In some books published on the Philippines the statement appears that the Province of Jolo has never been under a Filipino governor, Jolo is where the Sultan of Sulu lives. This statement is not correct, During the absence of Governor Moore from the Island of Jolo, for over six months a Christian Filipino acted as governor, and the same harmony, cordiality, and friendly relations between the Mohammedan and Christian Filipinos continued as before. Thus the rumors that are being circulated in this country that the Moros have a traditional hatred for the Christian Filipinos have absolutely no foundation.

Mr. HOOPER. If that is a rumor that is being circulated, it has been widely circulated during the last 15 or 20 years. I have read that statement in many books, that there was a deep-seated hatred on the part of the Mohammedan Filipinos for their Christian neighbors. Many of these writers compare the situation there to the strife between the Mohammedans and the Hindus in India.

Mr. Roxas. That is why I have referred to this fact, because I consider it so important. It is our honest belief that there is no truth to such assertions. Writers will tell you there is this traditional hatred because the Koran teaches that when a Mohammedan is able to kill a Christian he goes straight to heaven without stopovers. But if that were the foundation for this animosity, then there must be as much ground for a hatred of Mohammedans against all Christians, including Americans, as there is against the other Filipinos.

Mr. UNDERHILL. That is not a general practice?

Mr. ROXAS. No.

Mr. GILBERT. I am reliably told that the author of the "Isles of Fear" never got off the boat at Sulu and thereafter wrote a book about the Philippine Islands and devoted much space to Sulu.

Mr. Roxas. That is the way many books have been written.

Mr. GILBERT. Everybody that spends a week in Manila writes a book on the Filipinos.

Mr. ROXAS. Without criticizing the author of that book I will say that her book on the Philippines had exactly the same effect in the Philippine Islands as the book that the same author wrote on India had in India.

Mr. CROSS. You spoke of one of your islands being near Formosa. How far is that island from Luzon?

Mr. ROXAS. Not over 200 miles.

Mr. CROSS. Luzon is only 205 miles, is it not?

Mr. Roxas. I really can not say. I believe the gentleman may know better.

Mr. CROSS. There are 7,083 of those islands and I think Ibayat is put down as one of them.

Mr. Roxas. In order to prove that the unity and solidarity of our people, especially as regards the Mohammedan Filipinos, has existed for many years, I want to make mention of the fact that during our war for freedom against Spain, Mohammedan Filipinos fought alongside their Christian brothers. We fought side by side against Spain for liberty.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you give the number of Moros who fought with you in those campaigns?

Mr. ROXAS. Frankly, I could not give you those statistics now, but the history of our revolution against Spain contains that information. One more fact I would like to mention in regard to the Moros. That is their participation in and support of our movement for independence. I shall admit in all fairness and frankness that some Moros have signed statements expressing themselves against independence. I feel, however, that those statements do not represent the true and real sentiments of the Moros themselves. It would be unnatural for Moros not to wish to govern themselves. Just as an example of the declarations often attributed to Moros, I should like to read a paragraph from the book written by former Governor-General Forbes of the Philippine Islands, concerning a resolution said to have been approved by Moro leaders to which a great deal of importance has been given. He says, on page 47 of that book:

A very interesting document signed by most of the leading datus in the Sulu Archipelago was presented to the Wood-Forbes Mission in 1921 requesting absolute separation of their territory from the Philippine Islands and permanent annexation to the United States. The first names in this document are those of Americans, and it is obvious from a study of it that it was prepared by American and foreign residents in the islands. Many of the Moros signing it did so with their thumb-marks, as they were unable to write and presumably unable to read, so that it is a matter of opinion as to whether or not they were correctly informed as to the contents of the paper.

That describes the nature of the many so-called resolutions approved by Moros in the Philippine Islands and which have been círculated and given publicity in the United States by opponents of our independence who want to show that the Moros are against independence. Even Mr. Forbes was misled by these statements, for, in his book he gives great weight to the statement made by a certain very prominent leader of the Moro people whose name is Datu Facundo Mandi and who lives in the Province of Zamboanga. We Filipinos never gave importance to such statements because we knew that Datu Mandi was at all times in favor of independence. What is the truth? Only very recently Datu Mandi held a very big public demonstration at Zamboanga, leading his Mohammedan brothers in a demand for independence, and the latest papers from the Philippines publish the text of the resolution publicly approved on that occasion wherein the Moros of Zamboanga express themselves in favor of complete and absolute independence of the Philippine Islands. A copy of this resolution is in the hands of the chairman of this committee among those which have been transmitted by the President of the United States.

There is another fact which requires attention in relation to the Moros. It is frequently said that the United States can not grant independence to the Philippine Islands because the American Government has certain responsibilities which it assumed with relation to the Moro population. To support this assertion they point to the Bates treaty, concluded in the early days of American occupation between General Bates and the Sultan of Sulu. This is what Governor Forbes says of the Bates treaty:

On the 20th of August, 1899, Brig. Gen. John C. Bates, who had been sent to Jolo for that purpose, negotiated with the Sultan of Sulu and certain datus of the vicinity an agreement, known as the Bates treaty, which established amicable relations between the American authorities and the Sulu Moros during the period of armed insurrection in Luzon and the Visayas. This agreement in effect defined the status of the sultanate as a protected sovereignty under the United States. Article XIII included the proviso: "The United States will give full protection to the Sultan and his subjects in case any foreign nation should attempt to impose upon them."

