William Mack in Tire Salter - Imperialism

8/6/2019 William Mack in Tire Salter - Imperialism

1/20

^^"Oj.oo

7L

1I3

Author.5 .^iitX^..^.MliiB.m..![\:)-_

Title ...^.V:f>.^V^-LV?^Ai.^!>(\.-......- _

Imprint..rkc^.c^^..:.....J.S53-

^P.47S72-2 OPO


2/20

'ij^ffi

^'0

4:'0'


3/20

rf 3

IMPERIALISMWILLIAM M. SALTER

A L,ecture before t ture of Chicago, in SteiuwayXr2yi899.

(REPRINTED FROM UNITY)

CHICAGOAI.FRED C. CIvARK & CO.

12 Sherman Street

FROM ANTI-!MP:PJALIST LfcAv-w .,


4/20


5/20

Imperialism..-1 Lecture by Wm. M. Salter, before the Society for

Ethical Culture of Chicago, in SteimvayMi Hall, February 12, iSgg.5

Three great issues have been before the Americanpeople within the last twelve months. The first waswhether this nation should put an end to Spanishoppression in Cuba and set the island free. The sec-ond w^as whether, having broken the Spanish powerin the Philippines, the nation should thereafter returnthe islands to Spain or turn them over to some otherPower or leave them to themselves, in any case wash-ing its own hands of them ; or whether it should as-sume some manner of responsibility for them. Thethird issue is now before us. We have freed Cuba ; wehave accepted responsibility for the Philippinesandthe question now is, how shall we discharge that re-sponsibility, in what spirit shall we act, do we reallywish to own the Philippines or do we wish to makethem free?Each one of these issues has tried, or is trying,keenly the temper of the people. Some thought inthe first place that Cuba was no concern of oursab-horred the war altogether. Later, many believed thatwe should do anything rather than charge ourselveswith the Philippinessome, like Prof. Norton, evenadvocating leaving them to Spain. But the mainbody of the people was moved in both instances by


6/20

humaner, more generous thoughts. The nation hasacted on the assumption that we were our brother'skeeperand even to islands in distant seas we havestretched out the friendly hand. The nation has as-sumed responsibility and has even agreed to pay Spain$20,000,000 for a quit-claim deed to the islands. Froma legal point of view the Philippines are in our hands.And now an issue has arisen that entirely over-shadows the earlier ones. It has not stood out clearlytill now. When men have urged keeping control ofthe Philippines, they have been called Imperialists, orin any case Expansionists. But it may be that theywere, and it may be they were not. It is possible toapprove of both the war and the Paris treaty, and yetto be oposed to imperialism or expansion. Im-perialism now first has a distinct significationmean, as related to a practical issue. Imperialismwas not the issue a year ago ; it was not the issue whenthe treaty was signed in Paris. Now it is the issuedo we believe in forcible expansion or not ? For thatis the meaning of imperialism, and that is the ques-tion now confronting the American people.The events of the past week have been simplyshocking ; they have been humiliating to anyone wholoved old-fashioned American ideas. But they haveonly brought home to everybody what the thoughtfuland discerning already knew. This is that the Philip-pinos want freedom, just as the Cubans did, and thequestion is, have we broken the Spanish power overthem to set them free, or to give them a new master?A people that does not care for freedom is perhapsnot worth freeing, but the Philippinos have caredenough for freedom to make several unaided at-tempts at it during the century. Twelve times, de-spairing of a peaceful redress of grievances, they haverisen in insurrection. They are naturally peaceful

;

according to General Merritt they are not natural andpertinacious fighters, like our Indians, but docile andamiable. Far away as they have been, we have knownr heard little of them, but of the last revolutionary


7/20

uprising in 1896 we have distinct information. It hadsix separate objects

(i) The expulsion of the monastic orders, who,even CathoHc authorities admit, practiced fearfulabuses.

(2) The abolition of the Governor General's arbi-trary power to banish without accusation, trial or sen-tence.

(3) Restoration to the natives of lands held by thereligious orders.

(4) A limitation of the arbitrary powers of thecivil guard.

