EXPANSION OF TERRITORY, EXPANSION OF TRADE An Address BY HON. WILLIAM P. FRYE, U. S. SENATOR FROM MAINE, BEFORE THE UNION LEAGUE OF PHILADELPHIA, March 17, 1900. EXPANSION OF TERRITORY, EXPANSION OF TRADE. : Ell3 I N FXCH A, NGI$ IXnX. -^t^aX VvA^a EXPANSION OF TERRITORY, EXPANSION OF TRADE. President Darlington : Gentlemen, if we will consider for a moment the constant demands that are made upon a Senator who faithfully, conscien- tiously and intelligently meets the duties of his high office, and add to these demands the responsibilities and the obligations of the Presiding Officer of the United States Senate, we can better appreciate the compliment that is paid The Union League to-night by the presence of our distinguished guest. I trust Senator Frye will pardon me for referrmg to a remark that he made when I had the pleasure of calling upon him in Washing- ton and invited him to address The Union League, After learn- ing the object of my visit, he replied, " I have declined at least one hundred invitations to speak, for the reason that I have not the time to give to the preparation that would be necessary. But," continued the Senator, " I have a speech in my mind that I would like to deliver to the American people, and there is no place in the United States where I should prefer to deliver it than in The Union League of Philadelphia." (Applause.) As an evidence of the sincerity of that graceful compliment, he is with us this evening ; and I may add that this is the first occa- sion that he has spoken during the present session of Congress. 5 6 Senator Frye will 'speak to us upon the " Expansion of Territory — Expansion of Trade," introducing his subject by a reference to the Treaty of Paris of 1898, which he, as a member of the United States Peace Commission, was largely instrumental in formulating. I have very great pleasure in introducing to you the Honorable William P. Frye, United States Senator from the State of Maine, and President jpro tern, of the United States Senate. Senator Frye said : Gentlemen of The Union League : I dislike exceedingly to open a speech with an apology, for my experience in such case is that the apology is likely to be better than the speech ; but since I accepted the invitation to address The Union League of Philadelphia, I have not had one moment of time in which to prepare an address suitable for an occasion like this, or for such an audience. Your presiding officer has well said that I could not refuse— as I ought to have done — to address your League. It has had my profoundest respect from the early days of the Civil War down to now for its wonderful services for our blessed Ilepublic. (Applause.) Humanity and a decent self-respect compelled the Congress of the United States to declare war against Spain. The conflict was short, sharp, decisive, and in a few months that proud em- j^ire was a suppliant for peace. We cheerfully yielded to the request, for we hate war and love peace. The President of the United States appointed five Commissioners, to meet at Paris five Commissioners to be appointed by the Queen Regent of Spain, to agree upon the terms of peace. Your Commissioners are well known to you, for they were all men who had been for a considerable length of time in the public service. They were none of them skilled in diplomacy. I, perhaps, was as much of a diplomat as any of them, and I simply knew what I wanted, and was bound to get it if I could. The Spanish Commissioners were high-bred gentlemen ; three of them had been ambassadors to foreign posts, and the Presi- dent of their Commission, Senor Rios, was said to be the best ecclesiastical lawyer in Spain. He was the President of the Spanish Senate, and was certainly as resourceful a man as I ever had the honor to meet. Our relations with these Commissioners were, as a matter of course, courteous and friendly all through our negotiations. We felt for them a profound sympathy, be- cause we knew very well that whatever treaty they signed, and we agreed to, was simply the death-warrant for them politically in their own country. The French Government treated us with great courtesy, and the French press with great discourtesy. Our Commission met every morning at ten o'clock, and the Joint Commission met, whenever necessary, at two o'clock in the afternoon. The pro- ceedings were conducted through an interpreter. The first demand which the Spanish Commissioners made on us will possibly seem somewhat remarkable to you. It was that we should promptly restore the status quo in Manila; release all of the Spanish prisoners ; restore their arms which we had taken from them, and pay damages for all the property we had de- stroyed, for all the wounds we had inflicted, and for all the deaths we had caused. Now, there was in law a solid founda- tion for that demand. Ordinarily a protocol provides that it shall take effect at some future day, in order that notice may be 8 given to the belligerents, wherever they may be, that hostilities are to cease. This protocol of ours took effect the moment it was signed. The battle of Manila was fought three days later. Now, under well-settled principles of international law, while the officers who conducted the battle would not be held respon- sible, if they had no notice (and of course they had none), the country itself would. Our reply to this demand was that in the protocol they had given us a temporary sovereignty in Manila and the Bay. A temporary sovereignty carries with it all the responsibilities and obligations of a real sovereignty — the obligation to preserve peace, to protect life and property, and in our judgment, with ten thousand Spanish prisoners within the walls of Manila, to give them their freedom and their arms, with ten thousand Tagalos just outside, would not be preserving peace, or protecting life or property, especially when the first offence which Aguinaldo and his troops took to the United States was, when they asked to be permitted to loot the city of Manila, Merritt and Dewey refused to permit a single armed Tagalos within the walls. Our reply to the question of damages was that when we reached that, in the consideration of the treaty, we would de- termine as to what should be done. The next demand the Spanish Commissioners made upon us was that we should accept the sovereignty of the island of Cuba, and in this demand they persisted without cessation for two solid months. Senor Rios held that, as a matter of law, the bonded debt of Cuba, amounting to $600,000,000 or $700,000,000, be- ing secured by a mortgage on the revenues of the island, would follow the sovereignty. We refused to accept the sovereignty of the island, on the ground that Congress had instructed us not 9 to accept it. They then demanded that we should guarantee these