IN THE NAHE OF LIBERTY ANTI-IMPERIALIST MEETING TREMONT TEMPLE, APRIL 4, 1899. PROTEST AGAINST THt FHILIPITNE POLICY PUBLISHED BY THE ANTI-IMPERIALIST LEAGUE 1S99 ROCKWELL AND CHURCHILL PRESS. BOSTON, MASS. A meeting was held in tlie Treuiont Tein[)le, Boston, on the eveuing of Tuesday, April 4, 18911, in pursuance of the following call : IN THE NAME OF LIBERTY. Anti-Imperialist Meeting. Protest against the Philippine Policy. The Hon. A. K. Pillsulrv will preside. Address bv The Hon. GEORGE 8. BOUTWELL. Short s[)eeclies by the Hon. .Ja.mks K. Dinbak, the Hon. HERBrjJT C. Parsons, the Hon. Robicrt 31. jMorse, Col. Tho:\ias L. Livi:u.M()ri;. There were present of the persons invited to take seats upon the platform: Mr. Moses Williams, INIr. Henry B. Metcalf, Pev. S. R. Fuller, Rev. C. G. Ames, Rev. C. F. Dole, Col. T. W. Higgiuson, Rev. Geoige C. Lori- uier, D.D., Representatives Myers, Stone, and Severance, Professor Charles E. Fay, Judge Asa French, Professor C. R. Lanman, Mr. Pjarthold Schlesinger, Mr. Moorfield Storey, Senators Keneiick and Innes, Mv. S. Endicott Peabody, Col. C. R. Codmau, Mr. George E. McNeill, Dr. Edward W. Emeison, Professor "\V. T. Sedgwick, Rev. Samuel W. Dike, Hon. Winslow Warren, Mr.^ Will- iam Endicott, Rev. B. F. Trueblood, General P. A. Col- lins, Mr. E. H. Clement, Mr. Francis E, Abbot, Mr. Edward Fitzwilliam, Mr. Robert Treat Paine, Mr. .Tames P. Muuroe, Mr. Albert S. Parsons, Mr. David Greene Haskins, .fr., jNIr. Erving Winslow, General F. A. Osborn, Mr. Gamaliel Bradford. THE HON. ALBERT E. PILLSBURY. The Hon. Albert E. Pillsbury, in calling the meeting to order, said : This meeting is called to consider the present attitude of our government toward the people of the Philippines. The situation is very simple. Less than a year ago we declared war against Spain, in the name of liberty :iik1 hninanity, f"i iur liarlmruus ireat- ment of the Cubans. To-ilay we aic doing in the I'hilip- pines what wc made wai' U[)on S[)aiH for doing in Cuba. Wc are laying waste the country with lire and sword, burning villages and slaughtering the inhabitants, because they will not submit to our rule. ft is said that as we are in possession of the Philip- pines wc must i)rcserve order. But Spain was in posses- sion of Cuba, and this was her excuse. If the pretext is good for us now it was good for Spain then. We refused to accept it. AVe answered it with war. A\'e have now taken the sword from Spain and turned it upon a peoi)lc to whom we hold the same relation that Spain then held to the Cubans. Indeed, our right to slaughter the Fili- pinos is less than hers to slaughter the Cubans, as Spain had been in possession of Cuba from the earliest times, while we have but just set foot in the riiilippines, under a title which the inhabitants arc liound neither in lau- nor morals to respect. A year ago the name of Weyler was the execrati(jn «»f the whole civilized world. The decree of AVeyler to the Cubans was " submission or extermination." To-day, if we can trust our information, the same decree is being enforced in the name of the United States against the people of the Philippines. The Manila correspondent of a New York newspaper, which is authority for this if i( is authority for anything, gives us this interesting exam- ple of our way of doing it, in an account of the fighting around Manila : "Occasionally a Filipino w^ould fall forward apparently dead, wait until he w^as fairly under the heels of the Americans, and then foolishly rise and attempt to gain safety. To shoot a man at six feet range with a Spring- Held ritle is a hard thing to do, but the orders were to let no insurgent live, and off would go the whole side of his head, or he would fall with a wound through the abdomen large enough to drop a potato through." Even Weyler could hardly do better than this. Are the American people satisfied to have their government en- gaged in this business? That is the question to-day, and that is the question before this meeting. It has been said by high authority that nine-tenths of the people support the policy of the government. There are many who support it, for a variety of reasons, but I am not aware that the people have been counted upon this question. There are Republicans who feel bound to 5 support it as the policy of a Repuljlican administration. The army and navy support it, becaust for tliem it is duty and promotion. There are expectant politicians who support it as the policy of more offices and more |)Ower. Some statesmen, hitherto eminent for twisting the British lion's tail, support it, though the caudal appen- dage is now in another hand, the hand of British diplo- macy, which is leading them to do its work, — for all this is done more for Great Britain than for us. There are newspapers which support it, on various grounds, some as party joui'uals, some for the glory of foreign empire, some in the interest of trade, one, I believe, in the cause of civil service reform, and some possibl}' with a remote view to their circulation. There are ministers of the gospel who support it, in the intervals of wondering why more people do not attend their ciiurches, believing, I [)resume, that the Prince of Peace will approve the killing of half the Filipinos if his message of good-will toward men may be carried to the other half. There are also high-minded and patriotic citizens who submit to it be- cause they see no help for it. Their view is this : We are in the Philippines, wisely or unwisely, righth" or wrongly, and we must restore order before we can deal with the question of government. Let us see about this. Is it necessary to slaughter the • inhabitants to restore order? What occasioned the dis- order which we are suppressing with fire and sword? Look back for a moment. How did we begin with the Filipinos ? We began by inviting their help against Spain, whose power in the islands they had broken before Dewey sailed into Manila bay. They were our allies, formall}' or informally, in honor it matters not which, so far as we needed them. The protocol of August 12 conveyed the first hint that, after availing ourselves of their help, we proposed to sub- jugate them and seize their countrj- to ourselves. They pro- tested. If they had done less they would have deserved, and had, the contempt of the world. They tried to appeal to our government for conference, if nothing more, upon their position and our purposes, and this appeal was denied. So our serpentine diplomac}' worked its way along until the purpose was openly declared to ignore our obligations, disregard their claim to a voice in the govern- ment of the territory, always theirs by right, which they had begun to reconquer from Spain, and subject them to our military power upon our own terms. To this they fi refused to submit, and we are killing them because they refuse. But for this there is no reason to believe that a hostile shot would ever luive been fired against us by a single Filipino. Who, then, were the aggressors? Tried by the high declaration with which we began the war against Spain, who were the aggressors? Forcible annexation was de- clared to be not only aggression, but criminal aggression. rt is said that we arc not guilty of such criminal aggi'e.s- sion, because we acquired the islands by purchase. Who sold them to us? The inhabitants have never sold them. We acquired from Spain only such title as she had, a title which never rested on anything but force. We took it, such as it was, with full notice that it was disputed, and not only disputed, l)ut broken. The headlines call the Filipinos ■• rebels." Why rebels? What allegiance have tliey ever owed to us? We have not even the paper authority of international law for claiming their allegiance. Wc knew before we set foot ill the islands that they denied allegiance to Spain, and we took full advantage of the fact. Our twenty millions paid to Si>ain did not pin-chase their allegiance, and nnich less did it pay for a drop of their blood. Do they oavc more allegiance to us than the Cubans owed to Spain? We began the war with a declaration of both houses of Congress that " the people of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent," expressly disclaiming any purpose to ac({uire sovereignty over them. AVhat single title had the Cubans to freedom and independence, or to possession of their own country, that the Filipinos do not possess to-dav ? Not one. Was our declaration, then, a lie? — the declaration which alone reconciled the people of the United States to invoke, in the cause of liberty, the horrors and calamities of war? A few im- perialists are candid enough to avow that it was a lie, and was never meant to be anything else. But that declara- tion was made in the name of the American peo[)le, and no less authority than theirs can recall it or depart from it, and they mean that it shall be made good, not only toward Cuba, but toward the world. It is said that tlie Filipinos are not fit