fact that we are forcing our sovereignty upon the whole Philippine people. And we are compelled to judge this act of the republic of to-day by the principle on which the republic was founded—that governments derive "their just powers from the con"sent of the governed." Petty criticism affects to discover the abandonment of this principle in the acquisition of Louisiana and California without consulting the handful of people living in these vast domains. Disingenuous criticism insinuates a violation. in the holding of the Confederate States to their allegiance. But, be it well understood, our conduct in the Philippines involves a flagrant and unprecedented denial-not yet the abandonment-of this vital principle of the Declaration of Independence; and this conduct is not excused by the afterthought that it may precede a higher state of civilization in the islands. Civilization has followed conquest, and so has a new religion, but I believe that enlightened Mohammedans now disavow the propaganda of the sword: And they who affect to view devastation in the Philippines and the Transvaal as a preliminary step toward the higher education of the survivors are but trying to divert attention from blunders that have plunged the great free states of the world into wars for the subjugation of weak peoples.

If, some day, the islanders shall be beaten into subjection, relief at the establishment of order may beget the comfortable reflection that "the end has "justified the means"-a maxim still current among the debased coin of politics. But, considering the permanent welfare of the republic, the Philippines

subdued will be quite as undesirable as the Philippines in revolt. The circumstance of revolt merely emphasizes the radical antagonism of this annexation, both to the true mission of the United States in the world and to their best interests at home.

The victory over Spain, especially the dramatic entrance into Asia by way of the Philippines, is made the occasion for boasting that the United States have at last cast off their "swaddling clothes" and taken their place in the world; as if international consequence of a virile and admirable sort had not been theirs from the beginning.

The importance of the United States commenced with their birth in an age when free institutions were practically unknown in continental Europe, and when England had almost forgotten "her precedence in "teaching nations how to live" that Milton had besought her never to forget; and it was not pure coincidence that the establishment of our republic was followed quickly by the French Revolution, from which, through many incidents of loss and gain, the people of continental Europe derive most of the liberties they enjoy to-day. The cause of freedom, encouraged by the founding of the republic, has been fostered everywhere by its success, by its open sympathy, by its prompt recognition of successful rebellion, and, in this hemisphere especially, by its adherence to the Monroe Doctrine. And the United States have borne a notable part in the unselfish activities of civilization; in the advancement of science and the useful arts, in the promotion of respect for

international law, and in the work of missions and exploration.

The worthiness of our achievements makes it discreditable to belittle them in order to magnify the events of the late war and the sufficiently great opportunities these have disclosed. Far more discreditable is the temptation to use these opportunities as a means of becoming what is called, in the jargon of politics, a "world power." To equip itself for effective work as one of the "world powers" the republic must adopt these policies and principles :

1. An unchanging foreign policy of territorial aggrandizement as active as opportunity permits.

This is the cardinal policy of the "world powers." It is based upon the assumption that markets must be enlarged abroad to prevent starvation at home, and that the best way to sell goods is to own buyers. The anticipated consequence of the rule is an appalling struggle for food, after which the descendants of the brutalized survivors will grope their way to a new civilization.

For the United States, the adoption of this policy means the abandonment of temperate friendliness towards all nations, and the substitution of persistent hatred thinly veiled now here, now there by vexatious alliances.

2. A great and increasing display of military power; though this is partly due to dread of invasion, and, in some countries, of revolution.

For the United States this means an armed force far beyond their proper needs in America, for we do not apprehend invasion, and the necessity for a great

federal army as a constabulary force can only arise through a blind encouragement of conditions breeding discontent.

Probably it would mean also a recasting of our federal revenue system in order to permit the taxation of land and incomes, now impracticable, as we have seen.1 Our expenditure in peace on military account, including pensions, has for some time exceeded that of any professedly militant state, and this must be largely increased if we abandon our traditional policies.

3. A selfishness passing the self-interest underlying a sound national policy, and often reaching out to the denial of any rights in weaker nations. This is the mainspring of the policy of aggrandizement.

These are some of the policies of the world powers, yet one who condemns them is not called upon to impute injustice to all their purposes (Russia, for example, must make her way to an open sea), or, in fine, to unravel the mixed motives and the confused processes that have accompanied notable advances in civilization. But when the best has been said for these policies, they remain unfit for our adoption; and if it be argued that we may keep the Philippines without accepting the policies, I reply that by our conduct in the Philippines we have adopted some of them experimentally, and must employ all of them permanently and in larger measure if we remain in the islands. For if we keep the Philippines we shall not place our Terminus there. They will be but a stage on a march to the mainland of Asia, to be resumed some day, notwithstanding the rational ideas that at 1 See supra, p. 85.

present commend to us the preservation of the state of China.

Withdrawal from the Philippines will mean that, having tried the policies of the "world powers" and found them wanting, we purpose to put our strength to better use than conquest, to affirm the hope of a better law for the world than the law of war, and to invigorate this hope in all nations by the example of our own. And our action will restore to our primacy in America the moral weight it has lost through aggrandizement in Asia, for the Monroe Doctrine, in which we demand the exemption of the Western hemisphere from foreign conquest, has been more conscientiously maintained at home and more respected abroad because of our traditional policy of abstaining from conquest in the Eastern.

Withdrawal from the Philippines will reëstablish the truth that the strength of our republic is not maintained by mere enlargement of boundaries, nor by mere addition of peoples: It is founded upon the competency and loyalty of the civic body, and upon the "indestructible union of indestructible States."