position or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction or control," and our revered Chief Magistrate has solemnly declared that forcible annexation is not to be thought of because it would be criminal aggression. Relying on these ought-to-be inviolable pledges, Ireland has risen to arms to strike for her own freedom, and has welcomed our forces to her soil to expel the English. We succeed, but instead of keeping faith with Ireland we demand the cession of her from England for a small price. We announce that our promises of freedom applied only to the Soudan, and our president issues a proclamation of American military sovereignty over Ireland. We can easily imagine what would happen. The Irish in Ireland and the Irish-Americans would stir up such an uproar against the astounding swindle, that we should be glad to get out of Ireland on any terms, if need be paying a price for our aggression and lie. And the whole of Europe would justly and if need be forcibly sustain Ireland's demands. Remote barbarians are in a different posture, and we can boldly bully them with impunity. They have no powerful friends and we have nothing to fear. But the deed is as rascally and abominable as if we were to deal Ireland a similiar treachery in like circumstances.

7. The American Lie of Love.

To those who believe that American honor is still worth preserving, the language of the main author (or nerveless tool, perhaps) of this perfidy, William McKinley, is animating reading. He dilated upon the benevolence of the United States in his proclamation of sovereignty or war, informing the natives how good it would be for some of them to be killed if they could not realize the blessing of becoming our property. Tenderly eloquent words are the following, illumined by the benevolent murder of thousands, which followed them:

"Finally, it should be the earnest and paramount aim of the military administration to win the confidence, respect, and affection of

the inhabitants of the Philippines, by assuring to them in every possible way that full measure of individual rights and liberties which is the heritage of free peoples, and by proving to them that the mission of the United States is one of benevolent assimilation, substituting the mild sway of justice and right for arbitrary rule.

"In the fulfillment of this high mission, supporting the temperate administration of affairs for the greatest good of the governed, there must be sedulously maintained the strong arm of authority, to repress disturbance, 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 terms in which General Otis transmitted the president's ultimatum will also raise the pride of freedompreaching Americans. He says:

"In the war against Spain the United States forces came here to destroy the power of that nation and to give the blessings of peace and individual freedom to the Philippine people; that we are here as friends of the Filipinos to protect them in their homes, their employments, their individual and religious liberty; that all persons who, either by active aid or honest endeavor, co-operate with the Government of the United States to give effect to the beneficent purposes, will receive the reward of its support and protection. . . .

"I am fully of the opinion that it is the intention of the United States Government, while directing affairs generally, to appoint_the representative men now forming the controlling element of the Filipinos, to civil positions of trust and responsibility, and it will be my aim to appoint thereto such Filipinos as may be acceptable to the supreme authorities at Washington.

"It is also my belief that it is the intention of the United States Government to draw from the Filipino people so much of the military force of the islands as is possible, and consistent with a free and well constituted government of the country and it is my purpose to inaugurate a policy of that character."

The 'representative men of the Filipinos' were to be bribed into acceptance of American authority by the promise of tempting offices under the United States. Poor, mean payment this to a people for resigning its independence, and a contemptible method of gaining possession of that independence. Another applica

tion of the noble 'spoils of office' system which our rulers have for deluding and tyrannizing over their own countrymen. And how conciliatory and inviting that assurance of our Otis that the Philippine people would some of them be graciously permitted to serve in the ranks of the military to keep their

country in subjection to the United States! This must have been a flash of Otis's own private humor to help his staggering president out of a ditch, for what does the mighty Secretary of War soon after say on this subject? He speaks thus:*

"The natives of Cuba, Porto Rico and the Philippines do not understand our purposes and ways of government sufficently to admit of their being made part of our military establishment to the extent of organizing them into companies, battalions and regiments at once. Our officers of greatest experience with them are of this opinion. In time this could doubtless be done, but it will require education. By degrees, a company could be given to a regiment to be utilized as scouts and guides; further on, a battalion could be added, and in time things working well, regiments could be organized, but it will take time, so much time, that for the uses of the immediate present and some time in the future, they could not be wisely counted as affording any considerable strength to the service, however many might be provided for by a Congressional act. They are a possible, even probable factor, of the future, but not for the present."