to govern them- selves ; that the talk about liberty and self-government for them is nothing but empty sentiment ; and that the only practical course is to take and hold them with the strong hand. I do not pretend to know whether they are fit to govern themselves, but 1 do not know of any- body iu this coiiutiy who lias authority to commit us to a war with them upon tlie assumption tliat they are not. Cau we assume that they are not, while refusing them a chance to try the experiment ? Can we assume that there are not at least a few who are fit to govern the rest, as they do here? "What makes a people fit for lib- erty ? One test upon which we shall all agree is that they are fit for liberty who are able and willing to fight for it. Another test is such a sense of national obliga- tion that they kee[) their word when they have given it. The Filipinos with whom we so far have had anything to do, or with whom Spain has ever had to do, are not a savage race. They inhabit cities and villages, and live by the arts of peace. They are Christians, many of them, within the pale of a Christian church. They have formed a government of their own, with a written con- stitution which is said to be of high mei'it. The}' have every natural and political riglit to govern themselves that our fathers had as against Great Britain, unless lib- erty is for the white man alone, — and this is what our new policy of imperialism really means. Are the American people prepared to blot out the Dec- laration, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the Con- stitutional amendments, and take their stand upon the doctrine that the earth is for the white man, and for the white man who carries the heaviest guns? and have the}'^ reckoned up the consequences of that position ? Upon such a question as this tlie people must be consulted. It cannot be settled in a cabinet council. Next month a conference of the nations is invited to consider the possibility of disarmament and peace. How shall we appear in that assembly? Shall we cast our vote against the proposition? Or shall we hold up our red hands in its favor? It is time for the people to speak, with a voice of authority, and to stop this unrighteous and disgraceful work of slaugliter. The blood of our own brave men cries out against it, no less than the blood of our victims. It is time to say. Have done with the policy of hypocrisy and false pretences, to which we have never consented, and come back to the Americanism of Washington and Abraham Lincoln, in which we still believe, and settle the Philippine question by that rule, the only rule by which it can be settled in accord with the interests or the honor of the people of the United States. THE HON. GEORGE S. BOUTWELL. I have set before myself two main objects in the ad- dress that I have prepared for this occasion. luciden- tally I shall deal with some of the reasons that are tendered in justification of the war in Cuba and the war in the Philippine islands. I have gathered somewhat of evidence, and thereto I add something in the nature of argument in support of the claim that the people of this country have never abandoned the doctrine of self-government as the cardinal doctrine of our public life, whether in the municipality, the State, or the nation. Next I have marshalled a portion of the evidence that is at ray command which proves, or tends to prove, that the President has entered systematically upon a colonial policy in imitation of the colonial policy of Great Britain. You will observe as I go on that I give uo attention to the speeches that the President has made. I follow him by his doings. J give the President credit for ability, for signal ability, in the work of transforming this govern- ment, and, therefore, unless I err in that particular, his policy must be logical. When the actions of men and the language of men appear not to harmonize I look for the trutli in the actions of men. A knowledge of a single act, especially in the case of a public officer, may not warrant a conclusion as to the motives and purposes of the actor, but when there is an array of several consecutive acts, and all relating to the same subject matter, and all tending in the same direc- tion, a conclusion maybe deduced with unerring certainty. Four great events, for which the President is responsi- ble in his office, are reconcilable with each other upon one theory only, and they all tend to one conclusion, — an American colonial system. First, I mention the protocol of Aug. 12, 1898; second, the treaty of Paris of Dec. 10, 1898; then the proclamation to the Philippines of Jan. 5, 1899 ; and, finally, the Philippiuean war of sub- jugation, which the President is now carrying on in the Philippine islands, upon his sole responsibility and with- out special authority of law. That war is transforming, and transforming rapidly, the eight or ten million Filipinos who were our friends, and who, except for this war, would have continued to be our friends, into enemies of the United States. When 9 this shall have boeu accomplished we shall be met by the fonnidable proposition that we cannot consent to the crec- tioii of an independent state in hostility to the govern- nieut by whose agency the state is to be created. Thus the colonial system will become the alternative — the in- evitable alternative. , ., ^ • ^ I pause to ask the devotees of commerce and the f riemls of missionary work whether the prospect for their under- takiucrs is now more inviting than it would have l^een if the President had aided the Filipinos to set up a govern- ment without delay, and thus to have bound them to this country by ties of gratitude which would have lasted through the centuries ? . , • , ^, The President is not drifting, nor is he anxious for the advice of Congress. He appears rather to shun its inter- ference He has a policy of his own — a colonial system for America which shall correspond to the colonial system of Great Britain. This is to be the distinguishing feature of his administration. On that policy we join issue Passino- from this topic for the moment and speaking for mysetf , I concede one point to the advocates of im- perialism. , ,. ^ . • If some of the opponents of the present policy of terri- torial, insular expansion have questioned the power ot this government to acquire territory either by purchase or by conquest they may have erred as to the extent of the sovereignty existing in the government of the United States, and it is certain that they have erred in raising a question which is not essential and which is calculated to embarrass the opponents of the present policy. The power to acquire territory is a necessary incident ot sov- ereigntv m any form of government, and its existence must always be assumed unless a contrary and control- ling declaration shall have been made in the fundamental law of a particular State. As no such restriction has been made in our Constitution, it must be admitted that the power of the United States to acquire territory is an unlimited power. It is in vain that we seek to luake a constitutional distinction between the acquisition of con- tiguous continental territories and the acquisition of islands in distant and unfrequented seas. l;or one, there- fore I have not opposed the acquisition of the Philippines upon the ground that there is not power in our govern- ment to acquire the islands either by conquest or by pur- chase but I have opposed the scheme as bad public polfc7 and for the further and controlling reason that 10 under our form of goverumeiit the iuhabitauts will be entitled to citizenship and to membership as States in the American Union. Our form of government in each and every of its attri- butes proceeds upon the idea that the people, acting in com- munities, are to govern themselves. It may be said with entire confidence that, until the opening of the Spanish war, there had not appeared in the United States one man whose voice could reach the public ear who had ventured to intimate that the United States could seize, or take, or accept, territories and peoples, and then proceed in the business of government upon any other theory than the theory of self-goveinment. No change in the public policy has been wrought by the fact that in many cases there has been a period of minor- ity, nor can the fact be quoted as evidence of a departure from the general policy of the country. With equal honesty it might be alleged that the full rights of citizen- ship are denied to young men, who do not possess tlie elective franchise until tliey arrive at the age of 21 years. With a marvellous inaptitude in the use of the faculty called reason the advocates of enforced jurisdiction over the Philippines cite the case of the District of Columbia, where the right to vote does not exist. The District of Columbia was a little territory originally, that measured 10 miles on each of its four sides, or 100 square miles in all. It is now reduced