Philippine Islands, written by John Foreman, F. R. G. S., and published by Charles Scribner's Sons in 1899, being a political, geographical, ethnographical, social, and commercial history of the Philippine Archipelago and its political dependencies, second edition, revised and enlarged, with maps and illustrations." This book Í now beg to present to you, Mr. Chairman, and suggest that if you haven't a book of your own on the stocks you will give it at least a hasty examination. I only say all this because six weeks ago we were led to believe that only those who had personally visited the islands were to be allowed to speak at the House hearings, and as I was one of the "little pigs that stayed at home," it was mainly through the kindness of the leader on the Democratic side that I succeeded in "butting in." That was round 1, and I got the award.

Round 2 consisted in trying to find out what the committee wanted to press the bill for, unless to help Smith, Bell & Co. get sugar in duty free.

As section 2, page 4, line 14, to page 5, line 2, answered that query pretty fully, it may be said that round was mine also. Round 3 was to demonstrate that the Cuban producer did not get the full advantage of the 20 per cent conceded in the reciprocity treaty. When the Dingley bill was on the stocks the reciprocity provision was shaped up in the sail loft, and 8 per cent was considered enough. It was to correspond somewhat to the "de taxe de distance " allowed by France to her colonial sugar. Ultimately the limit was raised (excuse the phrase) to 20 per cent, but the Cuban only gets 8 per cent "allee samee," for the sugar trust pockets the other 12 per cent and also deducts that increment from the price it pays us for our Louisiana sugar, in addition to the deduction of three-sixteenth cent, a sort of "surtaxe de distance" which the trust invented, being what it would cost to transport our sugar from New Orleans to New York-in case they wanted to carry, say, 30.000 or 40,000 tons out of the 200,000 to 220,000 they buy from us to that port to break the market in their favor at a critical time. This round was consumed mainly in sparring for wind.

The fourth round was the advancement of an alternative proposition in the interest of the Filipinos, with an F, which I thought and still think would not harm the domestic industry.

If you will take the trouble to read the record, you will see that this proposition met the usual scholarly and masterful argument, " poohpooh."

Of all sad words to human view

The saddest are these pooh-pooh, pooh-pooh.

66

I am tired of them, you are tired of them. Let us put them aside and see if we can not find instead a "πоуб7" as a substitute of value. You, Mr. Chairman, will at least remember the words of Archimedes Archi Mede we call him in New Orleans" До5 поубт∞, Kαι Δος πογστω, KIVNŐIU TNVYnv," "Give me but a fulcrum and I will move the earth." Let us see if we can not find the fulcrum, and then apply the lever of our common sense, good will, and right desire to the elevation of this bill out of the mire of exploitation and humbug into which it has fallen.

Dates, Mr. Chairman, often disclose facts. It is curious to note that the hearings of 1905 ended on the 3d day of February, yet on the 14th day of that month, before any mail advice could have reached S. Doc. 277, 59-1-5

Manila, we find in the Spanish papers an alternative proposition advanced by Colonel Shuster, collector of the port of Manila, and approved by the planters of Pampanga (at least), in the event that the concession of 50 per cent additional did not meet the views of the American Congress. It would not be half a bad idea for this committee to call for all the cable messages passing between the War Department and the Philippine government, say, from January 10 to March 1 or later. This may seem like an insinuation, and I told General Grosvenor at the Ways and Means Committee hearing that I never insinuated, and I don't want to stultify myself, so I will make it a charge and ask you to prove or disprove it. Get the documents and let them tell the story of the "Shuster formula." We can't help putting things together when we read in Secretary Taft's speech as published in El Comercio of August 14, 1905. Mr. Secretary said: El Gobierno no debe tenor agentes que no amen a los Filipinos que no se asocian a ellos social y officialmente," and later, "Ningun empleado cuyo corazón no responda al grito de Las Filipinas para los Filipinos, puede esperar ganarse la aprobación del gobierno de Washington, ó permanecer en las islas como uno de sus representantes."

66

Compare that language of Secretary Taft's with the news item in the Post of Saturday, viz, that Governor Wright had been promoted to the ambassadorship at Tokyo. Our amiable and, so to speak, loveworthy Secretary of War certainly wears the "main de fer" in the "gant de velours," and it is none too soon for you to make a few little objections to his continuation along these lines if you have a just regard for the welfare of the Republic. I certainly can not look you in the face and believe otherwise. Within the last few days I called his attention, through Colonel Edwards, of the Bureau of Insular Affairs, to a substitute for H. R. 3 based upon the "Shuster formula," alluded to a little while ago, as acceptable to the sugar producers in Pampanga at least (although I believe those of Panay and Negros also accepted it) and couched in the following language:

On page 1, line 11, after the word "Provided," strike out and insert “That sugar wholly the product of the Philippine Islands coming into the United States from the said islands shall hereafter pay the full duty prescribed in the existing tariff law: And further provided, That the moneys so collected shall be paid over to the Philippine government under the condition that the said gov ernment, after setting aside for the support of the island government such part of the said moneys as they may see fit, shall distribute the remainder as a bounty to the producer of sugar in the islands, as was done in the United States of America under the act of October 1, 1890 (26 Stat. L., 567), entitled 'An act to reduce the revenue and equalize duty on imports, and for other purposes.'