bonds, and we refused, as a matter of course, saymg to them that we entered upon the war for humanity's sake, and for no other, that we expended our money, and wasted the lives of our noble soldiers, in order to prevent the despotic power of Spain from further exercising its cruelty in the island of Cuba, and gamed no possible benefit from the result. There could not possibly be any reason why we should guarantee the Cuban bonds. These demands were pressed upon us without cessation for nearly two months, and every day it seemed to us that negotia- tions must inevitably be broken off and the war be resumed. I cabled to the President that the negotiations would not result in a treaty, and I trusted that he, as commander-in-chief of the army and navy, the moment negotiations should cease, would seize upon the archipelago of the Philippmes, and take the Caroline Islands, too. It became evident to us that something radical, emphatic, de- termmed, must be done ; and we finally concluded that we must lay down an ultimatum, give them a certain number of days in which to accept or reject it, and if they rejected it, end the ne- gotiations. Now, gentlemen, that was not an easy thing to do. An ultimatum, to have power, must have the agreement of the five Commissioners, and the five Commissioners were as far apart as the two poles. There were four propositions before us — one to take the island of Luzon alone, another was to leave the archipelago, another to take a coalmg and naval station, nothing more, another to take all we could get. I was for takmg all we could get. Now, there were five Commissioners holding these divergent views, who could not be driven, who could not be 10 cajoled, with whom sophistry would not possibly have any effect, and yet who must, by logical discussion, be brought to a unani- mous agreement. It took us several days to bring that result about. How was it accomplished? I can only give you a feeble illustration of some of the arguments. Take the proposition to leave the islands. Could that be en- tertained ? There had been a rebellion in that archipelago, and Affuinaldo and seventeen of his chieftains had been in exile in Singapore. They there met the United States Consul, who sug- gested to them that it was a good time to renew their rebellion ; that Dewey was going over there, and Merritt was to be there. They accepted the suggestion, and went to Hong Kong to join Dewey ; but Dewey had sailed for Manila. We gave them a United States cutter, with the American flag flying over it, and carried them over to Manila. Dewey gave them what guns he had captured from the Spaniards, and they immediately formed an army. Now, there was no alliance between them and the United States, no promise made in writing, or orally ; but at the same time these men were helping to fight our battles. "VVe could have conquered Manila without their help, but very likely they saved the lives of many of our soldiers, and aided us in our un- dertaking. They whipped the Spaniards every time, and con- quered province after province. They took many Spanish pris- oners. They were practically our allies, although they were not our allies in fact, or by promise, oral or written. Now, could this great Republic, under these circumstances, leave these men to the tender mercies of Spain ? Is there a man here who would not have blushed with shame for his Republic if it had been thus guilty ? 11 Take the coaling and naval station. Where would you locate it? At Manila? Well; but Mindora is within gunshot of Manila. With Mindora in Spain's possession, or Germany's, or Russia's, you would have to make of your coaling or naval station, to have it of the slightest earthly use, a Gibraltar, and protect it with a tremendous armed force. Again, if you only took a coaling and naval station, and left the rest of the archipel- ago in the hands of Spain, you still leave these friendly Tagalos to the tender mercies of Spain. It is not necessary for me to say to this intelligent audience what the tender mercies of Spain are. Again, shall we take Luzon alone ? If we do, what will we do with it? We will give it just as good a government as you have in Pennsylvania. (Laughter.) We will relieve the peo- ple from slavery, from all unjust and wicked taxation. We will respect the personal rights and freedom of the inhabitants. We will regard their religion. We will give them a real republican government, insuring to them content, happiness, comfort and security. How long will it be before the rest of the islands will find out what the Tagalos have received from the United States of America; and, when they find out, how long will it be before they will rebel ; and if they rebel, how long will it be before our Tagalos, sympathizing with them, will fit out filibustering expe- ditions to help them, send them arms, send them money ? Why, you would have one perpetual war with Spain. Your peace would be a farce — and that contention was surrendered. We finally agreed unanimously upon what ? That Spain must surrender the sovereignty of Cuba ; that we would not take it ; that we would have nothing whatever to do with the Cuban bonds ; that whenever Cuba was ready to form a stable govern- 12 ment, we would give her the right to do so, and the sovereignty would be hers. Next that Spain must leave Puerto Rico, yielding the sovereignty to us. Spain had been a menace to the United States long enough, and must leave forever and ever this hem- isphere. Again, we must have Guam, a landing place for our cable. Again, Spain must yield the sovereignty of the entire Philippine archipelago to us ; that we would pay Spain $20,000,000 ; that we would pay our citizens for damages which they had suiFered from the Spanish army in Cuba, and Spain would relieve the United States from all claim, national or individual, thus taking care of that claim which I mentioned as their first demand ; that we would return to their homes the Spanish prisoners, and that Spain should return to Cuba and Puerto Rico and the Philippine archipelago all of the men she had sent into exile from those coimtries. We cabled that ultimatum to the President of the United States, and he cabled in reply that it was eminently satisfactory to him. Then we had it carefully translated into Spanish and delivered it to Senor Rios, and gave him three days in which to accept or reject it, informing him that, if he rejected it, negotia- tions would promptly stop. The next day he wrote a letter to the Chairman of our Commission, asking if we really meant it. He received a reply which seemed to satisfy him that we did. That was the difference between non-diplomacy and diplomacy. Now, why did we agree to pay $20,000,000 ? We were obliged to. They were compelled to accept whatever we demanded or