to one-half of its original size. With sufficient reasons, with reasons imperative, in fine, reasons which were sufficient to distinguish a government subordinate from a government supreme ; reasons aris- ing from the experiences of a fugitive Congress, the framers of the Constitution made a wide departure from the theory of a republican government, and in a manly, open way they recognized the fact. They made no resort to subterfuges ; they made no attempt to qualify, to mis- interpret, or to conceal the fundamental truths of the Declaration of Independence. They said : A great exi- gency is upon us. We are engaged in a mighty struggle. We are striving to create a nation. In a nation there must be sovereignty, and that there may be sovereignty there must be a capital, free, always free, from the un- timely or impertinent or dangerous interference of a State or of a mob. They did not assume that some Congress might seize a territory, exercise jurisdiction, and author- ize or permit a President, as commander-in-chief, to keep the peace. They said : We will invoke the highest human 11 authority ; we will uot attempt to exercise jurisdiction over any territory aurl its occi"ipants, however iusignificant the territory or feeble iu numbers the dwellers thereon may be, unless the people aud States of the Union shall authorize the thing to be done. This of the territory of the United States, and over which a limited jurisdiction was to be thrown by the new Constitution. Let the advocates of imperial jurisdiction over the Philippines follow the example of the founders of the Re- public. Let them ask the people aud the States of the Union for constitutional authority to set aside the Decla- ration of Independence aud the preamble to the Constitu- tion, wherein the establishment of justice is named as only second in importance of the objects for which the Constitution was formed. Let them state the exact facts to the country, aud say that, with the aid of the natives, we have expelled Spain from the islands where she has claimed jurisdiction since 1521, although her actual jurisdiction has never been exercised over more than one-half of the territory ; that we have succeeded to the title of Spaiu, but without the concurrence of the natives ; that the territory is equal in extent to the territory of the States of New England and New York combined ; that the population is equal to the population of the seven States named ; and that we propose to govern these people and to tax these people without their consent, until iu our opinion they are capa- ble of governing themselves. Finally, we ask for authority to compel thera into sub- mission in case of resistance, aud we are able to assure the country that the millions on the islands are bound to the soil, and that they cannot find homes or abiding place or shelter anywhere else within the limits of the habi- table globe. We know that we are departing from the principles of our government when we attempt to rule and to tax a people without their consent. We know that our proposition is inconsistent with the preamble to the Constitution, and that it is especially inconsistent with the Declaration of Independence, wherein these words are used : " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, aud the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriv- 12 iuor their just powers fi'ora the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destruc- tive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute nevr government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them sliall seem most lilcely to effect tlieir safety and happiness." Let them say to the country : AVe stand in the presence of these great political truths, we recognize their binding force, we shrink from the violation of them in setting up governments and enforcing systems of taxatio'i over and among a people whose wishes have not been consulted, and whose voice has not been heard. We realize that these truths are for the islanders as well as for us, and that thereby they are pre-justified in resisting any attempt that we may make to set up our government over them. Moreover, one of our trusted leaders has said of himself and of his associates, "There is not one among us who would not cut off his hand sooner than be false to the principles of the Declaration of Independence and to the great traditions and ideals of American history." Hence it is that we ask the people and States of the American Union to assume the responsibility. By this course the advocates of free conquest and imperial schemes of government may bring themselves within the precedent of the founders of the Republic, who created a voiceless municipality that a nation might pos- sess sovereignty. In support of the request three reasons might be offered : (1.) A possibility of an increase in the Philippines in the demand for low-priced cotton cloths, and thus the manu- facturing industries of Fall River and Lowell and kindred cities might be improved. (2.) The field for missionary work might be enlarged. One observation on this point. The war through which we are now passing has been tolerated by some and de- fended by others as a war in behalf of humanity, or as a war which will enlarge the field for the spread of Chris- tianity. AVars will not cease until mankind abandon the opinion that the sentiment of humanity, in any of its many forms of expression, or the s[)read of any system of religion, can justify the sacrifice of human life in war. Wars for humanity, for civilization, for religion, have no fixed points at which, in the nature of things, they are to terminate. Our Cuban war, for humanity, has spread already to the Philippines, and for a like reason it may pass over to China. 13 (3.) The forcible seizure and occupation of the Philip- pines by us may prevent the forcible seizure and occupa- tion of the islands by some other nation possessing less wisdom and humanity in government than we claim for ourselves. Can any one, can the President or Senator Lodge, have a doubt about the verdict of the country upon these prop- ositions? Are wars to be justified ujjou the ground that markets may be extended? On the contrary, I hazard the state- ment that every war limits the ability of the people to make purchases, and for the reason that the earnings of the laborers are consumed in war taxes. Wars tend to enhance the price of the products of labor, and to dimin- ish the means of the toilers in every line of industry. Wars increase the demand for tlie enginery of war, but they limit the demand for everything else. The markets of the world are not opened by wars abroad, but by schools, by institutions of design and technology, by inventions, and by applied science at home. Whoever can excel in cheapness and quality of production will open all the markets of the world to his products. All markets are closed against the inferior and the more expensive articles. While England is struggling for new markets she is losing the monopoly of the markets that she has conquered, and one by one and step by step they are passing into the hands of France, Germany, and the United States. Wars are closing the markets of the world against those who carry on the wars. The war with Spain has added largely to the cost of production in the United States by the new taxes laid upon capitalists and upon laborers. The prosecution of the war against the Filipinos is an offence to every producer, and every laborer, and every taxpayer in America. Our demand must be this : With- draw the troops from the Philippines, and that without regard to any arrangements that may have been made. Leave the islands to the inhabitants. Let them set up a government for themselves. Let it be recognized as an independent state, and without any inquiry by us as to its character. Nothing can be more presumptuous in human affairs than the claim that the President and Congress are entitled to an opinion even upon the matter of the govern- ment of the Philippines. The only preparation for such a work is the preparation which ignorance may furnish. We are ignorant of their languages, of their traditions. 