What is to be done to reconcile this with general Otis's volatile assurances? Here there is no chance for mistake or double interpretation. The American government promises something it has no intention of performing for a very long time, if ever, in order to get firm military grasp on the Filipinos. The deception stands in black and white. Otis says, 'It is my purpose to inaugurate a policy drawing from the Filipino people so much of the military force of the islands as is possible.' The War Department at Washington says, 'For use as native soldiers the Filipinos are a possible, even a probable factor, of the future, but not for the present. We defy the European Powers to produce a more barefaced instance of fraud in their own dealings with savages than this masterpiece.

It is not unfair to take the president as the leader of the Imperialist phrenzy, and in his utterances to estimate the sense and unselfishness of all. We find him in his Boston banquet speech repeating the bathos which is the stock in trade of the British expansionists. His language is their language, and we hear him babbling the phrases

*Contained in a statement from the War Department on the needed army legislation, issued Feb. 19, 1899

of Chamberlain, Salisbury, Rosebery, Curzon and the rest. He speaks of our flag in the Philippines, "where it now floats, the symbol and assurance of liberty and justice." It floats over the graves of many dead Filipinos who died from accepting our assurances of liberty and justice.

The immortal lie that we have not sought to confiscate the Philippine archipelago is reiterated-"It was a trust we have not sought;" God thrust it upon us, he says. God was the cause of our treachery to the trusting natives, God compelled us to shoot them down when our dastardly intentions were discovered, God forces us against our virtuous wish to plant ourselves in the Orient in order to bring our mailed fist within arm's length of China to smash holes in her if necessary for our sacred trade. McKinley says: "Our concern was not for territory or trade or empire, but for people, whose interests and destiny, without our willing, had been put in our hands." "No imperial designs lurk in the American mind. They are alien to American sentiments, thought and purpose. Our priceless principles undergo no change under a tropical sun. . . .They go with the fiat: Wh read ye not the changeless truth, the free can conquer but

to save.'

999

It is not pleasant, but the question must be asked: Does this man think that he is talking to a nation of fools? If his words are not mere re-election vapor, he is the only man in the United States who is ignorant that what is thrusting us into the Orient is not God but Greed-greed for trade. Unless his mind has been unsettled by greatness the pious McKinley knows as every other American knows that if our priceless principles had not undergone a change since we started on our errand of mercy to Cuba, to stop the Spaniards from shooting Cubans, we should not be shooting Filipinos now because they wanted the same mercy at our hands that we promised to Cuba. If we must be villains let us not sneak and deny it and pub

lish a guinea pig prospectus that we have taken God into partnership. There is only one defence for McKinley, if he is not a deceiver: he is dying of majesty. This was the fate of president Faure. A French statesman and physician, noting the signs of premature decay, said: "If M. Faure is not soon turned out of the Presidency he will die from general paralysis, the effect of 'folie de grandeur.' M. Faure was so great that no one could speak to him first. For charity's sake let us believe that McKinley is so great that he can see nothing as it is but only as his magnificence of mind shapes it.

More reading of his speech will not change our opinion:

"We could not discharge the responsibilities upon us until these islands became ours either by conquest or treaty. There was but one alternative, and that was either Spain or the United States in the Philippines. The other suggestion showed, first, that they should be tossed into the arena for the strife of nations; or, second, be lost to the anarchy and chaos of no protectorate at all, and were too shameful to be considered."

This is in defence of our policy of making ourselves masters of the Philippines and of exterminating the portion of their inhabitants who will not consent. But the truth is quite different.

8. Fooling All the People.

It is one of the recent novelties of free government to be obliged to defend the right of the governed to be consulted. Mr. McKinley has enunciated and acted upon the doctrine that we may govern a people against their will according to our own ideas of their good. The application of this tyrannical principle was the cause of our disgraceful war to prevent the independence of the Filipinos. The McKinley statement of this doctrine is the most remarkable and revolting expression of political bombast of the century, assuming that its author is not insane. It is this:

"Did we need their consent to perform a great act for humanity? We had it in every aspiration of their minds, in every hope of their hearts. Was it necessary to ask their consent to capture Manila, the