That treaty has been interpreted by opponents of Philippine independence as a commitment on the part of the United States to protect the Moros against the other Filipinos. How that can be deduced from the terms of the treaty is hard to understand. However, even if that construction were permissible, it should be borne in mind that the treaty was never legally adopted. President Roosevelt abrogated that treaty because the Sultan violated its provisions and because the United States did not desire to give the Sultan the recog nition of an independent sovereign. Moreover, the Sultan's authority is only recognized in the Island of Sulu. Two-thirds of the Mohammedan Filipinos do not recognize the authority of the Sultan. It is also said that the Philippines should not be granted independence because the United States, when the American Government disarmed the Moros, promised them that they would be protected against the Christian Filipinos. There is no truth in that statement. General Pershing, who first advised against such a course, states that no promises were made. A total of about 5,000 rifles, I think, were collected from the Mohammedan Filipinos. Governor Carpenter, whose work among the Moros in Mindanao has deserved the commendation, praise, and gratitude of the Filipinos, probably more than any man, knows the history of these people. He is quoted by Governor Forbes with reference to this question as follows:

Governor Carpenter asserts that at no time during the seven years of his residence and association with the Moros did he hear any of them claim that they had submitted to disarmament on the assurance the Filipino officials would not be placed over them, nor any other assurance except that the Government would undertake to protect their lives and property against outlaws.

Another statement which appears in this book by Governor Forbes says:

In carrying out the disarmament, no authoritative representation was made to the Moros that Philippine officials would not be placed over them.

Probably, it would be interesting to the committee to know that the representatives of the American Government entered into an agreement with the Sultan of Sulu, like England did with the same Sultan regarding Borneo. By this agreement the Sultan was awarded a yearly gratuity, and this sum, which amounts to $250 a month, is being paid by the Philippine government to compensate the sultan for his renunciation of his temporal power over his subjects.

With regard to the island of Mindanao, I would like to insert into the records a statement showing that more Christian Filipinos than Mohammedan Filipinos are residing there now. These statistics show that the proportion is about 2 to 1.

Population of Mindanao, by Provinces, and of Palawan, classified according to

Having concluded this presentation of facts concerning present conditions in the Philippine Islands, I respectfully submit to the committee that the task America had set out to accomplish in the Philippines is completed. The building up of the Philippine nation is done. We do not contend that the Filipinos have reached the highest peak of progress and culture and economic advancement attainable, but we believe we have reached the limit of progress, advancement, and education in democracy that we can achieve under American guardianship. The remainder we must learn by ourselves through the proven process of trial and error. We have built up a homogeneous, united people. We have developed political institutions responsible to public opinion and democratic in form. We have maintained a stable and sound currency. Our government finances are in a firm and healthy condition. Public order exists to a degree which surpasses, I dare say, that which prevails in many of the independent nations of the world. What else is there to be done? If America is really determined, as I believe she is, to carry out her purpose to grant the Filipinos their freedom once they are prepared for it, the hour has come for such action.

What is America's duty? I shall not presume to point it out to the members of this committee. More than the Filipinos, the Americans themselves will realize their privilege_and_duty. The Filipinos are waiting for this Congress to act. President Hoover last month said, "We have promised the Filipinos their independence. The only question left is the question of time," and that is the question that you will have to answer. Has the time come for the United States to carry out her policy of freeing the Filipinos? We say the time has come and that this is the most opportune time. Away back in 1908, President Roosevelt said:

In one more generation the time will come when the Filipinos will have a chance to determine whether they want to be free or remain permanently under the American flag.

The generation mentioned by President Roosevelt is drawing to a close. In 1920 President Wilson said:

The Filipinos have complied with the only condition precedent established by the Government of the United States to their independence. It is our duty to grant it to them.

After the Jones Act was passed, President Roosevelt again said: We have promised the Filipinos their independence. They have accepted our promise. We can not taint it with bad faith. We should give to the Philippine Islands their freedoin, especially because the Government of the United States by its action has rendered it impossible for the United States to defend the Philippines against a foreign foe.

These authoritative statements by two of the greatest leaders this country has produced, men who from opposite political parties have studied the Philippine question with understanding and the highest statesmenship, will, I am sure, weigh in the minds of this committee.

As for the Filipinos, we have entire faith and confidence in the sense of justice and generosity of the American people. Ours is not merely a domestic problem; in some respects, its transcends in significance anything that has ever confronted America. It involves not only the freedom of 13,000,000 people; it puts to a test the virtues. of democracy and American ideals. It is a question that concerns human liberty. America has ever been the champion of freedom and democracy in the world. She has endeavored ever since she went to war with Spain to spread the gospel of self-determination. She went to Europe and fought for freedom, liberty, and the rights of weak nations on the field of Flanders. Will America do in the Philippines what she did in Europe; what she did in Cuba more than a quarter of a century ago? We trust that sooner or later America will grant us liberty. We are the only Christian people in our part of the world. Governor Wood once said that the Philippines Islands was the spearhead of Christianity in Asia. Within a radius of 3,000 miles there lives more than 1,000,000,000 of the world's population, the majority of whom are now laboring under subjection, ruled by other peoples. What will be the effect of Philippine independence upon these nations struggling for their own liberty? It will cast a ray of hope in the hearts of these millions. It will be the crowning achievement of America's glorious career in the liberation of dependent nations. As Mr. Schurman said many years ago:

The destiny of the Philippines is not to be a colony of America. It is to become a daughter republic of America and a beacon light to the benighted peoples of the Asiatic Continent.

The Philippines will be the broadcasting station for America's ennobling principles of democracy and justice. Granting her freedom will establish a new standard of morality in dealings among nations. It will do more than that at the present time. It will teach the subject peoples of the world that the road to freedom is through selftraining, self-education, self-mastery, and discipline; and that there is a road of peace to the attainment of national independence. We have gone through the training, passed the tests, and now merit

106240-32-20