Thursday, December 2, 2010

1898 República Filipina Dagger Lost


Item was sold at a popular auction company that caters primarily to firearms. I am in to WWII firearms as well, so it was a big surprise for me to just stumble across this one on the Rock Island website. The sunface, 3 stars in triangle make it an obvious give away for a 1st Republic/Katipunan dagger.

Sorry to say I didn't win this. They estimated the daggers value of being $2500-4000...so I didn't even try. Wish I could of past this on to someone else but I just found this auction and didn't catch the deadline, and I been extremely busy taking care of a family emergency. Sad really because this dagger was mislabeled and the item sold for $750. Says it sold "on the floor" and the buyer had to also pay a buyers premium($146), plus taxes and fee...all in all +$1000 out the door. With the estimated price range they gave, I thought that is where they start...I never used Rock Island auction so I didn't even know they start the auctions off at $1. As you can see from the photos, this one is exceptional. The designs are typical, but the ivory handles really sets this dagger apart from all others...rare to see any Filipino(non-Moro) style blade with ivory. I hope to God the buyer/collector knows what he got. It would be extremely sad to know this piece of Philippine history went to a buyer who goes on with the rest of his life thinking it is an early American Masonic dagger from the 1830s.


Dagger listing information:

Very Early Large Masonic American Dagger with Scabbard

Description:The single fuller blade measures 9 1/4" long. Fancy silver hilt with fluted ivory handle. No maker markings. OAL: 13 3/4". Circa 1835 leather sheath with engraved silver throat and tip. The throat is engraved with a masonic emblem: a sun and three stars within a triangle.
Condition: Fine. The blade has some mild spotting and pitting with a few light chips. The ivory handle shows a very even mellow patina and has a couple missing minor chips and some minor handling marks. Scabbard is good with minor flex wear with some flaking.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Interview with Congressman Henry Allen Cooper (1926)

Image

Article written in 1952 by a Filipino who accidentally stumbled across Congressman Henry Allen Coopers office while working at the US Capitol building at Washington back in 1926. For those that do not know of Henry Allen Cooper, he is the author of The Philippine Bill of 1902, The Organic Act, or the Cooper Act of 1902. This Bill establishes the Filipinos own Bill of Rights, instills 2 representatives in US Congress, and establishes the Philippine Assembly(our own House of Representatives) whom are elected by Filipinos. A key note about the story of this bill prior to its passing, Congress was split on Coopers bill and it was on the way to being shot down. In a last ditched effort to garner support for his bill, Cooper took to the floor and fought for this bill in front of Congress. To end his debate he read Jose Rizals "Mi Ultimo Adios" with tears in his eyes. Coopers speech and the reading of Rizals poem was met with cheers and applause. The Cooper bill passed.

Philippine Organic Act 1902
http://www.chanrobles.com/philippinebillof1902.htm

___________________________________

RIZAL IN THE AMERICAN CONGRESS
December 27, 1952

By Vicente Albano Pacis

IN the semi darkness of the ground floor of the US Capitol in Washington, I entered an office by mistake—and stumbled upon the author of the Philippine Bill of 1902—and an interesting episode in Rizalian lore.

It was 1926. Though perhaps not as critical as that of 1902, the American congressional situation with respect to the Philippines was serious. In Manila, General Leonard Wood, the Governor-General, and Manuel L. Quezon, the Senate President, were in the midst of a knock-down-and-dug-out fight. And friends of the general on Capitol Hill were active. One of them, tough and determined Congressman Robert Bacon of New York, had introduced a bill separating Mindanao and Jolo from the Philippines and retaining them under US sovereignty, should Luzon and the Visayas become independent, Senator Sergio Osmeña has rushed to Washington in alarm to try and block the shocking proposal.

A young Associated Press correspondent, I was closely watching the developments on the measure and was that day on my way to the office of Congressman Kiess of Pennsylvania, chairman of the House Committee on Insular Affairs, when I entered the wrong door. I was about to withdraw, having started to offer my excuses, but what the elderly female secretary said rang a bell in my head.

She said. “This is the office of Congressman Henry A. Cooper; can I help you?”

“Cooper of Wisconsin?” I inquired.

I had been in and out of the Capitol for five or six months and had not heard any mention of his name now seen him in the house session hall. I had no idea that he was still a member of Congress. But feeling sure now that the man into whose office I had gotten by mistake was none other than the man for whom the Cooper Act—the first Philippine Organic Law—was named, I decided to see him. I asked the secretary if I could do so.