14 of their habits of life, of the exactions which climate may make upon the dwellers in the tropics, and yet we think ourselves capable of governing a distant and foreign people with whom ordinary intercourse is impossible. What is the next step in the career of [)uljlic crime on which the country has entered? Only this : The creation of a mercenary army, to be composed of men with whom, for the most part, we are unable to have personal inter- course, who have no knowledge of our institutions, and who will be bound to us by no tie, except that wliich may be established between the oppressed and the oppressor. The demand has already come from Cuba, and for the reason that our troops cannot remain in the island after April 1. If natives can be obtained in Cuba and Porto Rico, what is to be done for or with the 40,000 citizen soldiers who are in the Philippines? Mercenary armies have been the curse of every country in which they have found employment. At the best, they are bound to the country that they serve by no other tie than the tie which binds the employed to the emi)loycr. In the Philippines the relation will be that of the oppressed to the oppressor. We are to establish a system of slavery in tlie Philippines, and then trust to an army composed of men who are con- scious of the chains that they are wearing. The battle of the 5th of February has given us control of the suburbs of Manila, but the subjugation of tiie island of Luzon is the work on which the army is entering. That may be a work of days, or the contest may go on for years. I pass now to the question of responsibilit}', and I assume, first of all, that the responsibility for the existing state of affairs is upon the President. To that point I shall offer some evidence. How far Aguinaldo represents the inhabitants of the islands is not known to any one. Three facts, however, are established : He represents somebody ; he has a military force at his command that rises to the proportions of an army ; and he is the only person in the island of Luzon who makes a claim to authority. A vital charge against the President and the administra- tion is this : Since the 12th of August, when tlie protocol was signed, Aguinaldo has been treated as a rebel, or as an enemy. As early as December, 1898, we sent a menacing fleet and army for the purpose of capturing or destroying tl)e city of Iloilo. That movement was delayed for the 15 ratification of the treaty. Tlie treaty ratified was pre- auuouuced as security for peace, and immediately we attacked the city of Iloilo. It is now evident that every habitation and hamlet that is within range of the sliot and shell of our navy will suffer a like fate. How otherwise is the rebellion to be suppressed ? The President's proclamation of January 5 was a declaration of war against the inhabitants of the Philip- pine islands. The declaration of war by us justified the Filipinos in making actual war, and it is in vain that we attempt to transfer the responsibility from ourselves to them.' Nor as yet is it an established fact that the war of arras was commenced by Aguinaldo. What are the allegations and demands of" the proclamation? I quote from its language : 1. It is alleged in the proclamation that the destruc- tion of the Spanish fleet and the capture of the city of Manila "practically effected the conquest of the Philip- pine islands." 2. " As the result of the victories of American arms the future control, disposition, and government of the Philippine islands are ceded to the United States." 3. " The military government heretofore maintained by the United States in the city, harbor, and bay of Manila is to be extended with all possible dispatch to the whole of the ceded territory." / 4. "The taxes and duties heretofore payable by the inhabitants to the late government become payable to the authorities of the United States, unless it be seen fit to substitute for them other reasonable rates or modes of contribution to the expenses of government." 5. " In the fulfilment of this high mission, supporting the temperate administration of affairs for the greatest o-ood of the governed, there must be sedulously maintained the strong arm of authority, to repress disturbances and to overcome all obstacles to the bestowal of the blessings of good and stable government upon the people of the Philippine islands, under the free flag of the United States." The President occupies the position in reference to the Philippines that Russia occupies in regard to Poland, and a position kindred to the position that Austria occupied to Huno-ary in 1848, when Kossuth was carrying on a contest in behalf of self-government in which all America sympa- thized. The President abandons the Declaration of Independ- 16 ence, and sets aside the immortal words, " Governments are instituted among men, deriving tlieir just powers from the consent of the governed." He is now using an army of American citizens to overcome an obstacle — the opinion of the inhabitants of the Philippine islands that they have a natural and inalienable right to govern them- selves. In the presence of the proclamation of January 5 the conjecture even is impossible that the President con- templates a time when the inhabitants of the Philippines will be permitted to govern themselves. He is now engaged in carrying on a war for tlie purpose, as he alleges, of " bestowing the blessings of good and stable government upon the people of the Philippine islands, under the free flag of the IJnited States." Thus does the President avow a purpose through war to under- take the " bestowal of the blessings of good and stable government, under the free flag of the United States," upon unwilling peoples. Wiiat is the meaning of this declara- tion, when it is stripped of its rhetoric? Only tliis — we are to enter upon wars of conquest, and to govern the conquered by force. The flag which to us is a free flag would be to them only an emblem of tyranny. What sort of a government is the President setting up in the Philippine islands? The answer must be this: A military government set up over a people who have been subdued or who are to be subdued by military power. Can such a government be a good government in the opinion of those who are the subjects of it? And of what value is the opinion of tlie governing party to those who are the subjects of the government? The President avows the purpose to enforce submission against all resistance, and to govern and to tax without reference to the wishes of the inhabitants. He asserts a purpose to use all the powers ever claimed by any despot. In fine, there is no middle ground in principle between the republicanism of the Declaration of American Independence and the broadest claims that were ever put forth by a czar of Russia. That some despot- isms are mild in administration cannot justify the exist- ence of despotic governments. The promises of the President as to the gentleness of his rule in the Philippine islands cannot qualify the badness of his policy as he has set it forth in the proclamation of January 5. Promises ! Of what value are promises as security against the evils of military rule over a people 7,000 or 10,000 miles away? It was as recently as the first third 17 of the mouth of February that the Secretary of War admitted the necessity of conceding to General Otis abso- lute power to deal with the Filipinos upon liis own judg- ment, and in the second week of March a like authority was given General Brooke in Cuba. And uow the admin- istration offers in its defeuce the statement that it is igno- rant of an order by which a military chieftain forbade the free transmission from one American citizen to another of a speech spoken in the Senate of the United States by a senator from a sovereign State. To make "the gruel thick aud slab " we have the startliug rumor that the cap- ture of prisoners has been forbidden. Thus for the time being there is a full surrender of executive supervision over^'the military authorities in the Philippine islands and in Cuba. Thus does the civil authority disappear, and thus does military rule take its place. Thus is despotism the constant companion of military rule. Under such circumstances, of what value are executive promises of o-ood government, even if the official life of the promiser could be extended from two years to two centuries? Has not this couniry had its fill of experience of mili- tary governments while the States of the South were pass- ing from the rebellion to renewed statehood in the Union ? And was there one man who did not rejoice as the days of deliverance came when military rule disappeared and the rule of the people was reestablished ? Our military districts of those days were within call of the telegraph every minute of the twenty-four hours ■ we had actual personal supervision of what was going on ; we had free communication through private and public channels ; there was no censorship of the press and the telegraph ; and yet evils of the gravest character were the incidents of that transition period. With this experience we are invited to stand aside and be silent while the President forces a "good and stable government" upon an unwilling people, through military rule. This is the advice of our fellow-citizen, Governor Long, advice which some of us can neither accept. nor heed. Although I place myself under the disagreeable neces- sity of repeating what I have said on former occasions, I shall trace the steps by which the President has developed his aggressive, warlike, and un-American policy. I shall not now deal with his motives and ultimate purposes. I pause, however, to say that it is great good fortune for the country that the brevity of our presidential term gives to the people an opportunity