Mr. WELCH. The question is when are we going to grant them their freedom?

Mr. HURLEY. Well, my idea is that you grant them their freedom when you have got these people, a people whom you conquered by force of arms, a dependent people, so that they can take care of their rights under a free government.

We all believe in the rights of small peoples. The Moros are a small people and we conquered them. We did it for the purpose of unifying the archipelago. We assumed certain obligations to them when we did that. Are we going to turn them loose before we complete those obligations?

Mr. WELCH. Now that you have mentioned the subject of the Moros again, you stated at the opening that we would leave defenseless this heretofore unconquerable Moros. They have had over 30 years of American culture and civilization. Has not the culture and civilization you proudly referred to, which this country brought to the Philippine Islands, extended into the Moro country? Are they as warlike to-day as they were then?

Secretary HURLEY. Mr. Welch, of course, you no doubt have been there. The present proud position of the Christian Filipinos is the result of more than three centuries of absorption of occidental principles, whether it be through religion, government, or language. The condition in the Moro country is the result of 30 years of western contact and influence. There is quite a little difference between 300 years and 30 years.

The Moros have been disarmed. They have been deprived of their old method of self-preservation and self-defense. But they have not made, in 30 years, the progress that the Christian Filipinos have made in that time, because the Christian Filipinos had more than three centuries of foundation to start with.

The Moros started from the day we conquered them and disarmed them. I think that is rather a reasonable argument for the lack of immediate progress made by the Moros.

The fact is, Mr. Congressman, that, if the Moros had made the progress which you suggest they should have made, they would not now be represented by appointed governors and appointed representatives; they would have those qualifications that would enable them at least to vote for their representatives. They have not arrived at that state.

Mr. KNUTSON. What would you think of the proposition, Mr. Secretary, of turning the Christian islands loose and keeping the others, probably permanently?

Secretary HURLEY. Well, speaking frankly on that, there is one grave objection to it. The objective of the United State in the Philippines has been the unification of the islands, of the people of the archipelago. There must be that unification before they can continue to exist as a government.

Mr. CROSS. You do not think it would take 300 years to get the Moros in shape, do you?

Secretary HURLEY. Now, of course, I know that the gentleman is facetious. I am willing to be facetious if the gentleman wants to go along that line, although this is rather a serious problem.

Mr. CROSS. But the Christian people have had 300 years.

The CHAIRMAN. I am anxious that the Secretary shall continue, because I am personally anxious for him to get to the point in his testimony where he may discuss the provisions of the bill.

Mr. CROSS. All right.

Mr. LOZIER. May I ask one question?

The gentleman spoke of the fact that the Moros are represented by members in the Filipino Legislature, ruled over by governors appointed by the governor general. That is because the organic act in 1916 made those provisions. Does the Secretary think there has been no advancement in the Moros since 1916?

Secretary HURLEY. You must not expect me to show a lack of common sense or a lack of recognition of the obvious. I might say that, since 1916, many young Moros have graduated from the established schools, and consequently there is, to that extent, a change, and that change will continue to take place. Of course, every year that passes, if the leaders are acting properly, the change should be marked, it should be considerable. Progress has been made by the Moros in 16 years, and it was my information, not alone from Americansbecause there are very few Americans in official life in the Philippine Islands—but from Filipinos, that the Moros are not yet qualified to elect their own representatives.

Mr. CROSS. Yes; but, Mr. Secretary, you referred to our having

The CHAIRMAN. The chair will have to insist that we allow the Secretary to continue his testimony and not be drawn off on minor questions.

Secretary HURLEY. Well, please understand me. I do not mind it the slightest bit, if you gentlemen will be patient and let me complete my statement, because I think it is your right to examine me. If my opinions are fallacious, or if I am biased in this matter, you have a right to know, and I have absolutely no objection to any form of question. I would like to continue until I get down to the Hare bill, and then I know that you will want to ask me a lot of questions about what I have to say about it. But I do believe that the other side of this proposition should be briefly stated.