(5) No arrest without judge's warrant.(6) Abolition of the fifteen days per annum com-pulsory labor.These were hardly the demands of savages, either in

moral or mind. The Philippinos arc evidently hu-man beings, in some respects not unlike ourselves.Indeed, while the bulk of them [I have in mind, par-ticularly, Luzon, where are five out of of the seven oreight million, making up the population of theislands] are uneducated and half-civilized, they havesome of the marks of a superior people. They wisheducation. They are cleanly, are hospitable and oblig-ing. They have a pleasing family life. Wives havean amount of liberty hardly equaled in any otherEastern country, and they seldom abuse it. The menare self-respecting and self-restrained to a remarkabledegree. The climate allows them to be indolent, yetthey possess many fine branches of industry (makingbeautiful mats and elegant linen fabrics), and they imi-tate such branches of European industry as ship-building, leather dressing and carriage building, withgreat success. With their patriarchal system of liv-ing, they have not learned the art of forming a stateand are commonly supposed to be destitute of thecapacity of governing themselves ; yet the stress ofcircumstances has developed leaders among them andduring the past year an attempt has been made toorganize a government. For three centuries they


8/20

have been subject to Spanish rule, and it is absurd todeny the existence of capacities that have not beenallowed to grow. What their capabilities are is shownin the nature and personnel and working of the extem-pore government they now have and which makes somuch a part of the gravity of the present situation thatI must give a few details.

Its seat is in Malolos, forty miles from Manila.There the Philippine Congress sits in an old Spanishchurch. It had eighty-three members when it declaredthe republic on the i6th of September last; more havesince been added. Of these eighty-three, seventeenwere graduates of European universities. The Presi-dent studied at Madrid and Salamanca, taking degreesin theology and law, and is an author, his works on thelife and manners of the inhabitants of Luzon havingbeen translated into German. The head proper of thegovernment is a man who had been, under Spanishrule, a petty governor of his native town, a landedproprietor and by no means an adventurer with all togain and nothing to loseAguinaldo. Aguinaldo wasthe leader of the insurection of 1896, and yet when theSpanish government agreed to make concessions andto pay the wages of the insurgent troops, he counseledpeace and his counsel prevailed. (I may add that theinsurgents disbanded and kept their agreement to theletter, while the Spanish government did nothing in theway of reforms and only paid a third of the moneypromised, and that the payment of this to Aguinaldo,the recognized representative of the insurgents^^ con-stitutes the only basis I have been able to discoverfor the charge which our papers are making that hewas a blackmailer and a bandit.) According to a writerin the Reviczv of Reviews, who knew him. "friendsand enemies agree that he is intelligent, ambitious, far-sighted, brave, self-controlled, honest, moral, vindictiveand at times cruel." His cruelty has been kept well incheck, however, during the past vear, for all accountsagree that he has been temperate in the use of his


9/20

power and that his soldiers have treated their Span-ish prisoners more humanely than the Spaniards usedto treat the Philipinos who fell into their hands. Hisextraordinary ability as a military organizer are com-monly admitted. Encouraged in part by our own rep-resentatives, he came from Hong Kong (where he hadbeen since the insurrection of 1896) to Luzon, organ-ized a native revolutionary army, was of incalculableadvantage to our own military forces, captured some-thing like 15,000 Spaniards, raised large sums ofmoney ranging as high as $200,000 a month, and un-der his leadership the Spanish dorninion was prac-tically confined to two towns, Manila in Luzon andIloilo in Panay, Iloilo itself being afterward surren-dered by the Spanish to him. The fact is that up tolast Sunday American authority hardly extended be-yond the walls of Manila City, the whole of the rest ofLuzon, as well as some of the other islands being in thehands of the native government. This governmentsent an embassy to the Paris Peace Conference, settingforth that it embraced fifteen provinces and that in allof them good order and tranquility prevailed. Anacknowledged authority on the Philippines, long a resi-dent there, writes in a recent review that he has beforehim a list of the township presidents throughout Luzon,many of whom he has personally known for years.*Since the government has obtained possession of Iloilo,law and order has equally prevailed there, accordingto the testimony of our own observers. The Philip-pine government sent a representative to Washington,whom our government refused to receive, though per-sonally, and as he has conducted himself, no one hastaken exception to him. But a short time since theCongress at Malolos passed a fresh vote of confidencein Aguinaldo and empowered him to declare war onAmerica whenever he should deem it desirable. Grantthat this government may not be an ideal government,grant that it may not act wisely, grant that it does notrepresent the whole people of the Philippines but onlyJohn Foreman, National Review. Nov., '98, p. 398.


10/20

the more enterprising and progressive classes, none theless it is something, and I should think any lover offreedom, any old-fashioned American, would welcomeit as a beginning and as prophetic of greater thingsthat may some time come.