to interrupt or to change a bad public policy. II Dewey entered the harbor of Manila Sunday, the first day of May, 1898. By whose agency, by whose aid, by whose cooperation was he enabled to achieve the most illustrious success in modern naval warfare, and in an hour to advance himself to an equality in rank with Far- ragut and Nelson ? His coadjutor and ally was Aguinaldo, and his aids were the military forces under the command of Aguinaldo, who were then engaged in the work — the successful work — of expelling Spain from the Philippines. He was then thought to be worthy of our friendship and alliance. We were engaged in a common cause — tlie overthrow of Spanish rule. Aguinaldo was not then denounced as an enem3' or as a rebel, nor was a hint whispered by any one in authority that he was an adventurer, and a person without support in the islands. That lie is an adventurer and a person without influence among the Filipinos is a dis- covery of more recent times — a discovery made in the presence of the fact that he is in command of an army confronting us at every point. Following the occupation of the harbor of Manila and the capture of Cavite, there was no military movement until after the twelftli of Au- gust, when the protocol was signed. If our title to the Philippines is a title by conquest that title was gained by the entrance to the harbor of Manila and the capture of Cavite. At that time, however, there was no claim to jurisdiction by conquest, and there was no suggestion that Aguinaldo was either an adventurer, a rebel, or an enemy. He was our associate and co- worker for the overthrow of the authority of Spain, and to the uninitiated he appeared to be an ally. It may be a misfortune for the administration that its subordinates have left footprints in the sands which indi- cate the position of the administration in the spring and summer of 1898. The correspondence of Mr. Williams, consul-general at Manila, and of Consul Pratt, in the months of March and April, is conclusive to the point that Aguinaldo was treated as an ally in case of war, and conclusive as to the fact that as early as the closing days of March the authorities of Spain were at the mercy of the insurgents. Mr. Williams writes under date of March 19: "Re- bellion never more threatening to Spain. Rebels out- numbered the Spaniards, resident and soldiery, probably a hundred to one." Consul Pratt sends this certificate to Secretary Day of a 19 date uot earlier tliau April 2-S — nine days after the dec- laration of war: "General Aguinaldo impressed me as a man of intellectual ability, courage, and wortliy of the confidence that had been placed in him. " No close observer of what has transpired in the Philip- pines during the past four years could have failed to recognize that General Aguinaldo enjoyed, above all others, the confidence of the Philippine insurgents and the respect alike of the .Spaniards and foreigners in the islands, all of ivhich vouched for liis justice and high sense of honor." As late as July 18 Consul-Geueral Williams gave the insurgent leaders full indorsement in a letter to our Department of State : '• General Aguinaldo, Agoncillo, and Sandico are all men who would all be leaders in their separate departments in any country." These quotations may not rise to the dignity of proofs, but they suggest inferences, reasonable inferences, in support of two prop- ositions : (1) That the power of Spain was so much impaired that it could not have withstood the insurgents after the declaration of war of April 19, even if Dewey had not appeared in the bay of Manila. (2) That it was uot until the 12th day of August — a day fraught with evils to the country second only to the evils and sacrifices that followed the proceedings at Montgomery, Ala., Feb. 22, 1861 — that it was not until the 12th day of August that the leadership of Aguinaldo was repudiated, his char- acter assailed, and his proffers of friendship and harmony of action contemptuously spurned. An address by Aguinaldo to the Filipinos was dated at Cavite, within Admiral Dewey's quarters, the 18th day of June. A paragraph in that address deserves special attention. It reads thus : " I proclaim in the face of the whole world that the aspirations of my whole life, and the final object of all my desires and efforts, is no other thing than your independence, because I have the innate convic- tion that that constitutes your unalterable desire, as in- dependence means for us the redemption from slavery and tyranny, the reconquest of our lost liberties, and our entry into the concert of the civilized nations." Herein we find a distinct declaration of the purpose of Aguinaldo — the independence of the Philippines. It was made in the quarters of Admiral Dewey, and six and forty days after we had conquered the Philip- pine islands, if our conquest dates from the advent of Dewey into the bay of Manila. 20 In my addfess at the Essex Institute I spoke of the events of August 13. It is sufHcient for rae to say at this momont that the entry into the city of Manila was authorized by the proto- col, and that the proceeding was without value as a mili- tav}' movement. As the protocol decreed an armistice, all military move- ments, whether by one party or the other, were of no value. The protocol fixed the standing of the parties irrevocably. The harbor and city of Manila were placed temporarily under the control of the United States. This stipulation was, in fact, an admission that we did not then claim the islands by conquest. The President now claims title by conquest, which by a recent authority has been characterized as a crime, and he claims title also through the treaty by which Spain's title passes to us. I do not press you to an opinion upon these proceed- ings. I have one suggestion only to make : Is it a matter for adverse comment or surprise that Aguinaldo entertains the notion that he has been misled, deceived, and in the end betrayed by the authorities of the United States? In the presence of these facts of history I invite you to one conclusion, — an inevitable conclusion, — namely, that whatever there may have been of expense, of loss of life, of physical suffering, and of permanent impairment of health in the men comprising our arm}- in the Philippines is due to the aggressive war policj^ of the United States. And can there be a doubt, the shadow of a doubt, as to the truthfulness of this further proposition — that the war would have come to an end at any moment if the Presi- dent had said to Aguinaldo : "Set up your government and we will retu'e ? Why has not this been said? The answer is on the surface. It is the purpose of the Presi- dent to seize and to hold the Philippines by the strong hand of conquest, to subjugate or to exterminate the natives, and there are indications that the two events may coincide in respect to time. And I ask those of my countrymen who condemned, and condemned justly, the brutality of the war that Weyler carried on in Cuba whether the war that General Otis is now carrying on in the Philippines is not equally brutal and upon the same lines of policy — the destruction of the homes of non- combatants and the concentration of the women and chil- dren in the forests and open fields, where they can obtain 21 neither food nor shelter? Is the country to be beguiled and misled by the statement, now often made, that the great majority of the Filipinos are ready to accept our rule, and that Aguiiialdo is the only obstacle to submis- sion and peace ? He is an obstacle to submission and peace; but how, and why? He commands an army that checks, if it does not arrest, our advance as we attempt to cover the country in the rear of Manila. The inhabitants have set up a government based on a declaration of independence that was issued the first day of August, 1898, and which was sigued by the elected chiefs of 186 towns and provinces. I select two sentences from the declaration, prefaced by the remark on my part that their quality will justify a reading in any assembly of American citizens. They say: " The Filipinos are fully convinced that, if individual perfection, material, moral, and intellectual, is necessary to contribute to the well-being of their fellow-beings, the people must have tlie fulness of life — requiring liberty and independence — to contribute to the infinite progress of humanity." They say of their constituency: "They fight, and will fight, with decision and' constancy, without fear, and never receding before any obstacles that oppose their aim and desire, and with everlasting faith which realizes the power of justice and the fulfilment of the providential laws." It is against a people who have thus given expression to sentiments worthy of the age of Jefferson, worthy of the lips of Lincoln, that we are making war, aggressive, unjustifiable, cruel war. What is the issue ? The Presi- dent demands unconditional submission, including taxa- tion by military decrees. The Filipinos plead for the opportunity to exercise the right of self-government — self-government, nothing more. If the President would accept the teacliings of our Decla- ration of Independence we should be at peace. The President and his supporters ask us to accept the situation. We decline to accept the situation. We say in reply : You have involved the country in au unnecessary and unjust war. We say further : You can command peace with honor to the country, and, moreover, you can create a free and grateful commonwealth where now you are sacrificing human lives in an effort to extend the area of human bondage, which, euphemistically, you term " a process of benevolent assimilation." 