A History of the Philippines Part 18

The territorial form of government has frequently been regarded by American statesmen as a temporary condition to be followed at a comparatively early date by statehood. But after more than a century of development, territorial government, as shaped by Congress and as defined by the Supreme Court, shows itself so flexible and advantageous that there is no reason why it should not be regarded as a permanent and final form. Whether it will long prevail in the Philippines, depends very largely upon the political development and ultimate desires of the Filipino people themselves. For the present, it is the only suitable form of government and the only form which it is statesmanlike to contemplate.

Filipino Independence.--The events of the last few years seem to indicate that the American nation will not intrust the Philippines with independence until they have immeasurably gained in political experience and social self-control. The question is too great to be discussed here, but this much may be said: The rapid march of international politics in this coming century will not be favorable to the independence of the small and imperfectly developed state. Independence, while it may fascinate the popular leader, may not be most advantageous for this people. Independence, under present tendencies of international trade, means economic isolation. Independence, in the present age, compels preparedness for war; preparedness for war necessitates the maintenance of strong armies, the building of great navies, and the great economic burdens required to sustain these armaments. Especially would this be true of an archipelago so exposed to attack, so surrounded by ambitious powers, and so near the center of coming struggle, as are the Philippines. j.a.pan, with a population of forty-two million, wonderful for their industry and economy, and pa.s.sionately devoted to their emperor, is independent, but at great cost. The burden of her splendid army and her modern navy weighs heavily upon her people, consumes a large proportion of their earnings, and sometimes seems to be threatening to strain the resources of the nation almost to the point of breaking.

Advantages of American Control.--Surely, a people is economically far more privileged if, like the Philippines under the American government, or Australia under the British, they are compelled to sustain no portion of the burden of exterior defense. The navies of the United States to-day protect the integrity of the Philippine archipelago. The power of a nation so strong and so terrible, when once aroused, that no country on the globe would think for a minute of wantonly molesting its territory, s.h.i.+elds the Filipino from all outside interference and permits him to expend all his energy in the development of those abilities to which his temperament and endowment inspire him.

American government means freedom of opportunity. There is no honorable pursuit, calling, or walk of life under heaven in which the Filipino may not now engage and in which he will not find his endeavors encouraged and his success met with generous appreciation. In politics, his progress may be slow, because progress here is not the development of the individual nor of the few, but of the whole. But in the no less n.o.ble pursuits of science, literature, and art, we may in this very generation see Filipinos achieving more than notable success and distinction, not only for themselves but for their land.

Patriotic Duty.--Patriotic duty, as regards the Philippines, means for the American a wholesome belief in the uprightness of the national purposes; a loyal appreciation of the men who have here worked wisely and without selfishness, and have borne the brunt of the toil; a loyalty to the government of the Philippines and of the United States, so long as these governments live honestly, rule justly, and increase liberty; and a frank and hearty recognition of every advance made by the Filipino people themselves. And for the Filipinos, patriotic duty means a full acceptance of government as it has now been established, as better than what has preceded, and perhaps superior to what he himself would have chosen and could have devised; a loyalty to his own people and to their interests and to the public interests, that shall, overcome the personal selfishness that has set its cruel mark on every native inst.i.tution in this land; and a resolution to obey the laws, preserve the peace, and use faithfully every opportunity for the development of his own character and the betterment of the race.

APPENDIX.

SPANISH GOVERNORS OF THE PHILIPPINES.

(1571-1898.)

1571-1572 Don Miguel Lopez de Legaspi.

1572-1575 (Tesorero) Guido do Labezares.

1575-1580 Don Francisco La-Sande.

1580-1583 Don Gonzalo Ronquillo.

1583-1584 Don Diego Ronquillo.

1584-1590 Dr. Don Santiago de Vera.

1590-1593 Don Gomez Perez de Dasmarinas.

1593-1595 Luis Perez Dasmarinas.

1595-1596 Don Antonio de Morga.

1596-1602 Don Francisco Tello de Guzman.

