[6] “It is precisely these Americans, and their business associates in the United States, who have gotten through Congress the legislation which enables them to give the Filipino just half of what he got ten years ago for his hemp, and other like legislation, and the Filipinos know it.”—Blount, p. 118.
Also the following:—
“Apparently, Messrs. Roosevelt and Taft thought, in 1907, that granting the Filipinos a little debating society solemnly called a legislative body, but wholly without any real power, was ample compensation for deserted tobacco and cane plantations, and for the price of hemp being beaten down below the cost of production by manipulation through an Act of Congress passed for the benefit of American hemp manufacturers. If we had had a Cleveland in the White House about that time, he would have written an essay on taxation without representation, with the hemp infamy of this Philippine Tariff Act of 1902 as a text, and sent it to Congress as a message demanding the repeal of the Act. But the good-will of the Hemp Trust is an asset for the policy of Benevolent Assimilation. The Filipino cannot vote, and the cordage manufacturer in the United States can. No conceivable state of economic desolation to which we might reduce the people of the Philippine Islands being other than a blessing in disguise compared with permitting them to attend to their own affairs after their own quaint and mutually considerate fashion, the Hemp Trust’s rope, tied into a slip-knot by the Act of 1902, must not be removed from their throats. By judicious manipulation of sufficient hemp rope, you can corral much support for Benevolent Assimilation. Therefore, to this good hour, the substance of the hemp part of the Philippine Tariff Act of March 8, 1902, remains upon the statute books of the United States, to the shame of the nation.”—Blount, pp. 614–615.
[7] First year of operation.
[8] On December 31, 1912; increase of six months only.
[9] Twelve-sevenths of the actual figure for the first seven months of the year: 736,246 tons.
[10] The figures for coal importations are exclusive of the quantities imported from the United States by the federal government. These are excluded because they have been for the most part made in large quantities in alternate years, and would, therefore, while considerably increasing the average total amounts imported, give a false idea of the rate of increase of the more strictly domestic consumption.
[11] Twice the actual figure for the first half of the year: 204,094 tons.
[12] There were several different plans for the confiscation of the friar lands. The following shows the action taken in one instance, relative to the property of Spanish prisoners:—
“On February 2, 1899, the secretary of the treasury informed the governor of the province of Isabela that the property of all Spanish prisoners should be confiscated as booty of war.”—P. I. R., 1302. 6.