She slipped into the dim inner office and almost right away came back to usher me in. Seated beside an ancient roll-top desk, the completely white-haired, short, thin old man trembled visibly as he rose slowly and offered me his hand.

“I’m Cooper,” he stated simply.

I explained who I was and added for its possible psychological effect that I had just left the University of Wisconsin the previous summer. But it was not necessary. The mere fact that I was a Filipino seemed to have had a tonic effect on both his strength and memory.

“Well, sir, so you’re from the Philippines?” he said in a reedy voice as he motioned me to a seat.

Having himself sunk back into his swivel chair, he continued, “I’m always glad to meet Filipinos. In all modesty, one of the highlights—one of the most thrilling moments—of my long congressional service was my participation in the drafting and enactment of the first enabling act for the Philippines. And, sir, President McKinley, Governor Taft, and the rest of us met obstacles on every side. But do you know who came to our rescue, sir? None other than you great martyr and hero, Jose Rizal.”

I had gone in, glad of the opportunity to meet a history-book name. His reference to Rizal left me in a state of trembling expectation. What he did next heightened the suspense.

He leaned back in his chair, pressed interlaced fingers on his breast and closed his eyes. He remained thus for some time. I began to wonder if he had gone to sleep as old people often do at the oddest moments. I was about to call his secretary when he suddenly opened his eyes, sat erect, gripped the arms of his chair with each hand as if he had just remembered something very important. His mind had evidently traveled some two decades back, and now he resumed talking.

“Philippine-American relations started very badly, sir!” he recalled. “Those of us who were trying to formulate what might be a just and wise Philippine policy were harassed on every side. Do you know, sir, that President McKinley finally had to resort to nightly prayer?”

With a faraway look in his eyes, he related how the president, criticized on all sides and offered conflicting advice, had finally decided to go on his knees every night in the White House. And one night there had come to him what appeared to be the ultimate solution of the situation. Give back the Philippines to Spain? Leave them to another power in the Orient—Germany, Great Britain, Japan? Abandon the Filipinos? Each of these questions had brought an unsatisfactory answer. So the president had inescapably reached the decision that the only honorable course left to America was to take over the Philippines “to civilize, to educate and to train in self-government.”

The old congressman talked of the Anti-imperialist League, headed by powerful men like Ex-President Grover Cleveland, Andrew Carnegie, and Justice Joseph Story, which was “spreading fear and indignation by alleging that the Republican Administration, in taking over the Philippines, was embarking on a career of imperialism and wrecking America’s constitutional principles.” The Democratic Party, having promised independence to the Filipinos as early as in the presidential campaign of 1900, announced itself in favor of giving that independence immediately.

“But sir,” Congressman Cooper pointed out, “the Democrats were less interested in the Filipinos than in their own skins. Do you know that their official platform declared. “The Filipinos cannot be citizens without endangering our civilization. . . .’?”

Although by 1902 General Aguinaldo had already been captured in Palana, Isabela, by Colonel Funston, and the backbone of the insurrection had been broken, Filipino guerrillas were still active. Americans and Filipinos were still killing each other and the American press continued to carry lurid and gory tales of alleged Filipino brutalities and atrocities. As a consequence American public opinion was bitterly anti-Filipino.

“Most Americans, including prominent Republicans and Democrats, believed that your people were unfit for self-government,” Congressman Cooper went on. “In fact, many of them, including our leading newspapers and responsible statesmen, were convinced the Filipinos were barbarians, pirates, and savages.”

Then he recalled the day when, as chairman of the house Committee on Insular Affairs, which handled Philippine legislation, and as principal author of the Bill of 1902, he made his sponsorship speech. The date was June 19.

“Soon after I’d started speaking,” he recounted, “gentlemen on both sides of the House stood up and demanded to be heard. They badgered and interrupted me often. Finally I refused to yield the floor. I made a long speech; I covered every phase of the Philippine problem—economic, social, political, and Philanthropic. But the strongest argument which I had to demolish was the claim that the Filipinos were savages unfit for self-government. Therefore, I had to address myself especially to this particular point; and, just as President McKinley looked upon God for guidance, so I called upon your Rizal for support. He didn’t fail me.”

The Congressional record for that day chronicles that Congressman Cooper opened his argument against the detractors of the Philippines as follows?