22 At the end and for this occasion I arraign the Impe- rialistic part}' upon two grounds. First, they have aban- doned the fundamental truths of the Declaration of Inde- pendence. Their policy requires the abandonment of the truth that " governments are institnted among men, deriv- ing their just powers from the consent of the governed." In harmony with that policy the Declaration of Inde- pendence was qualified and limited in the Senate and upon the poor pretext that the truth of the declaration iiad not always and everywhere been followed by the i)eople and government of tlie United States. What great truth was ever yet observed in its fulness? Not even the truths of the Sermon on the Mount. And are failuies to be made the occasion for neglecting and rejecting the truth altogether? Instead of burial in the earth, the truths of the Declaration of Independence should be read in all lan- guages. It is not necessary to inquire whether the British min- istry and our authorities have come to an understanding upon the questions which primarily concern England and Russia. The seizure of the Philippine islands by us is English policy — a policy more important to England than the possession of the islands in her own hands. We are thus, and by England, to be forced into the conflict with Russia. In accepting England's policy in the East we accept her sovereignty. One of the calamitous incidents of this war has not been noticed publicly by any one except as an event for congratulation. I speak of the claim made by England that her refusal to cooperate with the states of Europe saved us from a conflict with tliose states combined. The misery of the incident is in the fact that England has laid upon us an obUgation which we can neither satisfy nor repudiate. In the month of November last the anti-Imperialists were asked for a [)lau, and in a way that implied a lack of faith in our ability to furnish a plan. Time having been taken we are now able to submit our plan. With it we appeal to the country in the belief that the two main prop- ositions involved in our plan will be acceptable to the people ! (1) We demand the reenthronement of the truths of the Declaration of Independence to their former place in the hearts of the people and in the public policy of the United States. For that we shall strive. (2) We demand a distinct disavowal of any purpose on the part of the United States to accept the colonial policy of Great Britain. 23 Heuce we have set forth our purpose in regard to the Philippiae islands in these words : "1. Tlie Anti-Imperialist League demands the sus- pension of hostilities in the Philippines. " 2. The League insists that it is the duty of Congress to tender an otlicial assurance to the country and to the inhabitants of the Philippines that the United States will encourage the organization of such a government as may be agreeable to the people of the islands, and that upon its organization the LTuited Slates will, in accordance with its traditional and prescriptive policy in such cases, rec- ognize it as an independent and equal state among na- tions." This is our platform, and whether it is heeded or de- rided it has in it the quality of immortality. Until an end shall have been reached the contest must be over these two propositions — and the end cannot be reached until these two propositions shall have been accepted by the country. COL. THOMAS L. LIVERMORE. Col. Thomas L. Livermore, who had been expected to speak, was unable to be present, and sent a letter, in which he said : I do not willingly omit to express my opposition, at any appropriate time, to extension of our dominion across the ocean. The ocean is our strongest barrier against the aggression of foreign powers. During more than eighty years this barrier has enabled us to live without the burden of a great standing army or navy, and to enjoy and profit by the fruits of our labor. To assume dominion over the Philippines would be to wilfully sacrifice this immeasurable advantage, for it would commit us to main- taining with our arms territory within the sphere of the conrticting interests of great powers, 10,000 miles away from our shores. The cost of this burden would far ex- ceed any revenue we could derive from the Philippines, and the taxation resulting from it would bear heavily upon the people of this countr}'. War over the Philippines with other powers would imperil our commerce in every sea and lead to hostilities in our own waters. To deliberately sacrifice the advantage of our present situation — to make ourselves weak where we are now strong — would be folly beyond expression, 24 To the argument that we need the Philippines for a market, or as a base from which to acquire other marlvets in Asia, the reply is, that to settle our own unoccupied territory will give us a great and increasing market for many years to come, and south of us the whole western hemisphere offers us a free and expaudiug market for the next hundred years, and a better market than that to be fouud in the Philippines or in China. The Monroe doc- trine pledges us to the protection of this territory in our own hemisphere from invasion by the old world, and it is to this territoiy, wliere we already have our burden, that we should devote our attention rather than to remote territories like the Philippines. The period when we shall have filled these markets will be so remote that b}' that time the political geography of Asia may be so changed that struggles for markets there, like that now in progress between other great powers, will be needless and unheard of. The President rightly expressed the sentiment of the people of this country in saying that we did not enter into the Spanish Avar for conquest, and we hope that his recent assurance that we have not entered upon a course of imperialism will be proved by the event, but we have reason to distrust the wisdom of those directing our aft'airs when, professing the desire to give self-government to the Philippines, they have allowed us to drift into the bloody war now raging in Luzon. That it was the folly of the Filipinos themselves in attacking our forces which pre- cipitated the war affords no excuse if matters were need- lessly allowed to drift into the situation which provoked this result. If it was really the intention of the adminis- tration to establish self-government in the Philippines it is strange that no attempt was made to avail of Aguinaldo's government as the means of establishing it. He is an in- telligent and able leader, and, as far as we have heard, is quite as capable as any otlier native who could be selected to be the head of the government. We have not heard of objections to him or his government on the part of the people in the Philippine islands. Indeed, recent events seem to indicate that the people are devoted to his cause. The administration has never disclosed to the people of the United States any reason, consistent with the desire of establishing self-government in the Philippines, for repudiating Aguinaldo's government, and as far as we can judge by anything which has been disclosed to us we are led to believe that it would have been possible before the 25 war began to have come to an agreement with it under which the United States would have retained control of the customs for the reimbursement of the §20,000,000, and maintained a military force to insure this control, which force at the same time would have secured the rights and property of foreigners. THE HON. ROBERT M. MORSE. I quote at the outset a paragraph from Vattel's " Law of Nations" : "He who is engaged in war derives all his right from the justice of his cause. Whoever, therefox'e, takes up arras without a lawful cause can have absolutely no right whatever ; every act of hostility that he commits is an act of injustice. He is chargeable with all the evils, all the horrors of the war ; all the effusion of blood, the desolation of families, the rapine, the acts of violence, the ravages, the conflagrations are his works and his crimes. He is guilty of a crime against the enemy whom he attacks, oppresses, and massacres without cause ; he is guilty of a crime against his people, whom he forces into acts of injustice, and exposes to danger, without reason or