The Philippines: Past and Present Volume II Part 19

The following year I introduced in the commission the bill which the a.s.sembly had rejected. Action upon it was postponed, pending the receipt of information which was requested from the a.s.sembly as to the reason for the failure of that body to pa.s.s it the preceding year. Shortly after this was obtained in the form of the above-quoted extract from the minutes of that body I was called to the United States and no further action was taken in the matter at that time, although the Governor-General in his message to the Legislature had included the following recommendation:--

"There is no express provision of law prohibiting slavery or involuntary servitude in the Philippine Islands. While the law provides certain methods of punishing the practice of slavery, as for example, the law for illegal detention, yet it does not seem right that an enlightened and modern country should have no way of punishing the purchase or sale of human flesh. It is recommended that this be remedied by appropriate legislation at the coming session."

I had also again attempted to discuss this important matter in my annual report.

I myself reached Washington at about the time this doc.u.ment arrived there, but that part of it dealing with slavery and peonage was cut out without either consulting me or giving me a hearing. I was advised by General McIntyre that the secretary had disapproved it.

In writing to me under date of January 11, 1913, Mr. d.i.c.kinson said:--

"I have read with much interest the copy of your communication of October 28, 1912, with the Acting Governor-General in regard to the law prohibiting slavery. The whole matter interests me very much and is very enlightening to me.

"I note what you say in regard to the matter coming up during my administration and the memorandum made by General Edwards. My memory may be badly at fault, but I really cannot recall that this matter ever came to my personal attention. I may have forgotten it among the many hundreds of things that came before me, but I certainly have no recollection in regard to it."

I am quite prepared to believe that the matter was never allowed to come to his personal attention!

On January 31, 1911, I again introduced this bill in the commission. It was amended in minor details and pa.s.sed on that date and was duly forwarded to the a.s.sembly. There it was introduced on February 2 and on February 3 was laid on the table. I here give the full record. It is significant as showing the lack of interest displayed by the a.s.sembly in this important subject.

"An Act prohibiting Slavery

"The Speaker. Commission Bill No. 88 is submitted to the House for consideration. Read the bill.

"The Secretary. [reading]....

"Senor Sotto. The Committee on Revision of Laws proposes that this bill be laid on the table.

"The Speaker. Is there any objection?

"The House. None.

"The Speaker. On the table."

In my report as secretary of the interior for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1911, I again took up this subject. After this report had been submitted to the commission I myself cut out all mention of slavery at the request of Governor-General Forbes, who urged that we make a last effort to get the a.s.sembly to act before appealing to Congress.

In spite of the desirability of having uniform legislation on such a matter as this in adjacent provinces, the commission felt that it could no longer with propriety delay action for the territory under its exclusive jurisdiction, and on August 7, 1911, pa.s.sed the bill for Agusan, Nueva Vizcaya and the Mountain Province.

The same act was again pa.s.sed by the commission for the territory under the jurisdiction of the legislature, when that body reconvened. The a.s.sembly referred it to committee on October 27, 1911, and tabled it without discussion on February 1, 1912.

In my annual report for 1912 I included the following recommendation:--

"That for the adequate protection of the non-Christian tribes a final and earnest effort be made to secure the concurrence of the Philippine a.s.sembly in the pa.s.sage for the territory under the jurisdiction of the Philippine Legislature of an Act identical with, or similar to, Act No. 2071, ent.i.tled 'An Act prohibiting slavery, involuntary servitude, peonage, and the sale or purchase of human beings in the Mountain Province and the Provinces of Nueva Vizcaya and Agusan, and providing punishment therefor,' and that in the event of failure, the attention of Congress be called to this important matter to the end that it may pa.s.s adequate legislation if it deems such a course in the public interest."

This time I sent the copy for the report to the printer without awaiting further possible requests or orders to remain silent, for I was thoroughly convinced that it was useless to expect action from the a.s.sembly and that nothing remained but to appeal to congress to pa.s.s suppletory legislation making effective the provision of the Act of July 1, 1902, prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude in the Philippine Islands.

At the next session of the legislature the commission again pa.s.sed the bill. The a.s.sembly referred it to committee on October 26, and tabled it without discussion on January 8, 1913.

From the above record it will be plain that, beginning in 1909, the commission pa.s.sed laws prohibiting and penalizing slavery and peonage annually during four successive years, and that the a.s.sembly tabled each of the four measures without deigning to give any of them one moment's discussion. Much less have they ever asked for any information as to the necessity for such legislation.

While no member of the a.s.sembly had ever made any official statement on the subject, the Filipino press had on various occasions denounced me as a liar or an ignoramus, and an enemy of "the Filipino people,"

for saying that slavery existed.