“Everyday we hear men declare that the people of the Philippines are ‘pirate,’ ‘barbarians,’ ‘savages,’ ‘incapable of civilization’. . . newspapers of prominence have repeatedly endorsed this view.

“Mr. Chairman, I am not here to join in this cry so often hear. . . . Before we say that the Filipino people are barbarians and savages whose future is hopeless, we should remember the past and not forget how largely human beings are the products of environment. . . . Think of their history! For three hundred hopeless years they had seen Spanish officials treat office merely as a means by which to rob the helpless people. For three hundred years they lived under a government which deliberately kept the mass of the people in ignorance, which deliberately sought to close to them every avenue of social and political advancement; a government under which it was well-nigh useless for a man even to attempt to acquire property, because his accumulations furnished only so much more of temptation and opportunity for the rapacity of government officials; a government which punished even the most respectful protest against its infamous executions with banishment or death. . . .

“What the Filipinos think, what they feel what they do, are only the natural results of what they have undergone. Yet, sir, despite this environment, this deprivation, this wrong and contumely and outrage, this unfortunate race has given to the world not a few examples of intellectual and moral worth—men in the height of mind and power of character.”

Then the talked of Rizal:

“It has been said that if American institutions had done nothing else than furnish to the world the character of George Washington, ‘that alone would entitle them to the respect of mankind.’ So, sir, I say to all those who denounce the Filipinos indiscriminately as barbarians and savages, without possibility of a civilized future, that this despised race proved itself entitled to their respect and to the respect of mankind when it furnished to the world and character of Jose Rizal.”

Briefly, he narrated the life of the hero from his birth in Calamba to his sentence to death by a Spanish court-martial in Manila.

“On the night before his death, he wrote a poem,” Cooper continued. “I will read it, that the house may know what were the last thoughts of this ‘pirate,’ this barbarian,” this ‘savage,’ of a race ‘incapable of civilization’!”

With eloquence and feeling, Cooper recited Mi Ultimo Adios as translated into English by Derbyshire. When the last line, “Farewell, dear ones, farewell! To die is to rest from our labors,” had faded away, there was a long, deep silence. Then the entire House broke into prolonged applause.

“Encouraged by the demonstration,” Congressman Cooper continued his narration to me, “I plunged into my climax. Even now I can remember the words; I fairly thundered them:

“Pirates! Barbarians! Savages! Incapable of civilization.’ How many of the civilized, Caucasian slanderers of his race could ever be capable of thoughts like these, which on the awful night, as he sat alone amidst silence unbroken save by the rustling of the black plumes of the death angel at his side, poured from the soul of the martyred Filipino? Search the long and bloody roll of the world’s martyred dead, and where—on what soil, under what sky—did Tyranny ever claim a nobler victim?

“Sir, the future is not without hope for a people which, from the midst of such an environment, has furnished to the world a character so lofty and so pure as that of Jose Rizal.”

Now visibly tired from his memory and oratorical exertions, he rested. Yet, though faintly panting, his seamy face wore more than the suggestion of a smile. He was reliving his years of power and triumph, and he was happy. His next words confirmed what his countenance had already proclaimed.

“The result was a complete triumph for Rizal, the Filipinos and justice,” he said, “and, I think I should add in all candor, myself.”

He stopped to savor the thought with relish.

“The story and poetry of Rizal did something to the House akin to a miracle,” he continued. “Your great patriot made congressmen — as well as senators — forget the Philippine insurrection and remember only your people’s travails. Rizal kindled a light by which, for the first time, Americans had done in 1776. Out of Rizal’s life and labors there was born an American-Philippine kinship that he has endured.” Almost as an after-thought, he added, “In the voting on the bill which followed shortly, American statesmen gave Rizal a sizeable majority: the measure was soon ready for the signature of the President. Theodore Roosevelt for, alas, the gentle McKinley had been assassinated the previous years.

I could not help asking him a question. For even as we were talking the Quezon-Wood quarrel raged in Manila and produced serious repercussions in Washington. “A kinship that has endured, Mr. Congressman?” I inquired rhetorically.

“Don’t ever worry for a moment.” he replied, raising a thin hand in a reassuring gesture. “The basic American policy in the Philippines is embodied in law and honored in practice. It is gradual self-government inevitably leading to independence. Having gathered the momentum of time, there’s no turning it back. Men are mere incidents; America’s policy is a matter of national honor.