necessity ; against those of his subjects who are ruined or distressed by the war, who lose their lives, their property, or their health, inconsequence of it; finally, he is guilty of a crime against mankind in gen- eral, whose peace he disturbs, and to whom he sets a per- nicious example. Shocking catalogue of miseries and crimes ! Dreadful account to be given to the King of kings, to the common Father of men ! " The President of the United States is now employing the array and navy in a war against the people of the Philippine islands with the avowed purpose of destroying their army and of reducing the people to admit the sover- eignty of our government. This war is conducted with all of the attendant miseries and horrors which Vattel so truthfully describes. In such a condition of things, the parallel to which has never before existed in our history, it is the right and duty of citizens who love peace and who believe in maintaining the high ideals for which our govern- ment has stood to inquire whether the war is righteous and justifiable, and if it is not such a war then to denounce it and to demand that it shall cease. It is not pretended that this war was declared by Con- gress or that it has been approved by Congress, in which 26 body aloue under our Coustitution the right to declare war exists, Tlie sole authoril}' for it urged by its supportex's is, first, that we had captured and held Mauila ; second, that we had agreed to buy the title of 8paiu to the Philip- pines, and, third, that the Filipinos have denied our right to sovereignty o^■er them, and have forcibly resisted it. But these facts constitute no justification whatever for the course which our government has taken. It is true that we had captured and held and still hold Mauila as the result of the war with Spain, and it may be conceded for the purpose of the argument that we had tliereby gained domiuiou over that city and its inhabitants, an area, let us say, of ten square miles in one of the 1,200 islands whose total area is 114,000 square miles. But that fact gave us no right to the immense territory beyond tlie city and to control over the 8,000,000 people who inhabit that territory. The claim to the Philipjnne islands by conquest is absolutely untenable. But what title have we acquired from Spain by pur- chase? If I were disposed to be technical I should remind you of the fact that an agreement to buy, not consummated I)}' delivery of possession, does not give title, and that at least until the ratifications of the treaty are formally exchanged and the purchase money paid it could not be said that our title by purchase is secured. But it is unnecessary to rest upon any such point. Let it be conceded tliat we have bought the title of Spain. Wliat then? Does the purchase of the title of Spain to its public property in these islands and of its claim to sovereignty carry with it tlie dominion over the native inhabitants who had at the time of the signing of the treaty practically achieved their independence, who had au organized government, a capital city, an accredited army, a system of taxation, churclies, schools, and the printing-press, and whose consent had never been asked, still less obtained, to this assumption of sovereignty? It is idle to say that because we bought Florida and Louisiana and Alaska and tliereby secured the right to hold and govern those territories and their populations we have therefore acquired the same right over the Filipinos. In none of the three cases to which I have referred was there any organized government or any assertion of independent nationality or indeed any con- siderable population, and in none of them was any objec- tion made by the inhabitants to our claim of dominion. A nation, whether black or white, cannot in these days, 27 at least according to the doctrines which we have learned and taught, be 1 ought and sold like nierchantlise. The good intentions of the purchaser to treat it well and give it as much liberty and opportunity to govern itself as he may think wise count for nothing. Those intentions may properly be used as arguments to obtain the consent of a nation to abdicate its sovereignty', but if they fail as arguments thev cannot lawfully be used to authorize force. Never was a more flimsy effort made to justify acts of violence and war than this claim that we have bought the right to govern the Filipinos. Until this right was asserted by the President there was no suggestion or probability of disturbance in the Philip- pines. The people had welcomed our coming. Emerg- ing at last out of the darkness and misery of the harsh and oppressive government to which they had been sub- jected for centuries, the^' beheld in our flag the symbol of freedom, they rallied about it, they aided our efforts, they fondly believed that at last their troubles were at an end. Until the President insisted upon the purchase of their native couutr}' as a provision of the treaty, and until he declared that the American flag should not be hauled down from any place where it had once been raised, there was no sign of discontent or disorder or of attempts at violence by the Filipinos. The sole ground for their action was the assertion of our right to govern them with- out their consent, and yet for their assertion of that right we should honor them as much as we have honored the Greeks or the Hungarians or the Mexicans or the Cubans, who have offered their lives in defence of their liberties. When we abandon our claim to supremacy their resist- ance will cease, and there is no reason to doubt that they would accept any proper help which we might tender tow- ard the rebuilding of the waste places, the restoration of order, and the establishment of a stable government. So long as we assert that claim, no matter what seeming success in the way of destruction of lives and of property and even of outward z'ecognition of our rule we may secure, we shall never get and we shall never deserve to get the loyal submission of these people to our authority. Our duty, tlierefore, is clear. It is commanded by our sense of right, by our love of liberty, by our sympathy with oppression. It is to abandon forever these foolish dreams of empire, this attempt to engraft the discarded methods of old-world tyranny upon the Declaration of Independence, to give back their country to the Filipinos, 28 and to do whatever it is possible lo do to repair the terrible havoc which we have caused. It will always be remembered, to our everlasting shame, that in less than one year we have destroyed more lives and more property and have done more to check the upward progress of a straggling [jeople than Spain has done in all the centuries of her occupation. In the future let the only reminder of our reckless raid be a simple monument standing some- where on the shore overlooking the sea near the graves of some of the thousands whom we have slaughtered, the image of America carved in stone, with covered and bowed head, humble, repentant, asking forgiveness, expiating her crime in the sight of God and men. How long it may be before the conscience of the nation shall be awakened, how many more daily records of the wretchedness and devastation which we are inflicting are yet to be made, no one can tell. But whether that time be long or short, let us not cease in our efforts to hasten it or fail to have patience and hope. While the flag with stars bedecked Tiireatens where it should protect, And the Law shakes hands with Crime, What is left us but to wait, Match our patience to our fate, And abide the better time ? THE HON. JAMES R. DUNBAR. Mr. Dunbar spoke brielly in opposition to the present policy in the Philippines. THE HON. HERBERT C. PARSONS. The presence of my name on the list of speakers for this meeting is to be considered, I take it, as a fulfilment of the unofficial but graphic newspaper announcement you have read that the country cousins were to be represented. I speak for certain of them, seriously, sir, when I say that they have a painful preparation for treating tlie question we are discussing liere, in an experience which began when, no longer ago than last May, they saw their brothers and sons marching out in health and vigor for what proved to be actual warfare ; an experience contin- ued when they welcomed back in the early autumn such 29 of these sons and brothers as had survived the shock of war, broken and wasted in body, shadows only .of the men as they went ont, tin experience just now completed in the reception home of the bodies of those who had given up their lives under the stress of tropical warfare. But your kindly introduction suggests another possible reason for my being here, that I am representative of another class, a class it is somewhat the fashion to dis- parage, the men in active politics. By them, sir, this (piestion is treated with cautious respect. To them, sir, it is a '' live wire," a live wire not yet safely insulated by the