{"1": {"fulltext": "tan", "height": "3926", "width": "2402", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3734", "width": "2272", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": "X\\nc^.-^^^\\nfl^^\\n/^f\\n,^a^\\nExpansion under Democratic Presidents Furnishes No Precedent\\nfor Annexation of the Philippine Islands.\\nSPEECH\\nOF\\nW.S. COWHERD,\\nOF MISSOURI,\\nHOUSE OF PvEPRESENTATIYES,\\nWEDNESDAY, MARCH 14. 1900.\\nW^SH[I?^G!-T01^^\u00e2\u0096\u00a0.\\n1900.\\nJ?. U.S.", "height": "3734", "width": "2272", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": ".C ?7\\n10 J-", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "SPEECH\\nOI\\nHON W. S. COWHERD\\nThe House being in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the\\nUnion, and having under consideration H. K. 9133\u00e2\u0080\u0094\\nMr. COWHERD said:\\nMr. Chairman: I do not know that any apology is needed for\\naddressing this House under general debate and talking from the\\ntext instead of upon it. I am inclined to think that more apology\\nis due to the House from one who attempts to discuss any phase\\nof the Philippine situation, after it has been talked over so loag\\nand so fveriuently both here and elsewhere. But there is one part\\nof that proposition to which I desire to call the attention of this\\nHouse. It has been very frequently stated by Democrats, here and\\nelsewhere, v/ho have concluded to follow the President in his policy\\nof imperialism and. thank heaven, their numbers are few that\\nthey were simply following Democratic precedents. Not unfre-\\nquent y our Rei^ublican friends have taunted us with the statement\\nthat the Philippine policy of permanent annexation was the policy\\nthat was inaugurated by Thomas Jetierson.\\nI desire, Mr. Chairman, to consider for a few minutes the ques-\\ntion of expansion under Democratic Presidents and compare the\\nmotives that influenced their action with those influencing the\\nacts of the party now in power. Because it must be remembered,\\nand is everywhere conceded, that it is the intent which fixes the\\ncharacter of an act, and makes it either criminal or praiseworthy.\\nNow. what are the motives influencing the party in power to-\\nday with reference to annexation? I submit that in their last analy-\\nsis they are two. and two only. The one is an appeal to the military\\nspirit and the other the question of commercial advantage. It is\\nto the military spirit that the President appeals when he adopts\\nthe language of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. GrosvenorJ and\\nasks. Who will pull down the flag?\\nIt is to the military spirit gentlemen on that side of the Cham-\\nber appeal when they talk about taking our place among the na-\\ntions of the earth; doing our duty in policing the world. What\\nI want to call their attention to is that in appealing to this spirit\\nthey are by that very appeal admitting the fact that it is a policy\\nwhich if it does not keep us continually at war compels us to be\\ncontinuously preparing for it. It i.s to the commercial spirit that\\nyou appeal when you tell us of the richness of the soil of the Phil-\\nippines, of their beds of coal, of the sands of the river teeming\\nwith gold, and all the wonderful future of oriental trade: but\\nwhen you contend that in this appeal you are following the Jeffer-\\nson policy, let me remind you, Mr. Chairman, you are proj^osing\\nto increase your commerce by battle ships instead of merchant-\\nmen; you are proposing to open markets, not on the (luality of\\n4239 3", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "your goods, biit on the quality of your guns; and these, I submit,\\nare the two motives, and the only two worthy of consideration,\\nthat are influencing the action of the present Administration.\\n1 admit that I leave out of consideration the minister of the gos-\\npel who talks about the opportunity lor evangeli/ation. I leave\\nout of consideration that organized hypocrisy that prates about\\ncivilization. It is useless to argne with religious fanatics who be-\\nlieve the doctrines of Jesus Christ can be carried on the points of\\nbavonets. or to talk with the jjolitical hypocrite who v.-ishes to\\ncivilize by extermination. The fact is that two motives only in-\\nfluence you; reallv. only one, and that is commercial greed, and\\nthe other is an appeal to the mihtary spirit made to cover your\\nreal purpose. 1 admit that a just commercial advantage is a\\nproper object for administrative action. I admit that an appeal\\nto the military spirit, if not proper, is alwa^ s a powerful appeal\\nto people of Anglo-Saxon origin. But what I wish to call your\\nattention to is that, appealing to this spirit as actuating your\\nmotives, you have no right whatever to talk about Democratic\\nprecedents and pretend you are following Jefferson himself.