“The law of 1902 gave your people their first adequate opportunity to show their political capacity. And your statesmen — Osmeña, Quezon and others — have vindicated your people and justified the faith of those of us who, in 1898-1902, saw in the Filipino with his bolo, not a brute savage, but a man defending his motherland and his freedom. You’ve made good. No American can alter that record — ever.

“And when you’re free at last — and I hope it’ll be before I die — you’ll honor Rizal even more. For he not only awakened the Filipinos and wrote finis to Spanish imperialism but also lighted the way for America.”

The interview was over. Nothing more needed to be said. We shook hands. He sank back in his chair and I turned and left.

Sunday, November 28, 2010

General Arthur MacArthur on Apolinario Mabini 1902


Excerpts from Gen. Arthur MacArthurs testimony before the 1902 Lodge Committee in regards to incidents in the Philippines. Jan 31, 1902 - June 28, 1902.

During his examination before the Senate Investigating Committee, Major-General MacArthur made the following statement' in answer to the questions of the Committee:
"Senator Rawlins. -- Tell us about Mabini.
"General MacArthur. -- Mabini is a highly educated young man who, unfortunately, is paralyzed. He has a classical education, a very flexible, imaginative mind, and Mabini's views were more comprehensive than any of the Filipinos that I have met. His idea was a dream of a Malay confederacy. Not the Luzon or the Philippine Archipelago, but I mean of that blood. He is a dreamy man, but a very firm character and of very high accomplishments. As I said, unfortunately, he is paralyzed. He is a young man, and would undoubtedly be of great use in the future of those islands if it were not for his affliction.
"The Chairman. -- Is he a full-blooded Filipino?
"General MacArthur. -- I should say that Mabini has quite a blend of the Chinese.
"The Chairman. -- I was told that he was a Chinese mestizo.
"Senator Patterson. -- Where is he?
"General MacArthur. -- In Guam.
"Senator Patterson. -- How did he come to be there?
"General MacArthur. -- I sent him there.
"Senator Patterson. -- Why?
"General MacArthur. -- Because of his disposition to agitate.
"Senator Patterson. -- For the independence of his country?
"General MacArthur. -- An agitator.
"Senator Patterson. -- What was he agitating for?
"General MacArthur. -- I will illustrate it--
"Senator Patterson. -- Can you not tell me what he was agitating for?
"General MacArthur. -- I will tell you in a minute.
"Senator Patterson. -- Yes.
"General MacArthur. -- He was a prisoner. We had a local prison there that was known as the Anda Street station. That was the Bastille of Manila. I released Mabini from that prison. I told him, 'Mabini, you are released without any restrictions whatever. I simply rely upon your sense of obligation as a gentleman to abstain from any overt acts against the United States.'
"Senator Patterson. -- Now, what did you mean by that, General?
"General MacArthur. -- Well, I will explain. An occupied town brings the population thereof under the control of the occupying force or army. People are obliged to recognize the law as announced by the commanding general of the forces. A man who commits an overt act commits 'war treason,' as we call it technically, or 'war rebellion'; that is to say, they are war traitors or they are war rebels. When Mabini accepted his liberty he made to me no pledge at all. I did not ask it; I simply made that remark incidentally. Therefore, he committed war treason.
"Senator Patterson. -- What did he do?
"General MacArthur. -- He did many things.
"Senator Patterson. -- Let us have it.
"General MacArthur. -- He was in constant correspondence with the leaders in the field, and he was instigating continued resistance. He was strengthening the weak and encouraging the hopeless.
"Senator Patterson. -- For what?
"General MacArthur. -- For the success of the insurrection.
"Senator Patterson. -- The independence of the Philippine Islands?
"General MacArthur. -- The success of the insurrection. Now, as long as Mabini was a prisoner, of course he was at liberty to practice any stratagem by which he could reach his fellow-countrymen for the purposes mentioned. The moment he accepted his freedom he was under the same conditions that all other inhabitants are in an occupied place. They are bound at their peril to make no overt act, either by help or assistance, to the enemy in the field. Mabini did that; he did it to a very great extent, and I told him when I sent him away, I said, 'Mabini, this is not a punishment; I simply have to segregate you for the time being, so that your usefulness as an adversary will be neutralized. You are too powerful a man here, unless you will submit to self-control and stop doing this.' He submitted very willingly, and I think he is enjoying himself in Guam as much as a man can who is not in his own home.
"Senator Patterson. -- As I understand it -- if I am wrong correct me -- Mabini has a very strong conviction that the Filipino people should be a free and independent people, has he not?
"General MacArthur. -- I had a conversation with Mabini one day that may illustrate, somewhat, that idea. It comes right to your point, Senator. Mabini was expatiating to me on the desire of himself for independence. He said independence was absolutely essential to good government. 'Now,' said I, 'Mabini, you have a confusion of ideas, I think. Tell me what government on earth you think is the worst.' Well, he mentioned a number, which I will not repeat. Said I, 'Mabini, they are all independent nations. A nation to be entirely bad has to be absolutely independent, and,' said I, 'your desire is for personal liberty such as is enjoyed under the American Constitution. The independence of a nation does not insure good government, because we have too many examples of independent government which are not good.' Said he, 'That is very true, that precise idea had never entered into my head.' 'Reflect on it,' said I. 'It is worth some reflection, because you might miss every object and every aspiration here if you were independent. You want personal liberty, security of life and property, the privilege of pursuing your own methods, and you might not attain any of those ends if you were independent. You can look around the world at present, and go back into the history of the past, and find how much independent nations have missed attaining those ends, and the possibility is that you might miss it in precisely the same way.' Said he, 'That is a new idea, and I will think it out.' What he accomplished in thinking it out I do not know, because I never had another conversation on the point with him.
"Senator Patterson. -- Still, you found that he was strongly imbued with the desire of the independence of his country, for personal liberty, for protection to person and protection to property under the government of the Filipinos themselves; that is what you found?
"General MacArthur. -- That was his desire and aspiration, and I pointed out to him how much he might miss his purpose if he could bring the islands into absolute independence by one stroke of the pen."

