
 for self-government, will no longer be our blessed heritage. 
 
 Mr. President, we do not want to retain permanently a nation 
 and be responsible for their government who never can partici- 
 pate in our free institutions. We can not afford to take a hundred 
 thousand soldiers from the peaceful pursuits of life and send 
 them across the ocean to maintain military government on the 
 Philippine Islands at a cost of a hundred millions of dollars a 
 year to our people. We can not afford to do it. because it will be 
 an injustice'to the American people and because it revolutionizes 
 the entire scope and purpose of our Government and will inflict 
 a great wrong upon a helpless, struggling, inferior race. I do 
 not believe in a government that does not emanate from those to 
 be governed and where the lawmaking power does not come in 
 contact with the people to be affected, for the reason experience 
 has demonstrated that a watchful and jealous constituency is es- 
 sential to maintain honest and faithful public officials. Seven 
 thousand miles of ocean lie between us and this people. 
 
 No power on earth, Mr. President, can prevent the effect of this 
 distance weakening government. Spain felt it in the admin- 
 istration of her colonial policy in her South American possessions 
 and in Cuba and the Philippine Islands; and now, Mr. President, 
 we are undertaking to do something that destroyed Spain's navy 
 and bankrupted her treasury. 
 
 It is absolute folly to undertake to force and maintain a gov- 
 ernment for an uncongenial race of people that occupy a territory 
 that does not come within 7,000 miles of your coast and within 
 
 4273 
 
15 
 
 10,000 miles of your capital. Let us take warning, and remember 
 that this new departure is contrary to the teachings of Washing- 
 ton, Jefferson, Monroe, Lincoln, Garfield, Blaine, Sherman, Ed- 
 munds, Reed, Carlisle, Cleveland, and Bryan. 
 
 We have three resolutions pending before the Senate relating to 
 the disposition and government of the Philippine Islands. One 
 by the senior Senator from Wisconsin, which vests in the Presi- 
 dent the right to govern the islands until Congress directs other- 
 wise. The resolution of the junior Senator from Indiana, which 
 declares that the islands are ours forever, and that we shall keep 
 them and govern them as dependencies. The bill introduced by 
 the Senator from Wisconsin leaves the policy of our Government 
 toward these people to the future action of* Congress. They are 
 left in doubt and uncertainty as to what they may expect from 
 our Government. The second resolution contemplates that we 
 will exercise permanent dominion over the islands, appointing 
 their officers, making and executing their laws. The third reso- 
 lution, introduced by my colleague, disclaims any intention on 
 the part of our Government to maintain permanent dominion over 
 this territory or to incorporate the inhabitants thereof as citizens 
 of the United States, or to hold them as vassals or subjects. This 
 resolution concedes the fact that these people fell to us as the re- 
 sult of war, and that we must restore peace and maintain order 
 throughout the islands until a government shall be established by 
 the people there, with our assistance, capable of protecting the 
 people from violence and maintaining law and order. It provides 
 that our military forces shall be kept on the islands until the in- 
 surrection is suppressed, and until a stable government can be put 
 in operation. 
 
 This resolution bears the blessed message to the Filipinos which 
 they have so long sought in vain, namely, that it is the purpose 
 and intention of the United States, when the insurrection is over, 
 when peace and order shall be restored and a stable government 
 established, that then we will withdraw our land and naval forces 
 from the islands, reserving to our Government such harbors and 
 tracts of land as may be needed for coaling stations and govern- 
 mental purposes, and transferring to the government of the Fili- 
 pinos all other rights and territories secured in said islands under 
 the treaty with Spain, and leave the future control and dominion 
 of the islands to the Filipino people. 
 
 The resolution is most carefully guarded, discharges faithfully 
 every duty we owe this people, as well as to carry out the obliga- 
 tions and duties we owe to foreign governments resulting from 
 the war. 
 