\\nNow, what was the policy that influenced Jefferson in the Loui-\\nsiana purchase? If. in arguing this question, 1 am compelled to\\ntravel over the points made by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.\\nBoctell] in his very interesting discussion the other day, I want\\nto offer to the House, as my excuse, that any word of Jefferson is\\nof sufticient weight to warrant frequent repetition, and that the\\ngentleman fromlllinois, in using part of the language I shall quote,\\nwas intending to prove the annexation of Louisiana was involun-\\ntary so far as Jefferson was concerned. That, in large part, was\\ntrue. The fact is that Jefferson, realizing a divided control of the\\nMississippi, which was then the highway of our commerce, would,\\nafter years of continual bickering, end in getting us into war with\\nEuropean powers, determined to obtain, if possible, full rights of\\nnavigation of the river and a place of deposit at its mouth.\\nThe hrst was the thing that he started to obtain: and I propose\\nto prove that tlie motive that influenced Jefferson was to make\\nour course that of a pacific nation. I propose to show that ho\\nwas endeavoring to lay the foundation for perpetual peace, as\\nyou are preparing to-day, in maintaining possessions in the\\nOrient, to lay foundations for perpetual war. I projiose to show\\nthe motive influencing Jefferson was to remo^ e occasion for bick-\\nerings with European neighbors that would embroil us in Euro-\\npean difficulties, while you, taking, as you are, possessions in the\\nOrient, and those possessions next door to European and Asiatic\\npowers, compel us hereafter to take a hand in every v.-ar on either\\nhemisphere; and yet you are contending that, notwithstanding\\nthat, von are following Jeffersonian pre edcnts.\\nNow, Mr. Chairman, I find as early as 1801, in writing to Mon-\\nroe, Mr. Jefferson says:\\nTliero Is ronsUlomble ronson to apprehend that Spnin cedes Lontslana and\\nFloriila to Franco. It is a very unwLso policy in both .and very ominous to us.\\nOminous because it threatened the peace of the nation, as ia\\nconclusively proven by his letter of April Its, 1802, written to Liv-\\ningston, who was then our envoy to France. In that letter Jeffer-\\nson says:\\nTlio ces.Mon of Louisi.ina and the Florldas by Spain to France works most\\nBorcly on the Unitod Stato i. There is on the Klol)e one sinplo spot\\ntbo possoiisor of which is our natural and habitual euemy. It ia Now Orleans,\\ni2a\u00c2\u00bb", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "through which the produce ot threcoighths of onr territory must pass to\\nmarket, and from its fertility it will ere long yield more than half of our\\nwhole iiroduce and contain more than half of our inhabitants. France, plac-\\ning herself in that door, assumes to us the attitude of defiance.\\nThere, then, is the Jeffersonian principle, the motive that ac-\\ntuated him in attempting to obtain rights beyond the Mississippi\\nand the purchase of Louisiana.\\nMr. BOUTELL of Illinois. Mr. Chairman\\nThe CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Missouri yield to\\nthe gentleman from Illinois?\\nMr. COWHERD. Yes.\\nMr. BOUTELL of Illinois, Would it interfere with the current\\nof the gentleman s remarks to state further along in that letter\\nthe process by which Mr. Jefferson proposed to secure the right of\\ndeposit if he did not get it by peaceful treaty?\\nMr. COWHERD. I propose to show that not only Jefferson,\\nbut the Congress of the United States, considered it so absolutely\\nnecessary to the welfare of the nation at that time that they should\\nhave the right to the free navigation of the Mississippi, considered\\nit so absolutely necessary to the peace of the United States that they\\nshould remove the continual caitse of bickerings from it, that they\\nproposed and intended to have it by conquest if they could not\\nget it by purchase.\\nMr. BOUTELL of Illinois. And not only by conquest, but con-\\nquest brought about through an alliance with Great Britain.\\nMr. COWHERD. I propose to show that, too, and I propose\\nto show that Mr. Jefferson said that when you entered into Euro-\\npean alliances and broils you would render the people so much the\\nless happy and prosperous, and yet that is the very policy you are\\nopenly advocating to-day, and saying that you are foUowmg Jef-\\nfersonian principles.\\nIn his letter, in 1803, to Monroe, in which he says he intends to\\nappoint him envoy extraordinary to France, Mr. Jefferson says:\\nI have but a moment to inform you that the fever into which the Western\\nmind is thrown by the affair at New Orleans, stimulated by the mercantile\\nand generally the Federal interest, threatens to overbear our peace.