Mabini to the American People 1899

Article published in American Newspaper after Mabinis capture late Dec 1899.

The following papers by Senor Mabini were originally published in the Springfield (Mass.) "Republican," May 25, 1900. They seem so pertinent at the present time, in view of the renewed discussion of Philippine affairs in Congress and elsewhere, that they are reproduced entire:


MABINI TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
"Some interesting documents by Mabini, now in custody at Manila, the able Filipino who headed Aguinaldo's cabinet in the Philippines, have recently reached this country and been translated from Spanish into English. Mabini, it will be recalled, was described by the American authorities as 'the brains of the insurrection.' On December 25, 1899, General Joseph Wheeler, then at Manila, sent to Mabini a list of questions on Philippine affairs, which he asked the Filipino to answer 'as a man of weight whose opinions are most worthy of consideration.' These were the questions and the answers:

"'General Wheeler. -- Is it possible to end the revolution?
"'Mabini. -- It is possible.
"'G. -- If it is possible, how?
"'M. -- By satisfying the aspirations of the people.
"'G. -- What are the causes which have produced the revolution?
"'M. -- They may be reduced to one single cause -- the need for a government which shall assure to the Filipinos liberty of thought, conscience, and association, an equal share in public offices and emoluments, respect for the laws and for property, and the development of the country's prosperity, through the means provided by modern progress.
"'G. -- Would all the Tagalos be satisfied that Aguinaldo should be president?
"'M. -- Not only the Tagalos, but all the Filipinos would be satisfied with a president whom they should elect in the manner to be stipulated with the American Congress. Today they acknowledge Aguinaldo because he personifies their aspirations; but, if they should observe in him either bad faith or incapacity, they would choose another who would have proved himself worthier.
"'G. -- Would all of the inhabitants be satisfied?
"'M. -- The answer to this is included in the answer to the preceding question.
"'G. -- Has Senor Aguinaldo sufficient power to pacify the islands?
"'M. -- He has, so long as the people are on his side.
"'G. -- Where would the money for the government come from?
"'M. -- For the immediate expenses required for the establishment of a stable and permanent government, a foreign loan of the amount necessary would be contracted, in the manner and with the guarantees previously agreed upon with the Congress of the United States. For the ordinary requirements of the administration and for the amortization of the public debt, such taxes would be equitably imposed upon the people as could be borne by them.
"'G. -- And the islands of the South?
"'M. -- They will observe the same attitude as Luzon.
"'G. -- Are the people of those islands fond of war?
"'M. -- No; and so little so that during the three hundred years of the Spanish domination no other war is recorded than that which began in the year 1896. They have found themselves compelled to sustain the present war to defend rights which they believe to be sacred and natural to every people.
"'G. -- Do the people wish a good government by the United States?
"'M. -- When they are convinced of the impossibility of obtaining for the present self-government, which in their opinion is the best, they will accept provisionally that which the United States shall impose; but solely that it may serve as a means to obtaining, sooner or later, self-government; for this is what progress, which is the law of every people, demands. When the American government shall oppose the action of this law, the period of its decadence and ruin will not be far off.
"'G. -- Do the people greatly desire progress -- as railroads, etc., etc.?
"'M. -- One of the causes of the revolution was the aspiration toward the life of progress, to which the greater facility of communication with other countries at the present day gave birth in the hearts of the Filipinos, notwithstanding the efforts of the Spanish government to neutralize this influence.
"'G. -- Is the manner of governing of Spain what they desire?
"'M. -- The sane public opinion of the country detests the manner of governing of Spain, because of the inveterate vices which it carries with it; thus it was that when Aguinaldo wished to take counsel with some who desired to resuscitate the Spanish system, manifesting little energy in repressing former abuses, the withdrawal of the honest Filipinos began, and much discouragement was seen among the people.'
"In a paper entitled 'Some Slight Observations for the Consideration of the American Congress' -- but which the American Congress will never take any notice of -- Mabini discusses, under date of December 25th, the present situation. He says in part:
"'The American Congress finds itself today in an extremely delicate and difficult position, inasmuch as upon the wisdom of its decisions depends the future of the two peoples. The Philippine problem keeps the future of the Philippines, as well as that of the United States, dark and uncertain. The prolongation of the war in the Philippines would bring with it, apart from an incalculable expenditure in men and money, the discredit of the United States before other nations. The Washington government was able to obtain the cession of the Philippines by the treaty of Paris, with the tacit consent of the powers, because the latter supposed that the government of the United States would better maintain peace and respect for the laws and for property.