war, one of the two ; there was no escape. Different motives controlled our action in that regard. So far as I was concerned, from an examination I had made, I became satisfied that the 13 precedents were all in favor of a payment for improvements made in territory acquired even by war. Where one nation at war succeeded in acquiring provinces from another, the rule was for the conquering nation to pay for any improvements which had been made in the territory so acquired. For instance, Germany in her treaty with France paid France 320,000,000 of francs for improvements which France had made in Alsace and Lorraine. Again, most, if not all, of the South American Republics, when they secured their independence from the mother country, either assumed a portion of the debt of the mother country, or else paid so much money to her. It did not seem to me that this great, rich and powerful Republic could afford to be less magnanimous to a bankrupt and defeated foe than Mexico could to Spain, from whom she had won her inde- pendence by war. Do you think so ? Again, I said awhile ago that it was exceedingly doubtful whether any treaty could be made. Some thought that if a cer- tain amount of money could be offered in our ultimatum, it might influence the Spanish Commissioners possibly, as it would afford them, to that extent, an excuse at home, and induce them to sign the treaty ; and, if it did, that it was better for us to pay it, because, if we failed in our negotiations and war broke out, it would not take many days to spend perhaps a good deal more than $20,000,000, and with it probably precious lives. These largely were our reasons for paying the $20,000,000. Had they made any improvements in the archipelago ? They had erected seventeen first-class lights and eighteen second-class lights ; they had spent a great deal of money in the harbor of Manila and outside of it ; they had built new barracks for five thousand soldiers, which we have been occupying ever since — very 14 fine barracks ; they had started a dry dock at Subig, and all the materials for it were there. We did not make an inventory of these thiugs, but put them into a lump sum, and I do not believe that any American citizen, understanding it, feels to-day that we did a wrong thing in paying the $20,000,000. Why did w^e agree to send their prisoners home ? We had them on our hands. Spain could not have sent them home, and would not have done so in years. She had no money, no credit, and it was far better for us from every point of view to do so. Why did we agree to pay the losses which our American citi- zens had suffered in Cuba ? Could we turn our American citi- zens, who were entitled to our protection in Cuba, and whose property had been destroyed there while we were playing the part of a neutral, and our ships of war, at an expense of $3,000,- 000 or $4,000,000 a year, were pursuing every supposed filibuster, and protecting the interests of Spain — could we afford to turn these American citizens and their losses over to be remunerated by Spain? When would she do it? Some time in the twenty- first century, not before. (Laughter.) Why did we have any trouble in the archipelago ? There was not the least likelihood of it when we were in Paris. General Whittier and General Merritt were before our Commission, and they testified that the most cordial feeling existed between the Tagalos and the United States troops ; that while there had been a little friction when they refused to allow the Tagalos to loot the city of Manila, they had gotten over it. They said that it would not take more than three or four regiments of white men, and as many regiments of natives, with white officers, to control the archipelago, and that the revenues of the islands would a great deal more than support the entire administration of 15 affairs, military and civil. They knew what they were talking about. How then did it happen that we have this trouble? Aguinaldo had his spies in Paris every day we were there, and they reported to him just exactly what we believed — that there would not be any treaty. Then Aguinaldo said to the rich Tagalos, and I think honestly then, "Here, there is not going to be any treaty, and the war is to be renewed. I must have money, more men, and I must have equipment for men. You must furnish me with money." They furnished him with money, and he bought arms and provisions for his army, which increased his force very largely. The treaty was signed. Then it was sent to Washington, and it came before our Committee on Foreign Relations, who reported it immediately to the Senate. If it had been ratified in ten days, there would not have been any trouble in the archipelago. It was not. It was in the United States Senate for nearly three months, if not quite, and most unfortunate speeches were made in the open session of the Senate, not intended to do so, but really giving encouragement to Aguinaldo. Aguinaldo's spies were in Washington for two months, dur- ing which time we did not believe that we could ratify the treaty. They cabled Aguinaldo again and again to that effect, and he said to the rich Tagalos, "The treaty is not to be ratified, the war is to be continued. I must have more money, more men and more arms." And he secured more money, more men and more arms. Then the little fellow lost his head, thought he was all powerful ; for every time he had met white men he had con- quered. He had never at that time met United States troops in battle, and he came to the conclusion that he could drive the American forces out of the archipelago, make himself die- 16 tator — a despot — and then he deliberately made war upon our troops. I repeat, if that treaty had been ratified in ten days there would not have been any war in the Philippine archipelago. Whether these men, who probably were honest in their convic- tions, intended it or not, my judgment is that the responsibility for the war is upon them, upon the press and the statesmen, and the men who are not statesmen — the men, who in the city of Philadelphia, the other day, according to the press, denounced Mr. McKinley, President of the United States, as a murderer. (Cheers.) Now we have these possessions. They are ours as honestly as Arizona is ours — as honorably acquired, and in their acquirement we dealt not only honestly, but magnanimously and generously, with Spain. Are they to be of any use to this Republic ? With your permission, gentlemen, I propose to discuss this question for a while from a commercial point of view. I am aware that the anti-imperialists assert that this is a sordid view to take. I believe that the man who the other day called the President of the United States a murderer is endowed with sus- ceptibilities which would be shocked at the idea of