\\nI read that to show, as I read the other quotations to show, that\\nit was the problem of maintaining peace that Jeft erson was\\nattempting to solve, and. if you choose to put it that way, that ho\\nproposed to have peace if we had to fight for it.\\nMr. BOUTELL of Illinois. That is it.\\nMr. COWHERD. You are proposing to put the country into a\\nposition where we must fight. That is the proposition that I\\nwant to draw attention distinctly to. And yet you pretend you\\nare following .Jeffersonian policies by annexing land in the Orient.\\nYou must admit that when you appeal to the military spirit and\\nsay you must take your part in policing the world, when you say\\nthat we must take our place among the nations of the earth,\\namong the great powers; that you propose to have a hand here-\\nafter in every European and Asiatic war; and you pretend to say\\nthat is Jeffersonian policy.\\nNow, Jefferson says in his letter to Monroe a day or two after,\\non January I d, 1803:\\nIf we can not by purchase of the country insure to ourselves a course of\\nperpetual peace and friendship with all nations, then, as war can not bo dis-\\ntant, it behooves us immediately to be preparing for that war without, how-\\never, hasteningit, and it may be neees.sary (on your failure on the Continent)\\nto cross the channel. We shall get entangled in European politics, and, figur-\\ning more, be much less happy and prosperous.\\n4239", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "6\\nAnd yet gentlemen, both on that side of the Chamber and on\\nthis, contend that the position we have taken in the Orient, whicla\\nthey admit will entangle ns in European and Asiatic politics, are\\nJeffersouian policies, when Jefferson sTated that he would take\\nthat position only in case be was driven to it. and if it was pur-\\nsned it would render us so much the less happy and prosperous.\\nLater, in his letter to Livingston, Jefferson says again, and I read\\nthis to show that it was his motive to make peace jjerpetual as far\\nas possible in the United States:\\nWe are satisfied nothing else will secure us affain ^t a war at no distant\\nperiod, anfl sve can not pre-^s this reason without hf^nning those arrange-\\nments which will bo necessary if war is hereafter to result.\\nMr. BOUTELL of Illinois. VThat was the reason that Jeffer-\\nson feared war in case Florida and the mouths of the Mississii^pi\\nRiver went to France?\\nMr. COWHERD. I will read you\\n^Ir. BOUTELL of Illin ds. \\\\Vas it not because the navigation\\nof the ^lississip])i. the Pearl, and the Apalachicola would likely\\nbe denied Ijy Franco to us. and that made it necessary for us to\\nfight to protect our commerce?\\nMr. COWHERD. That was only true in part; but Jefferson\\nsays in a quotation I am about to read that the divided possession\\nof the.se waters render bickering with foreign powers continually\\nlikely to occur, but the very thing, and what the gentleman failed\\nto state the other day when he said the Florida resolutions were\\na Democratic precedent of imperialism, the hope of removing op-\\nportunity for trouble is one of the things that influenced us in\\nthe purchase of both of these territories.\\nNow, to show conclusively that that was Mr. Jefferson s idea. I\\nread from his letter to John Dickinson, written from Monticello\\nAugust y, 1803, after the successfol negotiation of the purchase of\\nLouisiana:\\nDear Rth: Your friendly favor of the ]=t instant is received with that wel-\\ncome wliich always accmupanics the approbation of the wLso and pood. The\\na -i!iiisition of New Orleans would of itsolf have been a preat thin;::, as it\\nwould have insured toour We-torn brethren the means of cspcrtiu^r their\\nproduce; but that of Louisiau.i is iuap])reciable. because, pivins us the sole\\ndominion of the Mississippi.it excludes those bickerincrs with foreign powera\\nwhich we know of a certainty would have put us at war with France imme-\\ndiately; and it secures to us the course of a peaceable nation.\\nThere, then, is the Jeffersonian idea of expansion First, the pur-\\nchase of contiguous territory, the possession of which is necessary\\nto the full enjoyment of the territory we already own; the re-\\nmoval of a cause of constant bickerings with foreign nations,\\nwhich in tho end must necessarily restilt in the disturbance of our\\npeace; and last, the entire removal from proximity with us of a\\nEarojican power that in the end. he feared, would embroil us in\\nEuropean wars. Now, compare that with the policy you follow.\\nYou propose to t.ake territory 7.000 miles away, which our citizens\\ncan not inhabit and which is no earthly use to us. You i)roposo\\nto take that territory, as you state, for iho very purpose m part of\\ntaking a hand in Eurojioan policies and Asiatic diplomacy; and\\nyou projKise to take it with full admission ol the fact that instead\\nof securing to tis the cour e of a peaceful nation it will compel us\\nhereafter to take part in all the w^ars of both the hemispheres.