Mr. BRUMM. Mr. Secretary, it seems to me, as long as we have gone this far, I might as well ask you a question at this time:

Did I understand you to say just now, in effect, that the official opinion that you have as Secretary of War would lead the department to believe that the Moros are not at this present time, as a whole, in a position to select their own representatives, and so forth? Is that correct?

Secretary HURLEY. Unquestionably that is correct.

Now, I was asked about the separation of the Moro Provinces and the mountain Provinces of Luzon, and also the Sulu Archipelago, because those are the areas which, with most of Uindanao, comprise the nine Provinces which still have appointive officers.

Of course, rather than surrender these people, disarmed as they are, to their hereditary enemies, I would say yes, liberate 11,000,000 of the Filipinos, let them have their own self-government and let us remain in those Provinces. But if you do that, gentlemen, realize that in doing it, you are violating one of the fundamental policies of the United States when we went in there. That policy was unifica

tion of the language, the unification of the government, and the unification of the people of the islands. That is a part of the American policy. There is nothing little, there is nothing constrained in that purpose; it is a noble, forward-looking policy toward the creation of a nation, not towards the tearing down of a nation. But, if we are going to forsake the non-Christian peoples, I do believe that, in honor and in justice, we must make some arrangement temporarily for their retention and their government.

I do not want to go further on that subject now, but I do want the record to be clear.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Welch, I did not mean to interrupt you.

Mr. WELCH. Well, I can not reconcile myself to the statement made by the Secretary of War in reference to disarming the warlike Moros and leaving them defenseless, unless it is defenseless against the civilization and culture referred to by the Secretary that the United States brought to the Philippine Islands.

Secretary HURLEY. Well, have you been among them?
Mr. WELCH. No; I have not, Mr. Secretary.

Secretary HURLEY. Well, it is very hard for me to convey it to you. For instance, one datu, who addressed me in the presence of possibly two or three hundred people, made this statement-and you understand their side of the statement is a little exaggerated, just as the other side is

Mr. WELCH. May I interrupt you to say that my home is on the Pacific coast, and we rub elbows and are more familiar with oriental peoples and conditions than are the residents of other sections of the United States. You have referred to conferences with those who told you things in secret. We know from actual acquaintance with both the Moro and the Filipino. Even though we have not visited the islands, we are familiar with the conditions there. We know from those who have been there, those who have commanded our forces there, and from the men who served under them, and from those who have visited and do business on the islands.

Secretary HURLEY. Well, let us assume that you do. Let us assume that I have also been on the Pacific coast and that I have also to some little extent associated with those who commanded our forces there; that I have had about the same possibility of acquiring knowledge from that source as you have, and in addition to that, that I have had meeting after meeting with the Moros themselves.

Now, let me relate their general attitude, as stated by themselves. The man arose, and his speech was but a repetition of many of the same kind:

Your General Wood, your General McCoy, your great General Pershing came among us and asked us, after our fights, to surrender our arms to America. They told us they intended to bring civilization among us whereby we could protect our rights through civil process. We did surrender our arms. Those of us who are here to-day were too old to have to attend your schools. We have not reached the stage where we can participate in this civil government. We do fear abuses. We believe that we will be abused, that our land will be taken away from us, that our other property will be confiscated, that we will not be able to defend our rights.

Now, having surrendered our arms to you under those conditions, do you not believe, Mr. Secretary, in equity and good conscience, that, if you are going to be absolved from the obligations that you assumed, you should give us back our arms and put us back in the position we were before we surrendered to you?

Of course, that is unthinkable to me. But I want you to know that such an opinion does prevail, and that the great majority of them feel that fear. I am certainly not a partisan of theirs, because I never saw the Moro country in my life until I went there on this mission. I have, as I say, a profound respect for the aspirations of the Filipino people. I would like to see them accomplish their aspirations, and I would not like to see them destroy the possibility of accomplishing them.

So far as your Pacific coast problem is concerned, I think I covered that in the outset of my statement. I am anxious to restrict immigration, but restrict it on a basis that will reflect no racial antipathies nor anything that will offend the pride of the Filipino people.

Mr. WELCH. You know, of course, Mr. Secretary, that the Congress of the United States will neither exclude nor restrict Philippine immigration into this country while we retain them as wards and hold dominion over them. From my experience it is an impossibility.