discussing commercial interests in connection with our recent acquirement ; but I, myself, have an idea that anything which may affect the interests, the prosperity and the well-being of seventy millions of people is not unworthy of discussion before an American audi- ence. After we had lived in this country of ours for many years, having the best market in the whole world, and a consumption which took care of almost all our products, unfortunately lead- ing us to that dangerous contentment which prevented our look- 17 ing abroad throughout the world for foreign markets, we, through a bitter and cruel experience, learned that we had a surplus, an unsold surplus, that our production was beyond our consumption — and all intelligent men knew that such a condition was death to prosperity. Tariffs could not save us, legislation could not, nothing could except to find a place somewhere to sell that sur- plus. The problem of how to secure a foreign market was a most serious one. Our commercial rivals were entrenched every- where in the world. They had subsidized steamship lines to every commercial port ; they had banking facilities everywhere ; they had long-established agencies and a perfect familiarity with the requirements of trade all over the world, and we had — noth- ing. Now there was something for us to do — a problem for us to work out, and it was a most serious one; yet we entered upon it with courage and sagacity, and the city of Philadelphia took the lead in working it out. You established the Philadelphia Museum, one of the best instrumentalities that has yet been found in this country for promoting foreign trade. (Applause.) That museum, from that hour to this, has been at work finding markets for American products, instructing our merchants and our manufacturers all over the United States as to how and where these markets could be found, what kind of goods should be sent to them, and in what manner of packages. Again, we are indebted to the city of Philadelphia. There was established in this country the great organization known as the National Manufacturers' Association, embracing a member- ship from almost every State in the Union, and one of the best business men of the city of Philadelphia, Mr. Theodore C. Search, is to-day at the head of it. That association went vigorously at work. It sent twenty-five of its most sagacious agents down 18 into South and Central America to see what the requirements of trade were there. I am ashamed to say that they had to go across the ocean under a British flag, and then back again under the same flag to reach Brazil. That association has been at work all over the world. Again, the American-Asiatic Association was formed in New York, and the American-China Association formed, the purpose of the two being to find out where and what we could sell in the great East. Again, we instructed our consuls, in all the localities where they were, to make daily reports of the conditions and require- ments of trade, and these were published and scattered broad- cast all over the United States, amongst the business men of the Republic. Again, two or three of your great railroad lines sent out their agents to search for markets. Again, private corporations all over the country instructed their agents, their superintendents, in some cases their presidents, to visit these foreign lands and inquire into this matter of mar- kets. What was the result? In 1897 the balance of trade in our favor was a little over $300,000,000; in 1898 it reached $420,000,000. Our surplus was sold and our prosperity continued without interruption. How was this accomplished? It is easy enough to see how we sold our wheat, our tobacco and our cotton. Hungry men and the necessities of the manufacturers made a market for them. But how could we sell our manufactured products? That was the serious problem. Our rivals were making these products at one-half of our wage cost, and were using the same machinery we were. How did we succeed in selling them? Partly as I 19 have already told you — perhaps quite largely. But the advan- tages were not all with the people abroad, the disadvantages not all with us. Our iron and coal were more accessible than theirs ; our workingmen were better paid, better fed, better housed than theirs, and did better work. Our skilled mechanics had more inventive genius than theirs, as much as theirs combined. Besides that, transportation, which is a very important item in the cost of the finished product, was cheaper in the United States, on rail, than anywhere in the world. I know that it is the habit to rail at railroads. I am not a railroad magnate, nor a rich monopolist, but I do not hesitate to affirm that we owe our prosperity in this matter very largely to our railroads. I saw, in the London Economist more than four or five years ago, when our railroad rate was one-third more than it is to-day per ton per mile, a statement that if the rate in England had been as low as ours, England alone would have saved $100,000,000 that single year on railroad freights. Again, our coastwise, river and lake fleets have played a very important part in this commercial drama. There the freights are still lower than by rail, and those rates have been reduced in the last ten years even more rapidly than those on rail, by reason of increasing enormously the size of our vessel carriers. To-day a small vessel cannot carry freight; and when I say to-day, I am not talking about the last year or two, when there has been on our part and on that of Great Britain such a scarcity of ships — I am talking about a normal condition of affairs. All intelli- gent men know perfectly well to-day that with the foreign car- rying trade we have nothing to do whatever ; we are out of it. Our ships are never seen anywhere in the world. Four ships of the American Line carry the American flag, and cross the 20 \vater, but that is about all there is to it. Last year, with all our enormous exports and imports to and from Europe, our ships did not carry quite two per cent., and in all the world they did not carry quite nine. The Produce Exchange made a report a few years ago in which they asserted that 1750 ships cleared from the port of New York in that year for foreign markets loaded with oiu" products, and that seven of them carried the American flag. All of you know, and at the same time are very apt to forget, that we have such a thing as a lake, coastwise and river fleet. Why, gentlemen, we have the finest one in the whole wide world. We have a larger one than Germany, France and Eng- land combined in the same trade. To-day our tonnage in that fleet, of documented and imdocumented vessels will, in my opinion, reach 7,000,000. The Suez Canal, which is supposed to carry the commerce of the world, passed