\\nYet you set up a Jeffersonian precedent for such a policy. Ex-\\ncept for the fact that there is in both an expansion of our territory,", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "there is absolutely no similaritj between them. Why, sir, the\\nassassin who lurks behind a corner of the fence to shoot down hia\\nvictim for the purpose of robbery might .lust as well cite as a\\nprecedent the soldier who stands to defend his hearth and kills to\\nprotect his country. Both are killing\u00e2\u0080\u0094 one for a noble motive, the\\nother for a criminal purpose. Possessing the criminal purpose,\\nyou cite the man who is actuated by the noble one as a precedent\\nfor your conduct. [Applause.]\\nMr. BO UTELL of Illinois. Will it interrupt the gentleman\\nMr. COWHERD. I am glad to yield to the gentleman.\\nMr. BOQTELL of Illinois. I should like to ask the gentleman\\nthe same question which I have asked several on hia side who\\nhave discussed the practical solution of the Philippine problem,\\nWhether he would favor the immediate withdrawal of our army\\nand navy from the Philippines and leave the people there at once\\nto their own devices?\\nMr. COWHERD. I will say to the gentleman I believe that\\nhad we done for the Filipino what we did for the Cuban: had wo\\nannounced to him at the conclusion of the war with Spain, or\\nupon the surrender of Manila, that we proposed to give him a free\\nand independent government, controlled bj himself, we never\\nwould have had to send another soldier there, nor would any\\nquestion of withdrawal have arisen. [Applause.] Now, his party\\nhaving brought on the difficulty by the methods they pursued,\\nthe gentlemen want to know what we would do to get them out\\nof it. When Manila fell there was in Luzon a government, repub-\\nlican in form, and, if our own officers are to be believed, perform-\\ning satisfactorily to the people all the functions of government.\\nIn the first place I would have recognized that government. Now\\nI would make amends by notifying them fully, freely, and widely\\nthat we propose to give them free and independent government\\nat the very first moment possible. That is the policy I would ad-\\nvocate. I do not know what my party s policy may be; they have\\nnot declared it.\\nNow, we do not need to take the word of Jefferson alone as to\\nwhat was Democratic policy in regard to annexation. I hold here\\nthe Annals of the Seventh Congress, and I refer to a report ren-\\ndered by a special committee of the House. It will be found on\\npage 371 of this volume. That special committee was composed\\nof distinguished men Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Eustis. Mr. Bayard,\\nMr. Dickson. Mr. Lowndes, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Gregg. I\\nshall read only some short extracts from this report to show that\\nthe idea of Congress as well as Mr. Jefferson was, as I stated\\na while ago, that it was a matter of imperious necessity that we\\nshould have the right of the navigation of the Mississippi: that, if\\nnecessary, we would have to fight for it, because it meant war in\\nthe end, and that it was better to acquire it by peaceable means\\nthan to go to war for it. Gentlemen here are upholding the wag-\\ning of a war which is for but one purpose, and that is the extend-\\ning of our commerce; not to give our commerce access to mar-\\nkets, but to compel markets for it by control of dependent people.\\nThis report reads:\\nThe free and unmolested navigation of the river Mississippi is a point to\\n\u00e2\u0096\u00a0which the attention of the General Government has been directed ever since\\nthe peace of 1783, by which our independence as a nation was finally acknowl-\\nedged.\\nFrom the foregoing view of facts it must bo seen that the possession of\\n4:i09", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "8\\nNew Orleans and the Floridas will not only be required for the convenience\\nof the United States, but will be demanded by their most imperious necessi-\\nties.\\nThe preat question, then, which presents itself is, Shall we at this time lay\\nthe foundation for tuturo peace\u00e2\u0080\u0094\\nNot for war, but for peace\u00e2\u0080\u0094\\nby ofiferinsr a fair and equivalent consideration, or shall we hereafter incur\\nthe hazards and the horrors of war* The Governraont of the United Suites\\nIs diffor. ntlv or^ aiiizud from any in the world. Its object is the happiness of\\nman; its policy and its interest, to pursue right by right means.