In speaking of the Philippine independence I have presented some of the reasons given by Filipinos for desiring it, but there are arguments which ought to appeal especially to Americans. If it were our duty to maintain a colonial policy, no argument could be made against it, because duties are imperative and never conflict. If, on the other hand the Filipinos desire independence and are capable of self-government, we cannot justify the retention of the islands unless we are prepared to put our own interests above theirs, and even then we must be satisfied that our interests will be advanced by a colonial policy.
In the beginning of the controversy there were many who believed that the Philippine Islands would become a source of profit to the United States. It was confidently predicted that a multitude of Americans would flock to the islands and find rich reward in the development of their resources. These hopes have not been realized. Except in Mindanao, of which I shall speak later, there is no evidence of any present or future colonization by Americans. There are a few Americans engaged in business in Manila and at other army posts, but these are insignificant in number and the business done by them is nothing as compared with the cost of colonialism to the United States. We are maintaining about twelve thousand American soldiers in the island and five thousand native scouts, officered by Americans and paid for by the United States. Besides this outlay for the army, our Philippine policy has been made the excuse for a large increase in our naval expenditures. While it is difficult to determine accurately the annual cost of our Philippine policy to the people of the United States, it is safe to say that it exceeds the value of all the merchandise that we export to the Philippine Islands and all the money made by Americans in the islands, including salaries paid to Americans from taxes collected in the Philippines—and the expenses are borne by all the people while the benefits are received by a mere handful. No one, therefore, can justify the holding of the Philippines on the ground that they are a pecuniary advantage.
If it is argued that we need the Philippine Islands as a base for the extension of our trade in the Orient, I answer that it is not necessary to deny the Filipinos independence in order to hold a sufficient number of harbors and coaling stations to answer all the requirements of trade. The Filipinos are not only anxious to have the advantage of our protection, but they recognize that to protect them we must have harbors and a naval base. In return for the services we have rendered them we have a right to ask, and they would gladly grant, such reservations as we need. These reservations could be properly fortified and would furnish coaling stations both for our navy and for our merchant marine. It goes without saying that in case we had war with an oriental nation, it would be infinitely better to have the Filipinos supporting us, in their own interest as well as out of gratitude, than to have them awaiting an opportunity for insurrection.
CARABAO CART AND DRIVER.
I have already referred to the danger which may come to the principle of self-government in the United States from the systematic denial of self-government to the Filipinos. As our officials can only explain their continued presence in the Philippines by alleging incapacity in the Filipinos, they find themselves unconsciously surrendering the governmental theories which were until recently universally accepted in our country. We cannot overlook the influence that these changed opinions may have upon the politics of our own country if a colonial policy is indefinitely continued.
Neither can we ignore the fact that our prestige as a teacher of the principles of republican government must be impaired if we hold colonies under the law of force and defend ourselves by using the arguments employed by kings and emperors as an excuse for denying self-government to their own people. We cannot preach that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed and at the same time adopt a different principle in practice.