I started out by saying that the Philippinos wantedfreedom and I have stated all these things to showwhat manner of people they were. And now the ques-tion is, Spain having transferred to us whatever titleto the islands she possessed (and I am not sorry forit), no other nation having the right to interfere, whatshall we do? Shall we proceed to enforce our titleafter the Spanish fashion, or shall we respect the in-stincts and aspirations for freedom of those duskytribes, do all in our power to help perfect the inde-pendent political institutions that are already in theirinfancy, and defend them against any possible assaultfrom without? It will not do to say that the Philip-pines are ours in the sense in which the territory be-tween the Atlantic and the Pacific is ours. All we haveis a quitclaim deed to them from Spain. We havewhatever title Spain had. But what in the light ofAmerican ideas was that title worth ? There is an oldnotion lying at the foundation of our political systemthat government derives its just powers from the con-sent of the governed. Without insisting on the literaland pedantic interpretation of that notion, its generalmeaning is plain. It is the charter of our liberty, thespiritual basis of American institutions. In the nameof that idea and under it sacred sanction we flung our-selves into the Cuban war. Despite all low motivesthat intermingled, there was a note of idealism in ourfirst pronouncement. We have not sinned against thatidea (unless in the war with Mexico) till now ; the con-straining motive in our declaration to England aboutVenezuela was of this characterwe will not havepolitical freedom trenched upon on this continent, thatwas the meaning of it. Are we ready, is the Americanpeople ready to forget that idea now ? Circumstancesdo alter cases ; does it alter this case, or is it a principle

8


11/20

of the national life? The Monroe doctrine may beabandoned, though I think it has been rather extendedthan abandojied in the recent war (for the root princi-ple of it is nothing- else than concern for liberty) ; thewise counsels of the fathers, of even great Washington,may no longer be applicable ; but is the Declaration ofIndependence simply a counsel or is it rather Amer-ica's life blood? For my own part, I am in this casea conservative, for when the past is so fortunate as tohave enunciated a principle, I know nothing else thanto cling to it. Idealism and consers-atism blend in one.Happy is that country that can look back as well asforward to something great. Many countries arc gladto cover up their beginnings ; think the blessed fates,we in America are in luckier stead.Now, if the Philippinos wished to become a ]iart

of us, we should not sin against our great principlein incorporating them, however undesirable and po-litically inexpedient such a result might be, and theratified treaty would leave the world nothing to sayagainst it. We might have cherished this idea at thestart, we might have thought that any subject peoplewould be glad to come under the protection of ourflag; but apparently we are mistaken, we are wakingup to see that other peoples, even so-called inferiorpeoples, may have a desire to have their own politicalexistence as truly as we did, now a hundred and moreyears ago. We are confronted with a situation inwhich we have a paper title to a people that after alldoes not wish to belong to us. If they were our ownpeople as the South was, we might hold them evenagainst their consent ; but they are foreigners and out-siders to start with. We have absolutely no claim onthem at all save the quitclaim title which Spain hasgiven us, and what, after all, does that title amount toin the light of the facts of the past week, save permis-sion to make a conquest of them ? We hear much ofexpansion, of inevitable expansion,of the instinct to liveand grow and expand itself which every great people


12/20

feels. Americans talk in this way as well as English-men and I will not deny that there is some truth in it

;

all I can say is that according to the American ideathere are rightful limitations to the process and theselimitations are set in the terms of the Declaration ofIndependence, and if we forget those limitations webecome no better than the Roman Empire of old, andour republic is but a name. These limitations holdagainst a weak people as truly as against a strong one.The test of justice is in respecting the weak, and ifjustice is laid low it will lay us low in time. There isonly one thing stronger than man or the strongest andmost expansive nation, and that is the immortal laws,God.

This nation has had full warning of the dire eventsthat have happened this past week. Ever since Deweyentered Manila Bay we could, if we had our ears tothe ground, hear the murmurs and resolves of cer-tain dark-skinned people that they would throw ofifa hated oppressor's yoke and would not bow meeklyto a new master. There has been apparently muchholding the ears to the ground to know what our peo-ple really wanted, but there has not been apparentlymuch heeding of what even came over the wires fromthe distant East. We knew or could have known thatconditions were ripe for a fresh insurrection, we knewor could have known that after Dewey's victory it be-gan, we ourselves aiding and abetting, and in turnprofiting by it. We supplied the insurgents with armsand ammunition ; through our agent at Hong Kongweencouraged Aguinaldo to go back to Luzon, we evenallowed them to think that we should favor Philippineindependence ; they innocently believed that we sympa-thized with them, that having set out to free the Cu-bans, we could not be indiflferent to their own aspira-tions. They did not wish German aid and refused itwhen it was offered to them, but they were willing to bebeholden to uswe the great liberty-loving power ofthe West. They would not seriously oppose a tempo-rary American protectorate. All this appeared in their