\\nThat sounds a little sinj^ilar in this year of our Lord 1900, when\\n\u00e2\u0096\u00a0we are sending our ai iuies out to conquer a people fighting for\\ntheir liberty.\\nWar Is the great scourge of the human race and should never be resorted\\nto but in cases of the most imperious necessity. A wise government will\\navoid it when its views can be attained by jipuceful measures.\\nIn all nations the people bear the burden of war. lu the United States the\\npeople rule.\\nConcluding, this report says:\\nIn another point of view perhaps it wo\\\\ild he preferable to make the pur-\\ncha.se, as it is believed that a smaller sum would be re(|uired for this subject\\nthan would necessarily be expended if wo should attempt to take possessiou\\nby force, the expenses of a war being, indeed, almost incalculable.\\nNow, that, Mr. Chairman, as I take it, is a fair exposition of the\\npurposes actuating that great Democratic Administration in our\\nfirst aciiuisition of territory. And. as I have said, I challenge any\\ngentleman on that side of the Chamber to show where, in any way,\\na parallel can be drawn between that conduct and the motives\\nthat actuate you in holding onto the Philippine Islands.\\nThe next great ac(ii;isition was the purchase of Florida, and the\\ndistinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Boutell], as I said a\\nfew moments ago, read the secret resolutions pas.sed by Congress\\nand signeVl by the President and gave them, as he said, as some-\\nthing which indicated imperialistic tendencies in the Democratic\\nparty.\\nI do not think the gentleman was entirely fair in his presenta-\\ntion of that subject. Had he been, he should have said that when\\nour commissioners were sent there under these resohitious to tako\\ntemporary po.sses.sion of that country, which we proposed to hold\\nsubject to luture negotiations, they were sent there with instruc-\\ntions tliat they should not use force, except there arose the strong\\nBusi)icion tliat some other government was preparing to take pos-\\nBes.sion of the territory. What government was that?\\nThis, you will remember, was in ]\u00c2\u00abll, just prior to the war of\\n1812 with Ciroat Britain, and it is a fact that at that time Great\\nBritain was negotiating for the Florida forts. It is a fact that at\\nthat time she was preparing to establish a line of military posts\\nalong our onliro Southern bonier, from which she could success-\\nfully and easily wage war upon our citizens, and these resolutions\\nWire passed to protect us from Great Britain. They contemplated\\na niilitarv necessitv.\\n\\\\vhv, it is a fact that Great Britain did tako possession of those\\nFlorida posts; that from the shelter of those Florida forts she\\norganized the Indian bands to commit their depredations upon\\nAmerican civili/ation: that at thoanouth of one of the Florida\\nrivers she built a fort and garrisoned it with British arms, pro-\\nviding a place for the refugee slaves of the South and for the hos-\\n4:230", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0010.jp2"}, "11": {"fulltext": "tile Indians, and from that place, for years, war was waged upon\\nour Southern country.\\nIt is a fact that the weak hand of Spain was no loncrer able to\\ngovern the Floridas, no longer able to control the freebooters who\\nhad made their rendezvous along her southern borders, no longer\\nable to drive away the pirates who had taken possession of the\\nislands, no longer able to control the Indians, as she was by treaty\\nbound to do, from issuing out to make their forays upon us or to\\npunish them when they returned.\\nThese were the facts that led to the passage of the resolutions\\nthat the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Boutell] read the other\\nday. and this House will remember that Florida was not acquired\\nunder those resolutions, but that afterwards, when the Seminolea,\\nissuing from the Florida Everglades, waged war upon the United\\nStates, we followed them there, and General Jackson took posses-\\nsion of Florida in order to successfully prosecute that war, and\\nafterwards we purchased it. Purchased it\u00e2\u0080\u0094 why? For the very\\nsame reason we purchased Louisiana; to eliminate forever the\\nbickerings that were arising about the navigation of the rivers\\nrising in the United States and debouching through Spanish ter-\\nritory into the Gulf; purchased it to remove a European neighbor\\nwhose troubles were sure, sooner or later, to embroil us in Euro-\\npean war: purchased it because it was necessary for the peace and\\nthe defense of the United States. Again, no parallel can be drawn\\nbetween that conduct and the conduct of the present Administra-\\ntion in holding forever the Philippine Islands and holding them in\\nsubjection. For I want j ou to remember, gentlemen of the House,\\nthat not only in the treaty with France was inserted the provision\\nthat every inhabitant of that Territory should be entitled to all\\nthe privileges and immunities of an American citizen, and that\\nthe country itself should, in the fullness of time, be admitted to\\nits rights as a State in the American Union, but in every other\\ncession under a Democratic President.