last year a tonnage of nearly 10,000,000. The Sault Ste. Marie, in eight months of last year, passed a tonnage of 25,000,000 — more than entered London or Liverpool in the same time. It took 3,500,000 ton- nage to carry the freights on the Mississippi river alone last year. That fleet carried last year 168,000,000 tons of freight and 200,000,000 passengers. Your ships in the foreign carrying trade are unprotected and compete with ships that are protected. Your coastwise, lake and river fleet has been protected for a hundred years by absolute prohibition, no foreign ship being permitted to engage in it under any condition. There is the difference between protection and non-protection. (Applause.) How about the future ? Are we going to need foreign markets ? Take your manufactured product alone, which must meet the pompctition of all Europe in all the markets of the world, you paying double the wages they pay. 21 Is there to be a surplus of manufactured product? Last year we exported of manufactured product $1,000,000 worth every day, and yet consumption at home was greater than it ever had been in any year of the history of this Republic. A few years ago your export of manufactured goods, as compared to that, was a mere bagatelle. In these few years it has grown marvelously. Your surplus product is increasing every hour we live. It is bound to increase, and your necessity for a foreign market is becoming more serious every year. The danger of an unsold surplus is growing every year to be a greater and greater menace to the prosperity of this country. What are you going to do about it? You must double what you have been doing at least, and that you will I have not a shadow of doubt. But you must go further than that — you must look to other sources and in other directions for assistance. Your most dangerous commercial rival in the next twenty-five years is to be Germany ; indeed, she is the only rival you have any oc- casion to fear. Her people are economical and very hard work- ing. She patterns your machinery the very moment you get it out of the inventor's hands; she even patterns your goods, and, in some cases, puts them out as American goods. She is deter- mined on having the markets of the world, and her Emperor is equally determined. She has facilities we have not. Witness what they are doing to-day in establishing steamship lines to the great East; see what they mean by it. What do they mean by taking the Caroline Islands from Spain? What do all their preparations to-day foreshadow but a commercial war, fiercer than any that has been fought in our time? She does not pay one- half the wages to-day in making the identical goods that you do. Are you going to cut down yom' wages in order to comjjete with 22 her? That would be a menace to the life of the Kepublic itself. You cannot cut clown the wages of your workingmen one-half to compete with Germany; for, if you do, you then have reduced the consuming power of your people one-half, and thus double your product. Are you going to stop your mills, or run them on half time ? In that way you simply decrease the purchasing power of your own people and increase the cost of the product. That won't do. My own judgment is that several things may contribute to success. In the first place, I believe that you ought to carry your exports and imports in American ships, under the Ameri- can flag. Make every master of an American ship an intelli- gent, active agent to find markets for your goods and to dispose of them when the markets are found. When you load a cargo of goods from Philadelphia m a British ship, do you think the British master will help you dispose of it ? He is sure to be laggard in the disposition of those goods if he can. The idea of our paying $500,000 every day in gold to England and Germany to carry our exports and bring our imports is a humiliation that this American people ought not to submit to longer. I have taken a profound interest in the revival of our mer- chant marine for a good many years. In 1891 I spent over six months in an attempt, and sent for experts from all over the United States to come to Washington to assist me in drafting a l)ill. We finally agreed upon a Mail Subsidy Bill and a Bounty Bill, which were reported by me to the Senate. They both passed that body and went to the House, and the House, apparently without any knowledge on the subject, deliberately cut down the premiums that were to be paid on the Subsidy Bill nearly one 23 half, defeated the Bounty Bill by about six votes — it was a Dem- ocratic House — passed the Subsidy Bill with the very life, as I say, taken out of it, on the last day of the session — too late for a remedy. That ended that Subsidy Bill. It was a failure, and a dead failure, because the bill had been emasculated. Some peo- ple think that if a ten-knot ship uses twenty tons of coal a day, a twenty-knot ship ought not to take but forty. But, gentle- men, if a ten-knot ship takes twenty tons of coal, a twenty-knot ship will take three hundred tons a day and require one hundred men to handle it. All that we realized, and that was by way of a trade, was four ships called the American Line. I was not a free ship man myself, but your plausible, and prevailing, and tempting Mr. Griscom persuaded me to let in two of his ships, if he would build two just like them here. We let them in, and, thank God, we have one American line, and can sail from here to England under the American flag. I was a good deal discouraged by that attempt, and was quiet for several years ; but about three years ago I thought I could see that the American people were takmg a new interest in this mat- ter of reviving American shipping, and I thought it was a good time to try over again. I formed a committee of experts in shipping of twenty-five on my own responsibility. From Philadelphia I took Mr. Gris- com, who knows pretty well about ships; Theodore C. Search, as a representative of the manufacturing industries ; Charles H. Cramp, as a shipbuilder ; Mr. Mink, who has a large experience in the coastwise trade. I selected men who believed in discrimi- nating duties, men who believed in bounties, men who believed in subsidies, and men who did not believe in either. I made up a committee of twenty-five men, and there were never men who de- 24 voted so much time to one single piece of legislation as those men did to that. We finally drafted a bill which, in my judgment will, if it becomes a law, place our flag on the ocean once more. It has been reported by me to the Senate of the United States. When- ever it gets a chance for consideration it will pass the Senate, and I hope will the National House of Representatives. If it does, we will have agents of our own and ships of our own within the next five or