10


13/20

formal statement to the American people, brought tothis country by Agoncillo in September. Yes, as lateas two months ago they recognized that such a protec-torate would be necessary to them, as otherwise theywould, with whatever government they might set upfor themselves, sooner or later become the prey of somegreedy Power. But gradually they have become skep-tical of our intentions. They have been led to suspectthat we after all want to own their islands, and who willdeny with some reason? They claim that their ship-ping has been interfered with and arms and ammuni-tion seized ; they claim their taxes are under the Amer-ican authorities increased and old custom house abusescontinued. Three times they have tried, and tried invain, to secure official recognition, through their rep-resentative, from the United States government. TheUnited States will not declare what its future intentionsare. It refuses to say that it will not hold the islandspermanently. The President talks of "benevolent as-similation.'' and when a Senator assuming to speak forthe administration announces that our duty is to beonly temporary, there is a disavowal of the statement.Everything looks like expansion, peaceful expansion ifpossible, forcible expansion if necessary, but expansionin every case. The Philippinos scent imperialism, andthey are right. Victory has intoxicated this peoplethe commercial spirit is seducing it. making it forget it-self and leave the straight grand path it entered on ayear ago. In a recent census of the newspapers of thecountry it was found that two-thirds of them were for a"forward policy"and we know what that means. Ifthe people move or if powerful interests move ourChief Magistrate, pure-minded and just-ininded thoughhe is, gives no sign that he will gainsay. To wait toknow just how to act is legitimate : to wait for prin-cipleswhat under heaven is that but to confess thatwe have no principles ? Seeing that the nation has nomind on this new issue, this all-important, life anddeath issue to themselves, knowing full well that whenconscience is not alive interests sweep men away, hear-

II


14/20

ing the ever bolder and bolder expressions of imperial-ist policy from our newspapers, magazines and publicmen, and finding that the main problem discussedamong us is how to get the islands and yet not give thepeople rights, who can wonder that the Philippinos,victims of disillusionment, lost their patience and madeup their minds to strike a blow before it should be for-ever too late? For my own part, I have no wonderand rather admire, though I pity their ignorance andfolly. Poor Philippinos ! What are they with theirscanty equipment, with their pitiful bows and arrows,before the army and the navy of the United StatesBut they will soon learn betteror at least those whosurvive after our gallant attacks ! After the bravestare winnowed out we shall no doubt have a docile,'obedient population to rule over and "benevolently as-similate."The responsibility for the disgraceful battles of thepast week is commonly put on the Senators who op-posed the treaty. There never was a more superficialopinion. The real responsibility lay with those whohave refused to say a single clear word to the efifectthat we had no wish to govern the Philippines with-out their consent. One word even from the Presidentalone to the effect that we viewed our ofifices as merelytemporary, that ultimately we hoped the Philippineswould be free even as Cuba is to be free, would havemade the Philippinos our friends, would have madethem not dream of opening hostilities upon us, wouldhave made them gladly co-operate with us even as theCubans are beginning to do in that long unhappy isle.Unless we are to embark on an imperialist policy, theslaughters on either side the past week are the sickliest,ghastliest waste that this war or any war has everknown. There is no honor for any American who fellon the plains near Manila in these engagements ; thereis no comfort for any desolate American home in thethought that the life was offered up for liberty or in anyholy cause. If it was all waste there surely wasno honor, and if it was necessary as a first step toward

12


15/20

imperialism, there was honor only as honor and shameare one, only as there can be honor in fighting to en-slave men. As holy as was the war for Cuba, so un-holy is this war against the Philippines. It is a blackdisgrace to America, it makes me hang my head inshame for my country. If I had thought of this out-come I would rather have had the Cubans starved androtted out than that this people, with its proud history,with its glorious past, should sully itself with such dis-honor. I know, of course, there was nothing for oursoldiers to do but to fire back when they were firedupon, and I nowise reflect upon the personal braverythey may have shown. They were victims, not causesbut the damnable disgrace of this business is on our-selves that we have not known our mind, and on thehighest in the land that they have not known theirmind.

