TOPICS OF THE DAY.
AMERICA AFTER THE WAR.
THE War is over. How does it leave America ? That is a question of deep concern to English-speaking men in every corner of the world. Though America has con- quered, and has at her disposal the whole of the colonial possessions of Spain—possessions inhabited by some nine or ten millions of people, and capable of holding a popula- tion as large as that of the United States at the last Census—she has not vet decided what she will do with the territories in which -the Spaniards have ceased to reign. Two paths lie open to her. She may carry on the older traditions of the Republic, and may refuse to undertake the government of any subject peoples, or she may adopt the policy of expansion, and declare that she will do her share in what Providence seems to have designated as the special work of the Anglo-Saxon race,—the work of pro- viding a strong and honest and humane Government for peoples who, if left to themselves, fall under tyranny and misrule, but who as subjects to a stronger Power are capable of prosperity and advancement. A few weeks will probably show which side will win. If the advocates of expansion triumph, we shall see not only Porto Rico and Cuba retained under the American flag, but all, or almost all, the Philippine group. If, on the other hand, the old policy of no external responsibilities, no ruling of sub- jest races, no Imperialistic nonsense' prevails, we shall see America restrict her action to the narrowest limits. She will leave the Philippines, save for a coaling station, under some modified form of Spanish protection, she will declare Cuba independent, and she will keep nothing for herself but the islandof Porto Rico, and this new possession will, as soon as possible, be allowed to enter the Union as a State. Though the advocates of expansion have just now a great deal of influence, almost a paramount influence, on public opinion, it must not be assumed that they are all- powerful. The other side is less vocal, but it is as strong and as resolute as it is reticent. Its views, we most sincerely trust, will not prevail ; but they cannot be ignored, nor can we forget that they are shared by some of the most hard-headed people in the community. There are thousands of Americans, especially in New England, who have an instinctive hatred for what, for want of a better word, we must call " imaginative " politics, for, that is, wide and far-reaching views,—for anything, in fact, which is not plain and practical. They hold, as Lowell wrote long ago, that "all this talk of our dest'nies,—one half of it's ign'rance and the other half rum." When they are told that it is the destiny of the United States to expand, such men instantly begin to be suspicious. They would not very likely object to ruling a subject people in practice, but they find the idea intolerable when it is put in a picturesque and imaginative way. Senator Hoar, one of the Senators from Massachusetts, than whom there is no man more respected or more worthy of respect in the United States Congress, represents exactly the views of these hard- headed contemners of Imperialism. He has lately been put- ting the anti-expansion argument very strongly and protest- ing against "ruling over vassal States or subject peoples," and entering upon "the mad career of empire in distant seas." An aristocracy or a Monarchy, ends Senator Hoar, "may govern subject States. It never was done, and never will be done, successfully by a democracy or a Republic." That is, of course, a complete mistake historically, as far as Republics are concerned. As to whether democracies can govern subject States wisely and well it is difficult to feel sure, for true democracies, or rather true democracies of the modern type, have hardly tried. The democracies of the ancient world, owing to their smallness of area and to their inability to understand and use the representative principle, differed not only in degree but in kind from modern democracies, and therefore their example would now be of little or no use. The only example really available is that of England. During the last twenty years our Constitution has been entirely democratic, far more democratic, indeed, than the Federal Government of the United States. We are aware that this fact is very little understood in America, but it is a fact nevertheless. In England the will of the majority of the people prevails, with far less check, hindrance, and veto than in America. But during these twenty years how has the democracy borne itself towards the Empire ? The answer must be : "On the whole, extremely well." Curiously enough, it has been less afraid of responsibility, more inclined to trust its agents, and less willing to make party capital out of Imperial questions than was the old aristocratic rigime. The democracy has made some mistakes no doubt, but they have been few, and, as a rule, it has shown itself most teachable in regard to Imperial matters. Take the case of India and the opium traffic. Here was a case where under all the rules framed by the pessimists and pedants who hate democracy and popular liberty, the people ought to have made fools of themselves, and to have been led by a. mistaken and misrepresented senti- mentality rather than by right reason. But what happened? The democracy walked right up to the pit dug by the senti- mentalists and the fadmongers, and then most wisely refused to walk in. There is, in our opinion, not the very slightest reason why a democracy should not rule subject races well and humanely and with a proper sense of duty. When Senator Hoax says they cannot and will not, he is as much deceiving himself by strong words as is the merest demagogue who thinks that if an assertion is only general enough and strongly enough worded it is proved beyond denial. But not only do we hold that a modern representative democracy can govern subject States, but we hold also that in doing so the democracy may learn many most valuable lessons, and that a nation, like an individual, may be improved by the exercise of a trust. Of course, if the nation instead of treating its Empire as a trust, treats it as a place out of which to make money, empire will demoralise it If, however, it assumes empire as a duty and a responsibility, it may gain immensely in moral stature and strength. No doubt the effort to keep to the true Imperial path, and to prevent selfish and unscrupulous men from converting empire to baser uses, is often a hard one, but the very difficulty of persevering in the true path is a stimulant, and so a blessing. The nation is governed internally better, not worse, because the men to whom she delegates the task of governing it have also to undertake great responsibilities in connec- tion with subject races. Depend upon it American statesmen will be better and truer servants of the State if they have a wide, rather than a narrow, horizon, and are called upon to help convert some of the inferior peoples to what our old writers used to call "civility."