ten years to rival the subsidized ships of foreign countries, and meet them on equal terms in the great com- mercial ports of the world. Another thing I would briefly call your attention to. Where are you going to look for your export trade? You must look to the East. Humboldt said fifty years ago that the Pacific was to be the great ocean for the trade of the future. He was a true prophet, and we all know it now. The conduct of Russia, Eng- land, France and Germany within the last two years shows that they recognize the fact that Humboldt was a prophet and an in- spired one. Now, how can we reach this Eastern trade? How can we get our share of it? There is the problem we have to solve. I say you should construct an isthmian canal. Make it neutral to all the world, if you please, in peace and war; but not neutral with a country at war with us. What effect will that canal have? It will bring New York city a day's sail nearer Shanghai than Liverpool will be, and Liverpool to-day is a great deal nearer Shanghai than New York is — thousands of miles nearer. Before the Suez Canal was built we were about as near the Orient as England, and after we were from three thousand to five thousand miles farther off than England, and England has been 25 reaping the benefit. Her commerce with the East increased forty per cent, from the time that canal was opened up to 1888, and only seventeen per cent, to the rest of the world. That shows what shortening of distances and lowering of freights do for commerce. I repeat that canal will bring New York a day's sail nearer to Shanghai than Liverpool will be; 1200 miles nearer the northern ports of China, where our trade is to-day and where it must be largely in the future; 2000 miles nearer Corea; 1800 miles nearer Yokohama; 1000 miles nearer Melbourne; 1800 miles nearer Sydney; more than 2000 miles nearer New Zealand ; 3000 to 4000 miles nearer to the west coast of South America. Look at your map to-day, and you will find that the course from New York to the west coast of South America is abso- lutely straight. Now, is there an intelligent man here who can- not see that the enormous decrease of distance and lessening of freight rates are going to enable us to compete with England in the Orient, or with Germany, or with any other nation in Europe ? Our recently acquired possessions will be an enormous help for us in this contest for the commerce of the East, and for our commerce generally. Under that treaty we acquired, not the sovereignty of Cuba, because we yield that to any stable govern- ment that may be formed there, which is capable of preserving order, protecting life and property, making treaties, insisting upon their rights under them, and observing their obligations. But to whom will the people of the Island of Cuba owe relief from that despotic power of Spain which has ground her into the dust for the last two himdred years ? To whom will they owe their release from hunger and starvation and death ? To whom will they owe their relief from the most ingenious and 26 outrageous taxation that was ever imposed upon a people? Why, to us. Will not gratitude and propinquity give us the trade of that beautiful island? Let a stable government be formed ; let peace settle on the island once more ; let American capital go there, as it will, and the trade and commerce of that island will quadruple in two years, and it will be ours. Puerto Rico is ours ; her trade is ours, and will be. I should like to digress for a few moments at this point. The Republicans in Congress are just now in great disfavor with the people. Why ? Because they have voted for a bill imposing a duty on goods exported from Puerto Rico to the United States eighty-five per cent, less than is exacted under existing law. Because the President, in his annual message, advised Congress that it was their plain duty to give Puerto Rico free trade with our country. They are not aware of the fact that he, on further and more careful consideration, approved the bill imposing a duty of fifteen per cent, of the Dingley on such goods. Because they appreciate the unfortunate condition of the people of that island, and are controlled by a most creditable sympathy for them, though, in my opinion, a mistaken one ; for I have no hesitation in saying that the legislation referred to is more gener- ous and effective than free trade would be. They are told that the Sugar Trust has cajoled Congress ; as if free sugar was not just what that Trust most desires. What are the facts? The prmcipal products of the island are coffee (free), sugar and tobacco. From the best information obtainable, about all the tobacco and sugar have been purchased by a few men under the high Dingley duties, the producers hav- ing been compelled to discount from their price the duty. If these men can export these crops to our country free, they will 27 realize an enormous profit, which they will promptly pocket, the people of the island receiving no benefit whatever. It is said that a British Vice-Consul owns nearly half of the sugar crop, and I know that he has been in Washington for two months, lobbying for free trade. Under the bill which passed the House, the profits of these men are decreased by the amount of the duties paid, and the money so saved is given to the President to be expended for the benefit of all the people in the island. The island must have revenues, and is in no condi- .tion to raise them by direct taxation. This will help them out until they can provide, by laws of their own, the money neces- sary for governmental expenditures, and then this duty will be repealed. The President advised that all of the duties hitherto collected on their products, amounting to $2,095,000, now in our treasury, be turned over to him to be expended for the benefit of the island. The House promptly passed it, and it wall become a law, amended so as to include all duties collected up to the en- actment of the law now pending. There never before was a possession of this Republic treated so generously. Again. Thousands of good Republicans have been insisting that our Constitution, by its own force, goes into all of our pos- sessions, and that under it we cannot impose any duties on the products of Puerto Rico or the Philippine archipelago coming into our country, any more than we can on those passing from one State to another. Have they forgotten that the Republican party had its birth largely in opposition to that very doctrine ? It was an inven- tion of Calhoun, denounced by Webster and Benton, its sole purpose being the extension of slavery into our Territories. One 28 of the planks in the platform of our party, on -which we elected Abraham Lincoln, was a severe denunciation of this doctrine. Yesterday, in the Senate, a vote was