 First, this resolution provides for the suppression of the insur- 
 rection; second, that we will assist these people in putting into 
 operation a government of their own that will maintain law and 
 order; third, it protects the interests of the Government of the 
 United States by reserving the necessary coaling stations and land 
 needed for governmental purposes; fourth, it provides that until 
 a stable government is established on the islands the President is 
 empowered to maintain law and order there; fifth, that so soon 
 as such a government shall be established by the people of those 
 islands, with our assistance, we will withdraw our land and naval 
 forces, leaving the future control to the peop'e thereof. 
 
 If these resolutions do not cover every phase of the case, I do not 
 understand the English language. Pass them and give them the 
 effect of law, and then we will have pursued a course in the solu- 
 tion of our troubles with this people which will be in keeping with 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS •] 
 
 027 531 526 6 
 
 16 
 
 the principles of our Government. I do not believe we will ever 
 reach a satisfactory solution of this problem, a solution in har- 
 mony with the principles of our Government, by pursuing any 
 cher course than one substantially as above outlined. Mr. Presi- 
 dent, this course meets my approval, because humanity, reason, 
 and justice dictate such a policy. I realize that if we force a 
 military government upon these people against their will, the 
 alienation existing between us will be an incurable one. I am 
 unalterably opposed to the permanent retention of these islands 
 with the view of forcing American government upon them by 
 Americans, because I believe such government will cost the peo- 
 ple of the United States a hundred and fifty million dollars ayear 
 to pay the increased expenses of our Army and Navy to maintain 
 mV itary government there, a tax of $2 per capita annually for 
 5i j man, woman, and child in the United States. This does 
 not take into consideration the sacrifice of human life that must 
 necessarily follow in maintaining military government on those 
 islands. It is a fact that can not be disputed that the expenses 
 of maintaining our Army has already increased more than six- 
 fold. 
 
 The demoralization that follows war and the military spirit is 
 always to be deplored. I am opposed to it again, Mr. President, 
 because history teaches us that sovereignty acquired by the sword 
 must be maintained by the same means and that power acquired 
 by conquest and wealth gained by robbery are certain in the end 
 to weaken and corrupt the possessor. This rule applies to nations 
 as well as individuals. I am opposed to it again because by such 
 a course we revolutionize our Government, which was intended 
 for a free Republic and self-governing people and not for subjects 
 or vassal states without representation in the making and execu- 
 tion of our laws. I am opposed to it because it shatters the Mon- 
 roe doctrine from top to bottom. I am opposed to it because I 
 believe tr ' 5 at no distant day such a course will involve us in 
 Eur ; ,nd Asiatic quarrels. I am opposed to it because all of 
 
 the uciuits, traditions, surroundings, experience, education, and 
 aspirations of this people are opposed to our theories of govern- 
 ing. I am opposed to it because such a course would be a re- 
 pua ation by our Government of the principle that all govern- 
 r-on j must be founded on the consent of the governed. 
 
 a opposed to it because such a course is not calculated to 
 advance the interests and promote the happiness of this people, 
 oelf-government does not mean that these people are to have such 
 a government as we possess, but that these people shall have a 
 government in keeping with their desires and suitable to their 
 conditions. It has been said that greatness does not lie in coffers 
 or territory, but it lies in the men and women of a nation and 
 their ideals and acts, and that a nation is great as it clings to its 
 ideals. A great bishop said: "The end of all worthy struggle is 
 to establish morality as the basis of individual and national life, 
 to make righteousness prevail, to make justice reign, to spread 
 beauty, gentleness, wisdom, and peace, to widen opportunity, to 
 increase good will, to move in the light of higher thoughts and 
 larger hopes, to encourage science and art, to foster industry and 
 thrift, education and culture, reverence and obedience, purity and 
 love, honesty, sobriety, and disinterested devotion to the common 
 good— this is the patriofs aim, this his ideal." If we should strive 
 for this purpose and work in this spirit, tne Republic of our 
 fathers will never perish. 
 
 o 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 027 531 526 6 9