\\nNow if, as the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Boutell] said,\\nTalleyrand and Napoleon put that clause in the treaty with Jef-\\nferson, there was no Talleyrand and no Napoleon to put that clause\\nin the treaty with Spain. Not only in the treaty for the purchase\\nof Louisiana, but in the treaty for the purchase of Florida and in\\nevery other negotiation that was ever made under a Democratic\\nAdministration, it was provided that every inhabitant of the Ter-\\nritory should become a citizen of the United States; that the Con-\\nstitution as well as the flag should follow us into that Territory\\nand govern those people. It was provided in the Florida purchase,\\nit was provided in the cession from Mexico, it was provided in the\\nGadsden purchase.\\nCompare that with the policy of this Administration, that not\\nonly holds 10,000,000 people in teiTitory belonging, as they say. to\\nthe United States, not only holds them without any present pledge\\nof citizenship or guaranty of liberty, but holds them without\\ndaring to make a promise for the future. And yet you claim a\\nDemocratic precedent.\\nThe annexation of Texas, of course, was the union of two sov-\\nereignties. Texas had won her independence and maintained it,\\nas I remember, for aboiat eight years. It was far more probable\\nthat Texas would conquer Mexico than that Mexico would ever\\nreconquer Texas, as we know from the trend of subseciuent events.\\nOf course, out of that arose the war with Mexico, and out of\\n4239", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0011.jp2"}, "12": {"fulltext": "10\\nthe war with Mexico arose the cession of territory in 1848. I shall\\nnot go to any very great extent into the causes governing that\\ncession of territorj Of course, the slavery question was largely\\na part of it. also the question of the disputed boundary between\\nTexas aud Mexico, Texas claiming that her limits extended to the\\nmouth of the Kio Grande. Again, we demanded an indemnity,\\nwhich Mexico could onlj- pay in land. Al.so, the condition of Cal-\\nifornia very largely inlluenced it; because, you will remember\\nagain, gentlemen, history tells us that the British were negotiat-\\ning for jiossessiou of the California ports.\\nCalifornia had won her independence three times since 1832. and\\npermitted Mexico again to establish her authority over them,\\n.She was practically in the throes of another revolution, and the\\nBear flag was floating above her soil when Fremont flrst landed\\nthere. The Americans in that territory at the conclusion of that\\nwar numbered between twelve and fifteen thousand, an e iual if\\nnot a greater number than the Mexican inhabitants. Great Brit-\\nain had been making arrangements for another revolution. An\\nappeal was to be made to her for protection from Mexico, and\\narrangements were being made to take possession of the territory.\\nIt was a race between Commodore Sloat and the British officer\\nwhich should first raise their flag. Undoubtedly we took it also\\nbecause we wanted the Pacific coast. We wanted the California\\nports. We wanted to extend our territory from ocean to o.ean.\\nWo wanted to extend it from natural boundary to natural bound-\\narj- give it as far as possible natural frontiers. It was contigu-\\nous territory. It was not peopled by an alien race. It involved\\nnot a single one of the principles involved in the aunexation and\\npermanent retention of the Philippine Islands.\\nAnd permit me to say here that if you build the Nicaraguan\\nCanal, about which the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Adamson]\\nwas just speaking, it is possible that some day you must extend\\nyour southern boundaries to take it in. You might then claim\\nsome Democratic precedent, because you would have contiguous\\nterritory where white men can live and where we can extend the\\ndoctrines of the Constitution.\\nBut I submit, gentlemen, that in no annexation heretofore of\\nany land under Democratic Presidents has there arisen a single\\none of the dangerous principles that now confront us, nor h:tve\\nthey been actuated by the motives controlling that side of this\\nChamber.\\nAnd yet. notwithstanding these numerous good reasons for the\\nces-^ion of the territory from Mexico, I call you to remember the\\nfact that immediati ly after that cession there was an election and\\nthe party that had waged the most successful war in all our his-\\ntory, that had aciiuired this immense and valuable tract of land,\\nthat i arty went down to defeat, largely because the American\\npeople vrere impressed with the idea that that war was not a just\\none.