We have said that there will be a close struggle between the advocates and enemies of expansion, but we have little doubt as to which party will win the day. In spite of the quotation from Lowell with which we have armed those who disagree with us, we believe that it is the destiny of the United States to obtain possessions over- sea peopled by inferior races, who will require for many generations to be governed wisely and humanely rather than to have flung at their heads rights and privileges which, though admirably suited to men of the Anglo- Saxon race, and to those white races which they have absorbed and digested, have no meaning for, and are of no use to, men in a lower stage of social and political development. The Americans will, of course, just as we have done, make plenty of blunders, and do plenty of things which they will regret and will be ashamed of as they stumble down the path that is opening before them, but in the end they will find their road beaten plain and will have learned lessons of incalculable value by the way. Nothing, that is, can, in our opinion, now permanently prevent the over-sea expansion of America. No doubt the opponents of expansion may be able to insist that expansion shall be done in a very grey and undemon- strative manner—in a thoroughly English way, that is— but even though called by very different names it will be expansion. The only question is whether the first step on the Imperial road, for first step there must now be, shall be a long step or a short step. Our own hope and belief is that it will be a moderately long step. Let us for a moment look at what a moderately long step would mean in detail. America has already annexed the Sandwich Islands. There is no question that Porto Rico will follow suit. Senator Hoar even would not, we imagine, deny that. The next question is Cuba. No doubt the majority of Americans will begin by saying that the pledge of Congress must, of course, be carried out. Yet in spite of this pledge, and of the perfectly honest desire to carry it out that will exist, we believe that it will not be carried out, and that Cuba will not become independent. The moral, and we might almost say physical, difficulties are too great. A joint Commission is going to meet in Paris in October to settle what is to happen to Cuba and how it is to happen. Now, whatever people may think in the abstract about independence, the practical business of the Commissioners will be to find a plan for setting up some machinery of government in Cuba, and for securing the lives and properties of the people. But the first thing the Spanish Commissioners will think of will naturally and rightly be the very large loyalist population of Cuba. This population will perpetually be dinning in their ears: 'Contrive that we shall be annexed to America, or, at any rate, be put under strict American control. If the island becomes independent it means that we shall be massacred.' At first the American Commissioners may say they cannot take these fears into consideration, but if and when the Spanish Commissioners insist, and the Americans find that everything will go smoothly in the other nego- tiations if only they will yield as to independence, they will yield. They will be supported in this view by all the richer and better-educated Cubans, who, though not on the Spanish side in the war, want a firm Government, not the rule of banditti. Again, the plea against in- dependence will be upheld by every -United States soldier and volunteer who saw the Cuban insurgents in the flesh. There can only be one end. The Commissioners will find that they are obliged to agree to something of the that Cuba shall, at any rate for the next twenty years, be governed by a mixed military and civil Commission appointed by the President of the United States. Thus Cuba will become the first dependency of the United States. In the Philippines the problem is different. Spanish rule, it will be found, we believe, cannot be restored in any shape or form. Then will come the question, What is America to do ? Clearly she cannot leave the islands derelict. She must either annex them in tato, or else take some and place others in the hands of some other Power capable of ruling them justly. We believe that this is the course she will pursue. Which is the other Power that is to be allowed a share, it is not now neces- sary to inquire. It will not, of course, be England, though doubtless nothing will be done in the matter that will injure England in any way. These questions, how- ever, are for October next rather than for August. All that we now feel sure of is that America will find herself at the end of the year in possession of the beginnings of an over-sea tropical Empire. Long may she rule it in the interests of humanity and justice. While it is so ruled, Englishmen will never envy her her possessions, nor their expansion into a dominion as great as our own.
Previous page
