When democrats from Northern Europe flowed South is it not natural that they should establish democracies at the same time they ruled the lower conquered races? They died out in time and the democracies had to be followed by absolute or limited monarchies, for the surviving natives never have been self-governing. The Northern Aryan has even furnished the last king for the Greeks and the last queen for the Spaniards. We have been lucky enough to reach a climate which permits of longer survival - the immigrants in Greece, Rome, India and Ceylon were unlucky in drifting to fatal climates. Finally, when we have flowed over the whole country and are too crowded to wait for the slow increase of food production and must flow over the Pacific to other lands seeking a living in some way, we are doing the same thing over again - establishing democracies in which the lower races, Negritto and Malay, can take no part. What an illustration of the old adage that there is nothing new under the sun. In the Philippines we are doing what our relatives have done in Egypt, America, Europe, Greece, Italy, India and Ceylon. The two Aryan waves, one spreading east and the other west, have now met on opposite sides of the China Sea. Britishers in Hong-Kong, figuratively shake hands with their cousins in Manila. Aryan Britishers have outposts in Borneo a few miles from Aryan American outposts in Jolo. The Baltic man has at last encircled the world, as he was destined to do, from the evolution of a larger brain.
Filipinos have no sense of democracy, and this is the result of having so many strata in the population, each holding itself superior to the lower - a feeling found all the way from the rich mestizo to the lowest Malay. It is impossible to inculcate equality as we think of it at home. Even the school children show a decided aversion to the children of a lower strata. The high-class ones will not willingly do anything which smacks of servant's work - cleaning a blackboard, moving a bench, or a pile of books. Anything which soils the hands or clothes is for "Chinos" and common "hombres."*
It has become fashionable for a certain class of Americans to assert that our form of government is not fitted to rule lower races, in spite of the fact that Aryans have always established similar democracies and ruled lower races, and in spite of the fact that we have been controlling American Indians ever since the first Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock. Our democratic spirit has not disappeared yet, and never will as long as we live, because it is an ineradicable Aryan instinct. There is no doubt that our course in retaining sovereignty and giving up to the Filipino only such power as he has the brain to use properly - is natural, scientific and moral.
* From the 1902 report of the Philippine Bureau of non-Christian tribes we read: "Society among American Indians is thoroughly democratic. The authority of the so-called chieftain is not due primarily to descent or to noble blood, neither is it based on wealth. It is due to courage, skill as a warrior, sagacity - that is to purely personal characteristics - and to the strength of an Indian's 'medicine.' Moreover, the Indian has a strong sense of justice and fair play, and the Indian official can carry out his orders, not merely because he has the authority of the United States above him, but because he has the strong support of the Indian community. Oppression is almost impossible for him, even were he inclined to do it".
All this refers to a uniform people of one blood, but let us see how utterly impossible this is in the mixture of types in the Philippines from Negritto to Spaniard. "Now, Malayan society as we find it in the Philippines, is not democratic in its tendency, but is oppressively aristocratic. The power of the man of wealth, position or inheritance is inordinate. He is not only able to commit abuses, but is morally blinded to their enormity. Beneath him the man of poverty and unenlightened mind takes rank with the animals that till the soil".
We must establish the same form of government we did in Massachusetts - keeping the sovereignty from the native, but giving him full human rights before the law, but no right to make the law. We may have gone too far already. We have put legal instruments in the hands of people who cannot understand them. They are like the children in those little colonies of street waifs, Junior Republics, playing at self-government, with white men above them to see that they play fair.
At Balayan, Batangas Province, December 18th, 1902, a white school teacher was arrested and without trial, sentenced by a Malay justice of the peace, to fifteen days' confinement for punishing a refractory pupil, and was actually thrown into a jail. This outrage shows that if we give these people full liberty, it will not be possible to live there and elevate them in the manner the people at home desire. Life and property of white men are not safe if laws are administered by Malays. When accused we have a right to a trial by our peers, and if we abdicate that right we must suffer as we did in the South in carpet-bag days. Hence, it is evident that no white man should ever be tried by a Malay judge or jury, any more than a white man in Montana would ever submit to being tried by a Crow Indian judge or jury. We must have white United States courts to try white men for offenses just as we have white courts at home for the trial of white men committing offenses in Indian reservations. We must not surrender our sovereignty nor be tried by men not sovereigns, for they are not our peers.
In the Philippine Islands and Panama American citizens have deprived themselves of the right of a trial by jury. This is necessary now, but it will be corrected in time. Americans must go there to help these people or we cannot do our duty by them, and it is intolerable to think that at any moment a self-sacrificing American may be erroneously charged with crime and then refused a trial by jury - a birthright which our ancestors purchased with oceans of blood.
The universal contempt which both Jews and Christians have bestowed upon Esau for selling his birthright, would seem to indicate that it was unnatural, and unnatural acts are always highly immoral and subject to our contempt. It seems that it is a matter of selection - this reverence for an heritage - for by it alone races, clans or families survived as it gave them something to start on and gave them an immense advantage over those who did not have a birthright or heritage, or who rejected it. By valuing an heritage, races secured the accumulated wisdom and property of all prior ancestors, and must survive over races which would reject parental advice and property. The survival of these men produces an inherited reverence for birthrights. Now let us look at our superior intelligence and see if it is not a birthright in nature, giving advantages as well as the commensal duties which accompany all rights. For thousands of years our ancestors survived because they were more intelligent than their brothers and sisters who were killed off by natural selection. We then have inherited these greater variations of brain due to an awful loss of life of ancestral relatives - a heritage of supreme and vital value. We have thus a birthright which gives us dominion. Are we to surrender it? To give up our sovereignty in the Philippines and give it to the Filipinos would be as unnatural and immoral as Esau's surrender of his birthright to the lying Jacob.