It is high time this country took the bull by thehorns and decided whether it is for imperialism oragainst imperialism. Everyone who believes in theforcible subjection of the Philippines, everyone whobelieves in prosecuting the present w^ar even for a daywithout an explicit declaration on our part that wehave no designs on the liberty and independence of thePhilippine people and mean ultimately to do for themonly what we meant to do for Cuba, is an imperialist.He nowise differs from English imperialists, he nowisediffers from those who went plundering the world (orapproved of it) under a Roman emperor ; the essenceof imperialism is disregard of liberty. Those, on theother hand, who believe in liberty, who oppose con-quest, are the anti-imperialists. It is not a question ofhow much territory we shall have, but of how it shallbe acquired. It is not a question of favoring war or ofopposing war, but of what we have to say to a specifickind of war. . It is not a question of seeking new mar-kets for American trade, or of being content with themarkets we already have, but of what we are wallingto do to get new markets. One thing at a time, and the


16/20

nation needs to clearly envisage this question at thepresent moment.

Already there has been a relaxing of old sentiments.Even Mr. Blaine opposed the right of conquest. He in-duced the Pan-American Congress to distinctly saythat the principle of conquest should not be recognizedas admissable under American public law, and that allcessions of territory made under threats of war or thepressure of an armed force should be void. I fear thatthere are many who would not find that this expressestheir sentiments now. President McKinley said in thecase of Cuba that "forcible annexation cannot bethought of," that it would by our code of morals be"criminal aggression" ; but how many would say it nowwith reference to the Philippines ? Would our ChiefMagistrate himself say it? It is not a moment tooearly to face this question and to settle it. It is nowthat we are at a real parting of the ways. Let us main-tain our authority it we will in the Philippines, thoughwe have only ourselves to thank that we must do thisat such fearful cost, but let us say without further de-lay what our end and object is in asserting our author-ity. The whole future development of America turnson how we answer this question. If we go on one way,we shall simply add America to the list of the Pow-ers, of which the world has too many already that areunscrupulous foes of the liberty of man, and we shalldo so without the excuse which old crowded Europemay plead for itself, do it in a kind of wantonness andspeculative fever. And since we shall be learning con-tempt of liberty abroad, it will be harder to keep re-spect for liberty at home. Little by little individualrights, which it has been our glory to defend, will cometo be regarded as indifferent matters. If on the otherhand we withstand the temptation, the republic will bethe stronger for this exercise of moral force, we shallcontinue in at least one respect to set an example to thenations, we shall move on further and further along thelines of our appointed task, to show how liberty may be

14


17/20

guarded at home and how it may be protected in thegreat world outside.

Sometimes ministers say no matter how the prob-lem is settled, they believe the nation will prosper.They say they believe God has yet a work for Americato do and that we shall go on as we have gone on. Buta minister who reads his Bible should know better.

^ The language reminds me of those in ancient Israelwho leaned on Jehovah saying, "Is not Jehovahin the midst of us ? No evil can come upon us," whomMicah rebuked. God, the real God, is not indifferentwhich of two courses we take ; he does not take care ofus in any case ; only if we take the right are we safe,and if we take the other he conducts us to destruction.

It is a sublime call which comes to the Americannation to-day. Choose ye whom ye will serve, Mam-mon or Liberty and Right. Will you conquer racesgroping upward to freedom and to light, or will youmake yourselves friends to them, assisting them, stand-ing guard over them to prevent aggressions from with-out? The London Spectator says that an independentPhillippine republic would in ten years be either Eng-lish, German or Japanese. That is what we are to pre-vent. That is why we cannot withdraw from the ChinaSea and leave the Philippines absolutely to themselves.That is why I am glad that we have the sort of title-deed that we have. The other nations thereby respectus and know that if they interfere they will have some-one else to reckon with besides a republic just in itsswaddling clothes. We should give the Philippines achance. We should not impose upon them our civiliza-tion (beyond the mere respect for order, which, in themain, indeed, they already have), but let them developtheir own civilization. The world is not all of one type,nor need civilization be a stereoptyped thing. Weshould expect the Malays, under fostering influences,to contribute something to the world. Whatever theymay absorb from contact with outside peoples let themabsorb, but let them run it into their own moulds ; letthem add in this way to the variety and wonder and

15


18/20

richness of the world. I devoutly hope, I wouldearnestly pray did I think there was any use in prayer,that America may see where the part of honor andglory really lie, and I can at least beseech you, myhearers, to weigh this whole matter solemnly in yourminds, and if you find that you can agree with me, thengo among your friends and acquaintances and makeconverts to your idea, speak in season and out of sea-son, in public and in private about it, for I believe thefate of this nation now trembles in the balance and thataction, right action, alone avails.

16


19/20


20/20

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

013 717 902 7

Documents

William Mack in Tire Salter - Imperialism