\\nNow, Mr. Chairman, what are the facts confronting the Admin-\\nistration to-dayV Puerto Rico comes to us with open arms. The\\nports and markets which slie had heretofore entered are shut off\\nby that fact. She ai)peals to us for aid, and you respond with a\\ntax. Why? Not because you do not .sympathize with the Puerto\\nRican: not because you do not recognize liis cause as just. You\\nrespond with a tax because j ou wish to establish a precedent for\\nuse in the Plnlipjnne Islands. It is openly admitted that if the\\nproducts of the Philippines are to be admitted free into the United", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0012.jp2"}, "13": {"fulltext": "11\\nstates; if their labor is to compete ou equal terms with ours; if\\ntheir millions of Chinese inhabiiants are to be given free access to\\nour country, you can not sustain yourselves before the American\\npeople. So. before finally committing yourselves to this proposi-\\ntion, you propose to experiment with Puerto Rico to test the will\\nof the people and the justice of the courts. You wish to know\\nbefore proceeding further, whether, for the sake of commercial\\ngain, the people are willing to stirrender the spirit of liberty and\\nthe courts for political advantage; are ready to construe the Cou-\\nBtitution out of existence.\\nWhy, Mr. Chairman, there was a time once when Englishmen\\ncoming to America contended that the English constitution, the\\nBill of Rights, Magna Charta, and everything it guaranteed fol-\\nlowed them to any colony. But we contend to-day that the Amer-\\nican Constitution is good only for those citizens who can reach\\nthe Capitol without wetting their feet; that it is a dry-land doc-\\nument and loses its force the moment it reaches the sea. There\\nwas a time when the Constitution was the compass that guided\\nour condttct. the touchstone by which we tested legislation; but\\nto-day, under your construction of the Puerto Rican bill, the\\nConstitution no longer guides us nor guards them; it no longer\\nhinders the hand of the sovereign nor shelters the head of the sub-\\nject; and that is the proposition which you are desiring to enact\\ninto law in order that j ou may have a precedent for the control\\nof the Philippine Islands. Tiie President saj s empire is imjjos-\\nsible; yet what must be the feelmg of a subject compelled to live\\nTinder laws in whose enactment he has no voic-e, when he sees the\\ndominant race preaching one system of law for him and practicing\\nanother for themselves.\\nLook, too, what a ridiculous attitude it puts distinguished gen-\\ntlemen in when they attempt to support it. Why, the other day\\nI heard the distinguished gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Dolliver],\\nThe Henry of Navarre of protection, whose plume has lead\\nevery charge on free trade in this Chamber for a dozen years,\\nproudly boast that we propose to make the Philippine ports open\\ndoors to the commerce of the world. Mr. Chairman, if free\\ntrade is good for the Philippine Islands, why is protection such a\\nblessing for the United States; if protection is good for our infant\\nindustries, why is it not also good for an agricultural people where\\nmanufactures are yet to be established? if protection is good for\\nlis and good for them, then I ask you how you answer to your\\nconscience when you are legislating ior a peojile unrepresented in\\nthis Chamber for your benefit and to their damage. If this be\\nnot empire, it lacks naught but the name. Ah, Mr. Chairman,\\nthere was a time when we said that taxation without representa-\\ntion was tj ranny, and we made good our legal construction with\\nflintlocks and saber; but to-day you are announcing to Puerto\\nRico that taxation without representation is liberty, and you pro-\\npose to prove it by battle ships and Gatling guns.\\nMr. Chairman, the other day there was a still more remarkable\\nproposition advanced at the other end of this Capitol: and I notice\\nby the morning paper that it was discussed, and favorably dis-\\ncussed, last night in a caucus of Republican Senators. hat was\\nthat proposition? To open the ports of Puerto Rico free to the\\nproducts of the United States and tax the products of Puerto Rico\\nseeking entrance to the ports of the United States. I do not be-\\nlieve that proposition could at present pass any further than the\\nstage of honorable mention. I do not believe the American idea\\n4239", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0013.jp2"}, "14": {"fulltext": "12\\nof fair play will permit you to enact that kind of lepfislation into\\nlaw at this time. But so sure as we propose to legislate for a sub-\\nject race, so sure as we propose to pass laws for unrepresented\\npeople, just so sure will exactions of that kind some day find their\\nway into our statute books. The time will come yet when such\\nlaws will be enacted; the time will come when the desire for gain\\nwill dull our sense of justice; the time will come when the itching\\npalm will still our troubled conscience; and when that time comes,\\n\u00e2\u0096\u00a0we will do as a dominant race has ever done that has legislated\\nfor a sub.it ct, an inferior one, we will be prepared to take all the\\nbenefits of the legislation and give them all the burdens of it.