had on an amendment, offered by a Democrat, reasserting this doctrine, and every Re- publican voted agamst it, while every Democrat and Populist was recorded for it. (Applause.) Are the Republicans of this country prepared to adopt it now ? We are confronted, not by a theory, but by a most serious condition. While the products of Puerto Rico cannot affect our markets, our industries, or our workingraen, the Philippine archipelago presents a very different case. When peace is restored there, and American capital, with American methods, enter into this archipelago — the most productive in the world — sugar and tobacco can be produced almost without limit, cigars manufac- tured in enormous quantities, all with cheap labor ; and, if the Democratic construction is right, imported into our States with- out any duty, crippling our beet sugar industry, our tobacco raising, and competing disastrously with our cigar manufactur- ers, affecting seriously our workingmen. The Republicans, recognizing the importance of the question under discussion, and the absolute necessity of its settlement by the Supreme Court before w'e enter upon legislation for the Philippine Islands, imposed this small duty upon the products of Puerto Rico, as a practical assertion of their opinion that the Constitution did not by its own force extend to our lately ac- quired territories. While we treated the Puerto Ricans with ex- ceptional generosity, we at the same time took the only course to secure an early decision of the court. I beg pardon for this digression. (Applause.) I said the Puerto Rico trade would be ours. Guam is not 29 of much account, but it will be ours. We have civilized it — married all the people there who ought to be married — aud everything is going on finely. The Philippine archipelago is worth a good many islands like Cuba and Puerto Rico. As I said a few moments ago, it is the most prolific land in the whole world. It has been under Spanish power for three hundred years, and has been squeezed like a sponge year after year, and one half of its revenues stolen. It has no agricultural imple- ments of any kind — modern I mean — only one little railroad sixty miles long; no highways; and yet, according to United States Commissioner Harden, in 1897, when they had just emerged from a rebellion, the exports of the archipelago — with one third of the entire product rotting on the ground because they could not get it to the sea — the exports amounted to a little over $41,- 000,000, and the imports to over $17,000,000. The possibili- ties of the archipelago are worth looking at. It has almost every kind of mineral ; it has magnificent forests ; it has as good tillable land as the world affords ; it can raise hemp of the best quality without limit, and the demand for it is without limit ; it can raise, as I told you, sugar and tobacco almost without limit ; it raises okra and rice, and almost all sorts and manner of fruits and vegetables. There is coal in almost every island in the archipelago. Why, in the island of Cebu, up on a mountain top, there is a coal-mine cropping out on the surface. It has cropped out for three hundred years, since Spain has been in pos- session. It is better coal than the Japanese lump ; and if Spain had possession for three hundred years longer, it would still be cropping out, and nothing more. It is only fifteen miles from the mine to Cebu port, but there is no way of freighting the coal that fifteen miles. 30 Let the Yankees get in there, and in six months there will be a railroad from Cebu port to the Cebu mine ; there will be a thousand men Avorkmg that mine ; and they will land that coal at the port at five shillings a ton. We have been paying for Dewey's coal from ten to twenty dollars a ton. The possibilities are enormous. Let us take possession of that arehijielago, con- nect it by cable with the United States, as we shall shortly; con- nect the various islands by telegraphic communication; build railroads where they are necessary ; open up highways ; let us buy from the monastic orders the enormous possessions which they have in their hands, make it a charge upon the islands, and dis- pose of the land m small farms. Let us go on and furnish them with agricultural implements of the modern kind ; let us give them decent wages, such as we give our own people, and what will be the result ? We will quadruple in a few years the pro- ductions of the islands. Now what shall we do with the archipelago ? It is ours as honestly as any part of our territory. Shall we give it back to Spain ? If we did wrong in taking it, that is the only honest thing to do ; but even that man who said President McKinley was a murderer did not suggest that. What shall we do with it? Oh, they say, give the people a free and independent republican government in the islands — a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. (Laughter.) There is not an intelligent man who ever spent five years in the archipelago ; there is not an army officer or a naval officer, from Merritt and Dewey down, who has not declared em- phatically that they are utterly incapable of self-government. There was not a witness before our Commission in Paris who did not declare their incompetency for self-government. That great 31 Commission which President McKinley sent over there — and they were there a long time — came back and made a unanimous report that they were utterly unfit for self-government. Why should they be fit ? Who has been their schoolmaster for three hundred years? Spain. What did she know about free government ? No ; rec- ognize a government of theirs, surrender the sovereignty of the archipelago to them, and anarchy would result, and the people be decimated; or else Europe would step in to protect their people, or on pretence to do so, and veiy likely go to war them- selves over the division of the spoils. Perhaps we had better surrender the sovereignty to Aguinaldo — Washmgton — Lafay- ette — Patrick Henry. (Laughter.) What does Aguinaldo care about your Constitution ? What does he care about the Declaration of Independence ? What does he care about a republican government? All he seeks is despotic power. Give him that, place a crown on his head, and it will be the uneasiest head that ever yet wore one. There will be a rival chieftain in every island of the archipelago in less than six months. Perhaps we had better sell them. You can do so to good ad- vantage. I was informed a few days ago that there was a syndi- cate in Hong Kong ready to pay $400,000,000 for the islands. Sell them ? Would not that be a spectacle for gods and men ! What shall we do with the archipelago ? I do not believe that the voice of the American people can possibly be mistaken ; I do not believe there would be any uncertain