"And further provided, That in the event that the said Philippine government should, from any cause, fail to carry out the bounty provision as above set forth the law now in force regarding and governing shipment of sugar from said islands into the United States shall revive and prevail.

Again I got the "pooh-pooh" in a modified secondhand sort of way, but I want to argue for it here with you and trust that should it fail to meet your views you will at least consent to give reasons which may be understanded of the people," and not join in the merry refrain "Pooh-pooh, pooh-pooh!"

The only reason alleged for retaining the 25 per cent is that the island revenues do not yield enough to overtake the requirements of the budget.

This proposition does not interfere with that requirement—in point of fact it is in that respect better-for as soon as this substitute is enacted into law the provisions of the Brussels convention will send the entire available export of Philippine sugar to the United States, and as the duty paid goes to the Philippine government, which can retain what it requires and pay the remainder out to the producer as a bounty; and, as the full duty will be collected, there will be plenty of room for the Philippine government to take even 30 per cent and leave a reasonably encouraging bounty to the producer.

This plan has another and, I think, tremendous advantage. If you ask Mr. Welborn any question as to yield of sugar per acre, or number of acres under cultivation, or as to tonnage of sugar consumed, he will tell you quite frankly that it is all mere guesswork. So far, then, you are legislating absolutely in the dark as to consequences or as to risk. We, confidently relying on our knowledge of what is being done in the neighboring island of Java by the Dutch, and believing that you would be unwilling to admit, even for the sake of argument, that a Dutchman is smarter than a Yankee, are perfectly confident that the development of the sugar industry, under free trade with the Philippine Islands, will at once turn capital away from the development of the sugar industry on the mainland-whether cane or beet-and you know perfectly well that stagnation in any complex industry such as ours-half agricultural and half manufacturing means simply a lingering death. If the substitute were adopted and put in practice, I am sure that at the end of the very first year of its operation we would know more about the Philippine industry than we would find out, if the bill before you should carry, in twenty years, if the industry lasted that long. Under the McKinley law from 1890 to 1894 we had in Louisiana an object lesson in this matter. I present for your consideration the reports of the Internal-Revenue Department for these years, from which you will see that the supervision exercised by the Government established data which acquainted us, and you, with all the essential information we could desire in relation to acreage, yield, nature of machinery, style of sugar, etc.

You have, right here in the city, at the other end of the Avenue, the Government official who carried out the provisions of the law and applied the regulations of the Internal-Revenue Department— Mr. Robert Williams, jr.-and any planter in Louisiana or merchant in New Orleans will tell you that no more conscientious, capable, intelligent, and discreet official was ever known to them. I cheerfully certify to this from my own knowledge of the man, and, if you take up the substitute seriously, I beg you will call him before you and let him speak for himself. I also beg you will permit your clerk to read this extract from Manila papers which I present, or, if that be not agreeable to you, that they be printed as a part of my remarks. I hardly think the Shuster formula, as modified in the substitute I present, would meet less acclaim than in its original shape-perhaps it would receive more and I respectfully submit that, in spite of the allegations made, as to the Filipino not knowing what he wants, he has a residuum of common sense not to be sneered at and waved away. So much for the substitute. Permit me now to take up the bill as it is before you and to make some criticisms on that hasty and ill-advised piece of patchwork.

The act provides revenue for the islands as an expedient, as is clearly indicated by the word "temporarily," a word to be found in only two tariff acts from 1789 to 1897, and both of them in time of war-1862 and 1864. Was this because the statesmen who sat on the Ways and Means Committee knew that a succeeding Congress would undo this work and provide something enduring? Or because they expected that the tin pot (Philippine Islands) now tied to the dog's tail (the Federal Government) would drop off before "temporarily" ended. Or because somebody might offer to buy the archipelago with its dependencies on speculation, and any old patched-up arrangement would last long enough to work off this undesirable piece of stock? Or was it just a parliamentary piece of trickery to give the measure an excuse for reference to that particular committee? I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows. It was one of the four, or perhaps all of the four. There's not much comfort in either proposition.