1602-1606 Don Pedro Bravo de Acuna.

1606-1608 Royal Audiencia.

1608-1609 Don Rodrigo Vivero.

1609-1616 Don Juan de Silva.

1616-1618 Don Andres Alcazar.

1618-1624 Don Alonso Faxardo y Tenza.

1624-1625 Royal Audiencia.

1625-1626 Don Fernando de Silva.

1626-1632 Don Juan Nino de Tabora.

1632-1633 Royal Audiencia.

1633-1635 Don Juan Zerezo de Salamanca.

1635-1644 Don Sebastian Hurtado de Corcuera.

1644-1653 Don Diego Faxardo y Chacon.

1653-1663 Sabiano Manrique de Lara.

1663-1668 Don Diego Salcedo.

1668-1669 Senor Pena Bonifaz.

1669-1677 Don Manuel de Leon.

1677-1678 Royal Audiencia.

1678-1684 Don Juan de Vargas.

1684-1689 Don Gabriel de Curuzalequi.

1689-1690 Don Alonso de Avila Fuertes.

1690-1701 Don Fausto Cruzat y Gongora.

1701-1709 Don Domingo Zabalburu.

1709-1715 Conde de Lizarraga.

1715-1717 Royal Audiencia.

1717-1719 Don Fernando Manuel de Bustamante.

1719-1721 Archbishop Cuesta.

1721-1729 Don Toribio Jose de Cosio y Campo (Marques de Torre Campo).

1729-1739 Don Fernando Valdes y Tamon.

1739-1745 Don Gaspar de la Torre.

1745-1750 Bishop Father Juan de Arrechedra.

1750-1754 Don Francisco Jose de Obando y Solis.

1754-1759 Don Pedro Manuel de Arandia y Santisteban.

1759-1761 Don Miguel Lino de Ezpeleta (Bishop of Zebu).

1761-1764 Archbishop Don Manuel Antonio Rojo del Rio y Vieyra.

1764-1764 Dr. Don Simon de Anda y Salazar.

1764-1765 Don Francisco de la Torre.

1765-1770 Don Jose Raon.

1770-1778 Dr. Don Simon de Anda y Salazar.

1778-1787 Don Jose Basco y Vargas.

1787-1788 Don Pedro Sarrio.

1788-1793 Don Felix Berenguer de Marquina.

1793-1806 Don Rafael Maria de Aguilar y Ponce de Leon.

1806-1810 Don Mariano Fernandez de Folgueras.

1810-1813 Don Manuel Gonzalez Aguilar.

1813-1816 Don Jose de Gardoqui Jaraveitia.

1816-1822 Don Mariano Fernandez de Folgueras.

1822-1825 Don Juan Antonio Martinez.

1825-1830 Don Mariano Ricafort Palacio y Abarca.

1830-1835 Don Pascual Enrile y Alcedo.

1835-1836 Don Gabriel de Torres.

1836-1838 Don Andres Garcia Camba.

1838-1841 Don Luis Lardizabal y Montojo.

1841-1843 Don Marcelino de Oraa Lec.u.mberri.

1843-1844 Don Francisco de Paula Alcala de la Torre.

1844-1850 Don Narciso Claveria y Zaldua.

1850-1850 Don Antonio Maria Blanco.

1850-1853 D. Antonio de Urbistondo, Marques de la Solana y Teniente General.

1853-1854 El Mariscal de Campo de Ramon Montero, General Segundo Cabo (acting).

1854-1854 El Teniente General Marques de Novaliches.

1854-1854 El Mariscal de Campo de Ramon Montero (acting).

1854-1856 El Teniente General de Manuel Crespo.

1856-1857 El Mariscal de Campo de Ramon Montero (acting).

1857-1860 El Teniente General de Fernando de Norzagaray.

1860-1860 El Mariscal de Campo de Ramon Solano y Llanderal (acting).

1860-1861 El Brigadier de Artilleria de Juan Herrera Davila (acting).