"'On this basis the government of Washington refused to listen to the demands of the Filipinos to establish and secure, by means of a formal agreement, a government better adapted to their customs and needs, attempting to stifle by force their legitimate aspirations, with the pretext that the natives lacked the capacity for self-government, and could not, therefore, guarantee peace and order and the safety of foreign interests.
"'If the Philippine problem were solved by means of a compromise with the Filipinos, peace, the liberties of the individual, and the security of property would be better guaranteed, and the Americans would share the responsibility with the Filipinos before civilization and history; but if the American government attempts to secure peace by force, in order to establish a government in conformity with its own desires, and not with those of the Philippine people, all the responsibility of its failure will rest with itself.
"'To govern is to study the needs and interpret the desires of a people, in order to fulfil the one and to satisfy the other. If the natives, who know the needs, the customs, and the aspirations of the people, are incapable of governing the Philippines, will the Americans, who have had only little contact with the Filipinos, be more capable of governing them? Let Congress consider well: a good government in the Philippines is necessary, not for the good of the Filipinos, but because the honor and prestige of the American people demand it.
"'The American commission which came a short time ago to the Philippines does not know the country and could not know it in so short a time. When the Spaniards did not know the Filipinos after three hundred years, I fear that the American commission has not been able to learn much about them in a stay of three hundred days in the Philippines. They have been only in the towns occupied by the American forces, speaking to men whose only rule of action is personal interest, who confine their country within the narrow circle of their personal relations and interests and who, because of their conduct, possess no influence in the country. If they have talked with any honest Filipinos, these have not spoken their mind freely, through fear of suffering injury from the Americans because of their frankness, as was frequently the case in the time of the Spanish domination.
"'In making these observations I have not mentioned my personal interests, since I am ready to make any sacrifice that may be required in attestation of my convictions and my belief; besides which I think I shall make a better return for the good treatment I have received and continue to receive from the American authorities, by setting before them the naked truth, without considerations of any kind, in order to avoid irreparable mistakes.'
"Under date of January 15th, Mabini wrote an article on President McKinley's annual message to Congress in December last. Extracts from that are as follows:
"'We will, therefore, not discuss the validity or the justice of the treaty of Paris; nor shall we attempt to show that the purchase and sale of colonies, practiced as a lawful act by civilized nations, is, as a continuation by wholesale of the former traffic in slaves, contrary to the natural law, the only basis and sufficient reason for every human law.
"'The President makes mention of a manifesto which he caused to be published on the conclusion of the treaty of Paris, announcing to the Filipinos that "The Americans had not come as invaders and conquerors, but as friends, to protect the natives in their houses, their occupations, and their personal and religious rights." Regarding this particular, we find some explanation necessary. Has the government of the United States ever been asked if there existed, not to say the inviolability of the Philippine domicile, or the right to labor, but any personal or religious right? We must tell it that our houses, our honor, our possessions, and our personal liberties and rights were, in the time of the Spanish domination, at the mercy of the discretionary and unrestricted powers of the Spanish Governor-General in the Philippines; and consequently they did not exist as they do not now exist. Have the Americans come to establish them? In that case they should have proclaimed and ordained them before this. Are those natural rights meant possessed by all men, prior to every human law? Let them see what they have done and are still doing to the Filipinos and compare it with the principles proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence of the United States; and if they are not carried away by passion, they will comprehend that it is they themselves who have awakened distrust in the minds of the Filipinos.