Now, come down to page 2, line 2: "Sugar, tobacco, and rice, manufactured and unmanufactured." The House was in such a hurry to include rice on that dutiable list that it made nonsense out of the line. Who every heard of manufactured rice? If any of you gentlemen around this board will define the meaning of these words I shall have the definition framed and hung up on the walls of our Board of Trade in New Orleans which handles that product.

I was in the gallery when rice got out of the soup; it was a sight for gods and men to blush at. Not a year ago the rice producers in the United States were trying to get the Cuban Congress to raise the rate of duty on that article so as to get it into the island. They had rice to export. To the best of my belief, rice went from Louisiana into the Philippines less than twelve months ago. This Government, I think, gave $3,000,000 to buy rice for the unfortunate Filipino. According to some of the witnesses produced by the Secretary of War, the carabaos were all dead and the Filipino couldn't grow crops without them, yet this year the rice crop is abundant and next year may be superabundant, and the super may come to the Pacific coast and interfere with the domestic product. Perhaps they were going to manufacture rice out of nipa thatch. I don't know; you don't know. Nobody knows.

Why, in 1899 the Department of Agriculture, Division of Botany, issued Bulletin No. 22, by Prof. S. A. Knapp, the gentleman whom I saw interviewing the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee just after I had presented him with two copies of the Record containing that gentleman's speech in favor of this bill, and, mirabile dictu, you will find that in that bulletin Professor Knapp states that in the Philippines one man can farm only 2 acres of rice against one man in southwestern Louisiana and Texas farming 80 acres, the Filipino getting as compensation wages in gold per year, with board, $15 to $20 in the Philippines, and the American $180 to $216 in Louisiana and Texas. The acre proportion is 21: 80:: 1:32.

The wages proportion is $17.50: $198:: 1:11.3.

The American wage-earner is compelled to cultivate thirty-two times as much land for only eleven and one-third times as much wages as the Filipino, and the innocents abroad come home with the story they tell about low-grade labor in the Philippines. Gentlemen

of the committee, I want to assure you that my concern for the rice people is greater than that of Professor Knapp, for many of my own kith and kin grow rice on the Carolina coast, but this New York-Iowa professor's argument must have been bigger than the biggest stick to be the knock-down argument it proved to be when the House leader, with the grace of a Chesterfield, said he would not oppose that amendment and it went into the bill by a vote of 64 ayes and 50 noes, the minority substitute later on receiving 106 affirmative votes 8 votes less than were cast for and against the rice amendment; and don't forget to remember that this was on "rice, manufactured and unmanufactured."

Mr. Chairman, the very recital of these facts has nauseated me, and I beg you will let me desist until the qualm of my stomach passes off. It will pass off about as quick as the qualm of conscience passed off with the gentleman from Louisiana, who was the only one of the delegation who voted for the bill. That the proponents must have been hard up for votes, or thought they were, is a fair conclusion to be derived from the above-recited facts. Now, I think this committee is entitled to know why this bill passed the House, so far as my intimate and personal knowledge of the facts is concerned.

Between Aguinaldo, the Christmas present, and Sereno, the night watchman, this Filipino business has become a pretty kettle of fish, and if the bill goes through, the cooks will have a hard time to serve up the feast. Capital is not going into the sugar-producing business in that archipelago with the knowledge to be gained from the perusal of these hearings. Pass the bill as it stands or defeat it, it makes no difference to the Filipino now. The tale is told-every fool knows when he has been a knave, but not every knave when he has been a fool. Unless you retrace your steps, put things back in their place, restore the full Dingley rate of duty, and leave the Philippine government free to dispose of the moneys collected in such a way as to invite capital to invest, you are going to do no good to the little brown brother, who, in the very beginning, in the simplicity of his innocence, set up for debate in his agricultural association the question: "Is this measure for the benefit of the Filipino?"

Take a lesson from this business.. Don't attempt to conduct civil affairs with a War Department pilot. The Bureau of Insular Affairs should be put under another Department of the Government-Commerce and Labor, it seems to me, should have the call. You have tried the War Department long enough. When in 1904 or 1905 the immigration statistics show that only one Scotchman and only one Jew went into the archipelago out of the thousands of immigrants, the lion's hide has slipped from the ass's back-the roar becomes a bray and this experiment of a free people governing a subject colony is once more shown to be, in plain English, stupid. This attempt to render a people, some of which Foreman declares hardly belong to the "genus homo," homogeneous by changing their language is also a delusion. Some of you who have been fond of quoting Paul's saying that "God hath made of one (blood) all nations of men for to dwell on the face of the earth" forget to mention that he added in the same breadth " and hath determined the bounds of their habitation."