his opinion upon a knowledge of both races. But I will not rest the case upon
the relative advancement of the Filipinos. Henry Clay, in defending the nght
of the people of South America to self-government, said:
“IT IS THE DOCTRINE OF THRONES THAT MAN IS TOO IGNORANT TO GOV-
ERN HIMSELF. THEIR PARTISANS ASSERT HIS INCAPACITY IN REFERENCE
TO ALL NATIONS; IF THEY CANNOT COMMAND UNIVERSAL ASSENT TO THE
PROPOSITION, IT IS THEN REMANDED TO PARTICULAR NATIONS; AND OUR
PRIDE AND OUR PRESUMPTION TOO OFTEN MAKE CONVERTS OF US. I CON-
TEND THAT IT IS TO ARRAIGN THE DISPOSITION OF PROVIDENCE HIMSELF
TO SUPPOSE THAT HE HAS CREATED BEINGS INCAPABLE OF GOVERNING
THEMSELVES, AND TO BE TRAMPLED ON BY KINGS. SELF-GOVERNMENT IS
THE NATURAL GOVERNMENT OF MAN.”
CLAY WAS RIGHT. THERE ARE DEGREES OF PROFICIENCY IN THE ART
OF SELF-GOVERNMENT, BUT IT IS A REFLECTION UPON THE CREATOR TO SAY
THAT HE DENIED TO ANY PEOPLE THE CAPACITY FOR SELF-GOVERNMENT.
ONCE ADMIT THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE CAPABLE OF SELF-GOVERNMENT AND
THAT OTHERS ARE NOT, AND THAT THE CAPABLE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT
TO SEIZE UPON AND GOVERN THE INCAPABLE, AND YOU MAKE FORCE—
BRUTE FORCE—THE ONLY FOUNDATION OF GOVERNMENT AND INVITE THE
REIGN OF THE DESPOT.
I AM NOT WILLING TO BELIEVE THAT AN ALL-WISE AND AN ALL-LOV-
(NG GOD CREATED THE FILIPINOS AND THEN LEFT THEM THOUSANDS OF
YEARS HELPLESS UNTIL THE ISLANDS ATTRACTED THE ATTENTION OF EURO-
PEAN NATIONS.
Republicans ask : “Shall we haul down the flag that floats over our dead
in the Philippines?” The same question might have been asked when the
American flag floated over Chapultepec and waved over the dead who fell there:
but the tourist who visits the City of Mexico finds there a national ceme-
terv owned by the United States and cared for by an American citizen.
Our flag still floats over our dead, but when the treaty with Mexico was
signed American authority withdrew to the Rio Grande, and I venture the opin-
ion that during the last 50 years the people of Mexico have made more prog-
ress under the stimulus of independence and self-government than they would
have made under a carpet-bag government held in place by bayonets.
The United States and Mexico, friendly republics, are each stronger and
happier than they would have been had the former been cursed and the latter
crushed by an imperialistic policy, disguised as “benevolent assimilation.”
“Can we not govern colonies?” we are asked. The question is not what
we can do. but what we ought to do. This nation can do whatever it desires to
do, but it must accept responsibility for what it does. If the Constitution stands
in the way, the people can amend the Constitution. I repeat, the nation can
do whatever it desires to do, but it cannot avoid the natural and legitimate re-
sults of its own conduct.
The young man, upon reaching his majority, can do what he pleases. He
can disregard the teachings of his parents; he can trample upon all that he has
been taught to consider sacred; he can disobey the laws of the state, the laws
of society and the laws of God. He can stamp failure upon his life and make
his very existence a curse to his fellowmen, and he can bring his father and
mother in sorrow to the grave. But he cannot annul the sentence: “The
wages of sin is death.”
And so with the nation. It is of age, and it can do what it pleases. It can
spurn the traditions of the past; it can repudiate the principles upon which the
nation rests; it can employ force instead of reason; it can substitute might for
nght; it can conquer weaker people; it can exploit their lands, appropriate their
property and kill their people. But it cannot repeal the moral law or escape
the punishment decreed for the violation of human rights,
10