Señor Quezon’s statement relative to the attitude of the civil authorities in this matter is therefore recklessly false.
The existence of slavery in the Moro Province was well known from the outset, hence the immediate enactment of legislation to meet the special conditions which prevailed there.
Little by little the commission learned that slavery was by no means confined to Moro territory, and that peonage was general throughout the islands.
Before going further, I wish to make clear the sense in which I use these terms.
I define slavery as the condition of a human being held as a chattel and compelled to render service for which he is not compensated. As food and clothing are necessarily furnished by the slave owner, they are not considered to constitute compensation.
Peonage I define as the condition of a debtor held by his creditor in a form of qualified servitude to work out a debt.
On April 28, 1903, the senior inspector of constabulary in Isabela wired the first district chief of constabulary, Manila, as follows:—
“In this province a common practice to own slaves. These are bought by proprietarios [property owners.—D. C. W.] from Igorrotes and Calingas who steal same in distant places from other tribes. Young boys and girls are bought at about 100 pesos, men 30 years old and old women cheaper. When bought, are generally christened and put to work on ranch or in house, and I think generally well-treated. In this town a number sold within last few months, and as reported to me, Governor has bought three. Shall I investigate further? Instructions desired.
(Signed) “Sorenson.”