sound. Ameri- cans are not inclined to surrender territories they have acquired. When Canada demands a little bit of the frozen regions of Alaska, you American people are almost ready to go to war with 32 England to prevent their having it. The American people, for the good of the people of the archipelago, and for our own, will hold these islands. We will give them a good government, relieve them from slavery, from outrageous and burdensome tax- ation ; we will employ their people ; give them decent wages ; we will, as I said before, buy the immense real estate of the monastic orders, cut it up into small farms and sell them to the people at a fair price ; we will make them a charge to the archi- pelago, and in a few years the archipelago will pay the entire charge without feeling it ; we will build them railroads and high- ways ; we will construct schoolhouses and furnish them with school-teachers ; we will respect their civil and religious rights ; will give them freedom — all the freedom that is consistent with law — we will let them, so far as they can, direct their municipal and local affairs ; w^e will educate and train them into the power of governing themselves, and it is barely possible that in time, under our guidance, under our instruction, they may become able to establish a stable government there, capable of preserving peace and protecting life and property, making treaties, observing their obligations under them and compelling others to do so ; then possibly the American people might surrender the sover- eignty to such a government as that, reserving for themselves the necessary naval and coaling stations. So far, however, as I am concerned, I never would surrender the sovereignty of that archipelago to any people within the islands or to any nation without. (Applause.) This archipelago is infinitely more important from a com- mercial, strategic point of view than from any commerce of its own. There it is, right in the front door of the Orient, with 700,000,000 or 800,000,000 people, who imported last year $1,- 33 500,000,000 worth of goods, and, with their increasing civiliza- tion, will in a short time double that importation. It gives us a potent voice in the East, and that voice has already been heard for the first time. Russia, Germany, France and England pro- posed to divide up China, closing the door against our exports ; and for the first time in our history our State Department made a diplomatic demand that our treaty rights in China should be respected, and that the nations of Europe should not close the doors ; and the nations of Europe have replied that they will not. (Applause.) Suppose that our State Department two years ago had sent such a demand to Europe. It is not supposable that they would have sent it, but if they had, it would have been re- ceived with a sneer. For the first time we have an immense power in the East, simply because we are to-day a part of it. The nations of the earth to-day are close together. They stand shoulder to shoulder ; they heard the thunder of Dewey's guns ; and for the first time they recognized this Republic as a great world power. Shall we alone of all the people of the earth refuse to recognize that stupendous fact. You have commercial treaties with China that guarantee the reception of your goods into that immense empire of 300,000,000 or 400,000,000 people on the terms of the most favored nations. Do you propose to lose the benefit of those treaties ? Do you propose to allow Germany or France to violate them ? They would have done it with impu- nity two years ago ; they will not now. They heard Dewey's guns, and they know we are there now. No ; we never will surrender the Philippines. Then I am an expansionist, am I ? Yes, I am, and I am in the best company a man ever was in. When this Republic started, we had about 800,000 square miles of territory, a little ofO. 34 strip of land along the Atlantic coast. In 1803 we made tlie Louisiana purchase, and acquired 1,170,000 square miles of ter- ritory — North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Washing- ton, Oregon, Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa and Louisiana. There was a frightful outcry, a good deal more serious than was heard in Philadelphia the other day, a good deal louder than that raised in Boston to-day. Our Constitution was in splinters; the Declaration of Independence was treated with contempt ; the country was ruined, the Republic gone. Josiah Quincy — he was from Massachusetts — discussing in Congress this purchase of 1803, said : " The Constitution never was and never can be strained to leap over the wilderness of the West. (Ohio was part of the ' wilderness of the West.') I say it never was intended to form a covering for Missouri and the Red river country. Attempt to stretch it over this, and it will be rent asunder. You have no authority to throw the rights, liberties and prosperity of this people into the hodge-podge with the wild men of Missouri, or with the mixed races basking on the sands of the Mississippi. It will be the death-blow to the Constitution." In 1819 we took Florida, another outcry; in 1845 Texas, another outcry ; in 1848 New Mexico and California, another outcry ; in 1867 Alaska, another outcry. We started with 800,- 000 square miles of territory, and we left off with 2,800,000 square miles ; we never sold a rod of it, and the Constitu- tion still lives, and the Declaration of Independence still shines. Now, gentlemen, do you not think we can stand Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippine archipelago and survive ? Gentlemen, bear your burdens patiently, accept your responsibilities cour- ageously, discharge your duties intelligently and with fidelity, 35 and this Eepublic, under the guidance of Almighty God, will prosper and live through the ages. (Applause.) When the Senator concluded his speech and resumed his seat, Colonel E,. Dale Benson said : Mr. President, there cannot be a gentleman present here to- night who does not appreciate the compliment that has come to us in that we have as an honored guest the Presiding Officer of the United States Senate ; nor are we unmindful of the kindly ex- pressions made in regard to this institution and the great city of Philadelphia ; but a greater obligation rests upon us, one and all, for the very interesting, able and comprehensive address which has been presented to us on one of the most vital and burnmg questions which this nation has ever had under consideration. I therefore move you, sir, that Senator Frye be requested to ac- cept the grateful thanks of The Union League of Philadelphia for the courtesies of the evening. The motion was seconded by a chorus of voices, and unani- mously carried. ii//////////iML,,™V''^'^t^^ 013 74rgs ^