Secretary HURLEY. Well, I do not see anything impossible about it. Now, of course, I am not making my argument in the way I have it written here, but Filipino leaders, the Filipino people would welcome a regulation of emigration. The Filipino leaders opposed the first emigration. The first Filipino laborers were brought to Hawaii because their labor was profitable to American planters there. Then they drifted on to the United States. The American steamship companies advertised in the barrios of the Philippine Islands; they advertised the glories of America, to get passengers and collect a fare from them. There was a commerce in this thing. At the same time, the Filipino leaders, the Philippine representatives on the floor of Congress opposed it vigorously; they did not want the laborers to come. Now, they are coming into the United States, where there is a crowded labor condition, where the opportunities for the Filipino are very far apart. The Filipino is leaving a country in which there is a greater demand for labor for its development than there is in any other place in the world. It is conducive to better conditions in the Philippine nation for the Filipino to remain in the Philippine Islands. It is detrimental to the Filipino people, to the interests of labor and to the people of the United States for Filipino labor to come here in a crowded labor market. Why, there is nothing in that problem, if it is faced directly, and faced equitably, that can not be properly handled under the present circumstances.

Mr. THURSTON. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Secretary to amplify one further thought?

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Thurston, let me make this statement, and I am going to permit your question, but no more at this time. This committee is not here for the purpose of hearing arguments and conclusions drawn from facts. This committee, as I understand it, is primarily for the purpose of securing information upon which to draw its own conclusions. I think it would be unfortunate for us to continue arguing about the different conclusions to be drawn from facts, because if we do, it will be impossible to conclude the hearings any time soon.

Mr. KNUTSON. There is only half an hour left before we adjourn. I think we should allow the Secretary to continue. I am sure that we want the Secretary to present everything that he has, and if we do not have sufficient time, to allow him to continue to-morrow.

Secretary HURLEY. I think, if I have to continue to-morrow, Mr. Chairman, I will have to get a reprieve from the Senate committee. Will you do that, Senator?

Senator HAWES. Yes sir.

Secretary HURLEY. Thank you, sir.

Mr. THURSTON. I just want to inquire if your legal staff has made any examination into the legal aspects of immigration from the Philippines into the United States.

Secretary HURLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. THURSTON. And in their judgment, that would be legal?

Secretary HURLEY. Not only can it be done, but it can be agreeably done. Now, please understand me, I realize that if this question is used in an offensive manner, it can become offensive; but it need not, if we really have the interest of both people at heart, in order to treat both reasonably and justly.

Now, if I am to conclude in half an hour, I certainly can not conclude

The CHAIRMAN. It is not necessary to conclude within that time, Mr. Secretary. I think the committee would be agreeable for you to proceed longer if necessary.

Secretary HURLEY. Now, you understand, the questions have caused me to dig into the sequence of this address, and if you will pardon me, I will skip if I find that we have covered certain points quite fully.

Consideration of economic factors alone demonstrates that the Philippine Islands are not yet prepared for independence. Exterior trade, domestic production, and general business activities have been developed through a period of over 20 years upon the basis of substantial free trade with the United States. It would take many years to make the readjustments of trade, business, and governmental income which would be necessitated by the subjection of Philippine products to the present United States tariff duties. The immediate application of those duties would certainly be followed promptly by effects upon the islands' export trade, agricultural and industrial activities and general business life so severe as to bring widespread suffering and ruin. The resulting shock would probably be reflected in unbalanced governmental budgets, loss of public confidence, extensive bank and business failures, the dissipation of monetary reserves, currency inflation, collapse of public credit, operating deficits for the railroads, general unemployment, and lowered wages and standards of living. Under these conditions the maintenance of public order would present a very serious problem. Immediate or early independence, in connection with the conditions outlined above, would render the islands peculiarly vulnerable to penetration of various kinds from without and to the eventual loss of economic or political independence, or both. Mass immigration from overpopulated Asiatic countries would be another danger to be faced by an independent Philippine government, too weakened to offer effective resistance.

106240-32-38