"'How can we obtain peace? Every one will answer with us, that the surest and most efficacious means would be for the American Congress to give to the Filipinos what they could not obtain from the Spaniards. What is the form of government that would be compatible with the aspirations of the people? We know three: Annexation of the Philippines as a State; autonomy, like that of Canada or Australia; and independence with a protectorate. With a government like that of India, such as Professor Schurman advises, the Philippine people would gain nothing; and we believe that if such a one were offered them, peace could be obtained only by force. Peace imposed by force would not last, nor would it guarantee the fulfilment of the engagement made by the Americans to protect property and foreign interests in the Philippines.
"'We are not, assuredly, advocates of autonomy, and we have no hesitation in repeating what we have already said many times outside the country: that we would accept autonomy only when we were convinced that the people were not ready to sacrifice themselves for a better form of government. But we must take into account that the autonomy proposed by the Paterno cabinet was a plain infraction of the constitution, which they themselves had voted for, and the promulgation of which they had demanded with insistence, threatening to provoke a scandal in case of opposition by that part of the cabinet then in power. But who can say whether Senor Paterno would not have prospered in his plans and obtained the derogation of the constitution if he had been able to present a formal offer of autonomy on the part of the Americans? It is true that neither the commission nor the American generals could offer more than President McKinley offers, who in his message speaks of the Filipinos more or less as follows: If we succeed in crushing the insurrection before long, we will do with the Filipinos what best suits us; if we do not succeed, we will then enter into negotiations, availing ourselves of every possible advantage. For our part, we will confine ourselves to recommending him, with the greatest respect, not to forget these words: Blood does not stifle, but on the contrary nourishes the just aspirations of a people.
" 'It will perhaps be said that the annexation of the country as a State is not possible, because the Filipinos have different customs and a different manner of life, and that the Philippine Islands are not embraced in the Monroe Doctrine; nor autonomy, for, according to Professor Schurman, England granted this to Canada and Australia because the inhabitants, as belonging to the same race as the English, were capable of governing themselves. Hence his preference for a government similar to that of India, as we do not belong to the same race as the Americans. We, who know better the capacity and the manner of thinking of the Filipinos, will not follow Dr. Schurman in a path which, in our judgment, can lead to nothing; we would counsel Congress to adopt any one of the three systems above mentioned, decreeing, at the earliest possible date, that which shall offer the greatest probability of being accepted by the majority of the Filipinos.
"'We will examine the reasons which impel President McKinley to recommend Congress not to consider the system of independence with a protectorate. They are the following:
"'1. "The pacific and loyal majority, who desire only the acceptance of American authority, would remain, by independence, at the mercy of the armed insurgents." The pacific and loyal majority of the Filipinos, like that of every people on earth, desire only tranquillity; for which reason they adopt the plan of seeming to agree with all, without ceasing, however, to guard in their hearts the precious treasure of their illusions. This majority, in the places occupied by the American forces, are not at the mercy of the armed insurgents, but they are at the mercy of armed robbers. These latter have taken care hitherto not to show themselves in the towns, because they are afraid of the armed insurgents. Will it be said that insurgents and robbers are the same thing? The Americans think they are because they do not know the people of the Philippines, and because it suits them to think so.
"'2. "Independence would deprive the Americans of the power to put down the insurgent leaders, but not of responsibility for the acts of these." The insurgents are such because they desire and are fighting for independence. When this is obtained they will cease to be insurgents.
"'3. "Independence would impose upon the Americans the task of protecting the Filipinos from any attack by any other foreign power and from quarrels with foreigners, to which they are very prone." With independence, or without it, they will have this task to perform, which they have voluntarily imposed upon themselves by the treaty of Paris. Besides, did they not announce that their coming had for its object the protection of the Filipinos? These latter, not from temperament, but because it is to their advantage, will take very good care not to quarrel with foreigners who do not attack their liberties or their interests.
"'4. "Independence would divest Congress of the power of declaring war, investing the Tagalo chief with this delicate prerogative." Independence is not conferred without previously determining the form of government. As we suppose that the Americans and Filipinos would prefer the republican form, the Philippine Congress, and not the Tagalo chief, would in any case have the power of declaring war. If anything further is desired, it might be determined that a declaration of war made by the Philippine Congress shall be approved by the American Congress.