In preparation for what I deemed to be a probable request from Congress for a detailed statement of facts, I now proceeded to get together the information on file in government offices and courts, called upon various officers of the government for data in their possession which had never been made of record, and initiated new investigations, using for this purpose the police of Manila, the Philippine constabulary and various other agencies. Drawing on the abundant material thus obtained, I began the preparation of a report to the commission, recommending that the necessity for legislation be called to the attention of Congress, and supplying abundant data relative to the existence of slavery and peonage in the Philippines.

Before this report was completed there occurred a most unexpected event.

Dr. W. O. Stillman, President of the American Humane a.s.sociation, had written me months before asking about the power of the Philippine Legislature to enact humane legislation, and further inquiring what laws of this sort, if any, had been enacted. In my reply I had called his attention to the act of the commission prohibiting slavery and peonage in certain provinces, and to the fact that the att.i.tude of the a.s.sembly had prevented the enactment of similar prohibitive legislation for the remaining territory. My letter, which furnished no supporting data, was eventually published by this gentleman and was read in the United States Senate by Senator Borah. On May 1, 1913, the senate pa.s.sed the following resolution:--

"Resolved, That the Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, directed to send to the Senate any and all facts bearing directly or indirectly upon the truth of the charge publicly made that human slavery exists at this time in the Philippine Islands and that human beings are bought and sold in such Islands as chattels."

The reply addressed by the secretary of war to the president of the Senate on May 6, 1913, contains the following statement:--

"There is not in this Department, to the knowledge of the Secretary thereof or of the head of the Bureau having charge of insular affairs, a record of any facts bearing directly or indirectly upon the truth of the charge, publicly made, that human slavery exists at this time in the Philippine Islands and that human beings are bought and sold in such Islands as chattels."

This was a most peculiar statement. The pa.s.sage cut out of my 1909 report was certainly on file there, and it explicitly stated that slavery existed in the Islands.

The similar pa.s.sage from my 1910 report should have been on file there, and last but not least, when finally, after the lapse of years, I saw the so-called "Edwards" memorandum, in reality written by General McIntyre, on which the Secretary of War had based his action in ordering all reference to slavery cut out of my 1910 report, I had made a full reply to it, containing a specific statement that slavery and the sale of human beings were common in certain parts of the islands and citing certain specific cases. I had specially requested that this communication be filed in the bureau of insular affairs, and General McIntyre, the chief of that bureau, who acknowledged its receipt, could hardly have forgotten its existence.

The war department reported on this matter without seeking any information from Manila. I can only conclude that Secretary Garrison was deceived by some irresponsible subordinate.

As promptly as practicable I completed my report and sent it to the commission, which read and considered it on May 17, 1913, immediately pa.s.sing the following resolution:--

"Whereas the Act of Congress pa.s.sed July 1, 1902, 'temporarily providing for civil government of the Philippine Islands and for other purposes' provides that 'neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime whereof the parties have been duly convicted shall exist in said Islands,' and

"Whereas the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands in the case of the U. S. vs. Cabanag (Vol. VIII, p. 64, Phil. Repts.), decided on March 16, 1907, decided that 'there is no law applicable here either of the United States or of the Archipelago punishing slavery as a crime;' and

"Whereas, in order to remedy this condition in accordance with the above-mentioned provisions of the said Act of Congress, the Philippine Commission in its exclusive legislative jurisdiction over all that part of the Philippine Islands inhabited by Moros or other non-Christian tribes pa.s.sed Act No. 2071, and as a branch of the Philippine Legislature has in four successive sessions pa.s.sed an act prohibiting and penalizing slavery, involuntary servitude, peonage, or the sale of human beings, and

"Whereas during each of said sessions the a.s.sembly has failed to concur in the pa.s.sage of such Act; now, therefore, be it

"Resolved, That the Honourable the Governor-General be requested to send to the Honourable the Secretary of War a copy of the proposed law ent.i.tled 'An Act prohibiting slavery, involuntary servitude, peonage, or the sale of human beings in the Philippine Islands'

as pa.s.sed by the Commission in the last session of the last Legislature, but which failed of pa.s.sage in the a.s.sembly, with the recommendation that a copy of the law be sent to Congress with the request that the necessary legislation be enacted to render fully effective the above-mentioned provisions of the Act of Congress of July 1, 1902."

I was subsequently requested by the governor-general to address the report to him rather than to the commission, to the end that the Filipino members of that body might be spared the embarra.s.sment which would otherwise result from the necessity of voting either for its acceptance or for its rejection, and I very willingly made the requested change.