\\nMr. Chairman, if we would know what is the opinion of the\\nfathers upon this waging war solely for commerce, as you have\\nbeen doing in the Philippine Islands, a war that we may control\\noriental trade according to j our own admissions, let me read to\\nyou the resjionse that Benjamin Franklin made to Lord Howe\\nwhen he came as a peace commissioner to our shores, just as we\\nsent our peace commissioners to announce to the Philippine people\\nthat all we wanted was their trade and we would give them in\\ndue time such a government as in our opinion they ought to have.\\nThis was what Lord Howe said, that all that England wanted\\nwas control of the trade and commerce of the United States, and\\nFranklin responded:\\nTo rae It seems that neither the obtniiiing nor retr.inincr of any trade, how\\nvaluable soever, is an object for which men may justly spill each others\\nblood; that the true and sure means of extcudinf; and securinii commerce is\\nthe (goodness and cheapness of commodities, and that the profit of no trado\\ncan ever bo equal to the esjiense of compelling it and holding it by fleets or\\narmies. And 1 am persuaded that cool, dispassionate posterity will condemn\\nto infamy those who advise it. and that even success will not save from bome\\ndegree of dishonor those who voluntarily engage in it.\\nThere is the opinion of the most far-sighted, long-headed states-\\nman of the Revolution, the man who embodied in his own person-\\nality both the wit and wisdom of the age. There is his opinion\\nin regard to a war levied for the purpose of controlling the com-\\nmerce of a sulfject people. I commend it to the careful consider-\\nation of the Republican party.\\nMr. Chairman, there was a time when we boasted, not of the\\nmoney, but the laws we ma le; not that yonder flag carried trade\\nin its wake, but tliat it carried liberty. To-day its proud boast is\\nthat the trado follows the flag.\\nThe other day when General French rode into Kimberly to the\\nrelief of that beleagured city, the newspajiers tell us the citizens\\nheld a reception for the English oflicers, and Cecil Rhodes, the\\nvery incarnation of the land-lusting, the land-grabbing spirit of\\nthe age. the m;in who might also have said, as waa said the other\\nday in the other end of the Capiiol, These are all the islands left\\nto grab; Cecil Rhodes said in resiionse to a toast, that the\\npeople of Kiniiierly had done their part in preserving lor the world\\nthe greatest commercial asset of the ago, the English flag.\\nMr. Chairman. I lioi e the day will never come when nny man\\ncan rise in any land and point to yonder banner as a commercial\\na. Jset. (Ai)plause.] I trust sir. that something still will survive\\nof the spirit of those days when that banner floated above Wash-\\nington and his liarefooted patiiots at Valley Forge; I trust some-\\nthing stiil will live of the spirit that animated the men that\\nni)held that banner when they stood with stubborn f)ld Andrew\\nJaclcson at New Orleans. 1 trust something of that love of liberty", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0014.jp2"}, "15": {"fulltext": "13\\nstill permeates this nation as it permeated the followers of yonder\\nflag when they marched with Grant on his stubborn advance to\\nRichmoud.\\nAnd, Mr. Chairman, if the day ever comes when that banner is\\nnotliiiig but a commercial asset, then, sir, every stripe of white\\nupon its folds should be dyed in the blood of the men we kill to\\nconcjuer, and from yonder ground of blue you should take every\\nstar that represents an independent State. [Prolonged applause\\non the Democratic side.]\\n4239\\no", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0015.jp2"}, "16": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0016.jp2"}, "17": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0017.jp2"}, "18": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0018.jp2"}, "19": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0019.jp2"}, "20": {"fulltext": "LIBRARY OP CONGRESS\\n013 744 621 2", "height": "3636", "width": "2159", "jp2-path": "expansionunderde00cowh_0020.jp2"}}