"'There will not be wanting those who, invested with more or less authority, will say, as President McKinley says in his message: "Let peace come first and then we will give attention to your wishes." This reminds us of ex-President Cleveland, who, in one of his annual messages, after saying that the Cubans were unwilling to lay down their arms until Spain should guarantee the fulfilment of her promises, and that his government had offered the Spanish government to serve as their surety to the Cubans, if that government bound itself to fulfil them, said, before receiving any answer, that the Cubans were right, because the Spanish government had demonstrated by its attitude that what the Cubans feared would prove true. President McKinley, indeed, has promised hardly anything, but, in case he should make any more important promise in the future, and the insurgents should not readily put faith in it, it would be well to bear in mind Mr. Cleveland's words.
"'We must not close without acknowledging the ability with which both Professor Schurman and President McKinley have formulated their arguments, although, to speak the truth, a careful examination of these arguments reveals the sophisms on which they are based. The Filipinos are accustomed to answer this sort of reasoning with an enigmatical smile. We will therefore permit ourselves to recommend our neighbors, in the places occupied by the American forces, as soon as a favorable occasion presents itself, to ask the authorization of the commandants of those places to assemble peacefully and set forth in polite and temperate terms their desires and aspirations, and also their capabilities.
"'We do not doubt that the Americans, who were born and have grown up under the protection of democratic institutions and practices, will permit such reunions as the most reliable means of information, in order that they may be able to arrive at a true knowledge of the needs and customs of those places. If they continue to keep silent, as they have thus far done, mistakes of supreme importance may easily be made, and political mistakes too often cannot be corrected without bloodshed. Let us then all co-operate in endeavoring to dispel the ignorance which darkens the future of two peoples, which, united, could do much in favor of humanity and universal peace.'
"Mabini, on January 22d, addressed a note to three American newspaper correspondents, asking them to give publicity in America to these points:
"'1. The people of the Philippines do not cherish any settled hatred toward foreigners; but, on the contrary, welcome with pleasure and gratitude all who give proof of a desire to aid them in their efforts to secure for their country freedom and prosperity.
"'2. The Filipinos are keeping up the struggle against the American forces, not through hatred, but in order to show the American people that, far from regarding their political situation with indifference, they are ready, on the contrary, to sacrifice themselves for a government which shall secure to them individual rights and rule them in accordance with the desires and the needs of the people. They have been unable to avoid this struggle, because they have not been able to obtain from the government of the United States any definite and formal promise to establish such a government.
"'3. The existing state of war does not permit the people to give sincere expression to their aspirations; for which reason the Filipinos ardently desire that the American Congress may see some way of giving them a hearing before adopting a resolution which shall definitely decide their future.
"'4. To this end the Filipinos ask Congress either to appoint an American commission which shall put itself in communication with Filipinos possessing influence, both among the peaceable part of the population and those who are up in arms, or receive a commission composed of such Filipinos, in order that it may make known to that body the desires and needs of the people.
"'5. In order that this information shall be complete, and the labors of either commission have for their result the establishment of peace, it will be necessary that the American army of occupation shall not restrict the free expression of public opinion in the press and in peaceable meetings; that it shall suspend temporarily attacks on posts defended by Filipinos, always provided that the latter agree not to attack the Americans; and that it shall give the commissioners the utmost facilities to put themselves in communication with the revolutionists.
"'6. The most thoughtless Filipino, in view of the triumph of the American arms, cannot but acknowledge that every concession in favor of the Filipinos at this time proceeds exclusively from the liberality of the American people; which is a reason the more for Congress to show itself benevolent and indulgent.
"'I confidently hope that when the American people and the people of the Philippines shall know each other better, not only will the present conflict cease, but future ones will be avoided. The sane public opinion of the United States seems more inclined than formerly not to depart from their traditions and from the spirit of justice and humanity, which now constitute the only hope of honorable Filipinos.'
-Apolinario Mabini