declarations of party platforms. However you may regard these men, at least you must give them credit for recognizing one great fact, more clearly perhaps than others, that this question is eventually coming to the American people for settlement. Whatever course may be taken by public officials, whatever pre-judgment there may be of public opinion, there will be no final solution of the great issue involved uutil it is passed upon by the people in their sovereign power. And, sir, in preparation for that final judgment, it is the first I'ight of the American people to know the truth, the whole truth, as to what the govern- ment is doing in the distant Philippine islands. It is their right to know the truth, not at some distant time, but day b}' day as these events are passing, and while public opin- ion is forming. They have reason to protest against, at least, this feature in the present policy, a feature borrowed from the code of imperialistic nations, the government censorship of the news, the government control of the information on which judgment is to be based. It is not necessary before this audience — and let me say ibat I am in my representative country-cousin capacitj% justly proud of our Aguinaldian Boston relatives here assembled — it is not necessary to continue the discus- sion of the great principles which have been treated with vigor and power by the speakers who have preceded me. I want only to ask the people here assembled whether or not they believe that when this question comes to its solu- tion the American people are going to be guided by the great lights by which this nation has thus far proceeded on its course. Will they follow or will they desert, as to this problem, the Declaration of Independence, the Consti- tution, the Farewell Address, the Gettysburg speech? Will they follow Washington, who not only warned them against the perils they now seem no longer to fear, but enforced his policy in the proclamation of neutrality issued 30 iu the face of what seemed the sentiment of the American people, but proved to have been a passing passion ? Will the}' follow^ Washington, or his forgotten detractors? Will thev follow James Monroe, iu that declaration of a nationar policy which, onl}' half fulfilled in our forbid- ding foreign intrusion on American soil, is wholly true when we also forbear from entrance into foreign turmoils? Will they follow Abraham Lincoln or Stephen A. Doug- las? Will they follow General (irant, who said: " Let us have peace," or General Shatter, who says : '* Let us sweep half a people oft" the face of the eartli in order to civilize the remaining half " ? It has always been taken by the American people to be their duty to test every question by the great standard of national policy their splendid past has given them ; and, sir, I believe that when this question comes to be settled we shall have but a new and strong demonstration of the truth President McKinley has put into a happy phrase — that " desertion of duty is not an American duty." RESOLUTIONS. At the close of tlie speaking Mr. AVilliam Endicott offered the following resolutions, vvliich were adopted unanimously : First. That our government shall take immediate steps toward a suspension of iiostilities in the Philippines and a conference with the Pliilippine leaders, with a view to preventing further bloodshed, upon the basis of a recog- nition of their freedom and independence as soon as proper guarantees can be had of order and protection to property. Second. That the government of the United States shall tender an official assurance to the inhabitants of the Philippine islands that they will encourage and assist in the organization of such a government in the islands as the people thereof shall prefer, and that upon its organi- zation in stable manner the United States, in accordance with its traditional and prescriptive policy in such cases, will recognize the independence of the Philippines and its equality among nations, and gradually withdraw all mili- tary aud naval forces. 31 LETTERS were received among others as follows : Mr. Francis H. Peabody wrote : '• I am in full sym- pathy with its purpose. 1 believe the time will come when the folly and wickedness of what we call imperial- ism will be conceded, and sneers at its opponents will cease to be in fashion." Rev. E. Winchester Donald, D.D. : "I acutely regret that I have an engagement on April 4 so imperative that I shall be unable to attend the anti-imperialistic meeting, fnsiguificaut as my presence there would be, I none the less should like to show my utter detestation of the mad folly (I cannot call it policy) which has involved the nation in so disreputable an enterprise as that into which our brave soldiers have been led." Hon. Charles Francis Adams: "As you know, I en- tirely sympathize with the object of this meeting ; more so now than ever, in view of the very gallant resistance the unfortunate Filipinos are making against our wholly unprovoked assault upon them. I can compare the situ- ation there and now to nothing so much as what the sit- uation would have been a century and a quarter ago had our French allies, after the w^ar of independence, ac- cepted the colonies as a transfer from P^ngland, taken the war on their own shoulders, and proceeded, as we express it with the Filipinos, to ' subdue ' the rebels, on the ground — and a perfectly good ground it would have t)een, according to our present code of reasoning — that there was no evidence whatever that we were capable of governing ourselves ; and the French, therefore, were responsible for us to their own consciences, and before God and the world, — and duty made destiny. Neither would there have been anything in the record of the next eight years under the old federation to have shown that they were not right in such a conclusion. On the con- trary, Shay's rebellion in Massachusetts would have quite justified them in such course of reasoning and line of procedure." Mr. Edward O'Donuell, corresponding secretary of the Central Labor Union: "I am heartily in sympathy with the movement, like, I may say, the majority of 32 the labor men. I blush for the position America has been placed in by the unwise and blindfolded national executive." Rev. Benjamin Fay Mills : " If the meeting is called, as I understand it, for the purpose of protesting against our carrying on a war for the sul)jugation of the Fili- pinos, I am heartily in symi)athy with its object." Rabbi Charles Fleischer: "I want to make sure that you will know that my heart beats strougly as ever in sym- pathy with the anti-Imperialist cause. I iiope that at this meeting tlie word will be spoken that shall be heard and heeded in all America." Mr. Henry W. Putnam : " I trust some of the speak- eis will denounce our government's treachery in turning upon a faithful ally after getting from him all the assist- ance wc needed against Spain, and plainly call a spade a spade. It is, I think, tiie first stain of actual personal faithlessness and dishonor upon the national scutcheon in our whole history as a nation. Every American should blush and hang his head for this perfidy, unsurpassed, if indeed equalled, by anything since the days of Cortez, Pizarro, and Alva. We are outdoing the Spaniards not only of the nineteenth, but of the six-teenth century, and are asserting the brutal right of the strongest in the bold- est and most unscrupulous form known to civilized his- tory since the expulsion of the Huguenots from their homes in France by Louis XIV. Wc are more culpable than those oppressors were ; for we are sinning against the light of the last two or three centuries of progress." RESOLUTIONS. First. That our government shall take immediate steps toward a suspension of hostilities in the Philippines and a conference with the Philippine leaders, with a view to preventing further blood- shed, upon the basis of a recognition of their free- dom and independence as soon as proper guarantees can be had of order and protection to property. Second. That the government of the United States shall tender an official assurance to the in- habitants of the Philippine islands that they will encourage and assist in the organization of such a government in the islands as the people thereof shall prefer, and that upon its organization in stable manner the United States, in accordance with its traditional and prescriptive policy in such cases, will recognize the independence of the Phil- ippines and its equality among nations, and grad- ually withdraw all military and naval forces. THIS IS A PHOTOCOPY REPRODUCTION It is made in compliance with copyright law and produced on acid-free archival book weight paper which meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials Preservation photocopying by The University of Connecticut Libraries Preservation Department 2001 w Univ«;r!{fU' of Cqiyicclicut \ j£ibfanes 7 University of Connecticut Libraries 39153027673427 m ill!