"A car in trouble for over two hours, and no one has gone down to see what is wrong?" I asked.

"No. No one."

"They may be in some difficulty that they can't handle without help. They may stop the road forever, unless some one goes to their aid."

"Why, yes, that may be."

"Or," I went on, warming up to the subject, "the driver may be taken ill. Or the car may have gone over the side and every one in it may be hurt or killed.”

Politely they listened to my speculations, gathering in their full numbers to do so. They were calm, and entirely detached. Not in any way did they see a personal bearing in the theme. A discourse on petrography would have stirred them as much. Suddenly I turned from warm to very hot and boiled over in sincere and open wrath.

"How is it possible," I exclaimed, "that you the whole lot of you, able-bodied educated young men-can stay here dozing half the afternoon when you say, yourselves, that people may lie bleeding and helpless just below. You know that, and yet you never stir yourselves to find out!"

I stopped for breath, glaring the rage I felt. Then one of them unlimbered his thought.

"Madam," he said, "it would be fine-very fine indeedif one of us were paid to go down the road, at times like this, to see what is wrong. It would be very fine. But nobody, you see, has that job."

"No," chimed the others, brightly, "that's just it. Nobody has that job."

Chapter XX

WHAT THEY SAY OF US

AMERICA'S history in the Philippine Islands from the beginning of the Civil Establishment until to-day naturally divides itself into three periods-the Constructive, from 1900 to 1913, the Destructive, from 1913 to 1921, and the Reconstructive, which, beginning as 1921 drew to its close, is still in progress.

Of all three the last has been immeasurably the most difficult-a condition largely bred by the thick cloud of ignorance that on every side enshrouds the scene of action.

Dense as it is, American ignorance of Philippine affairs scarcely, if at all, exceeds the ignorance of the Filipino people in the same direction. And such an atmosphere cannot but create the maximum of embarrassment to an American Executive in the Islands.

"I complain that America learns about Philippine affairs only from American politicians, who get their information from Filipino politicians. And politicians belong to no country, but are a curse common to all, concerned with nothing, anywhere, but their own personal advancement."

These are the words of a Filipino business man, a considerable wholesale merchant-spoken in February, 1924, in Manila.

Carrying out his thought, I later asked an eminent Filipino politician, a leader of the majority party:

"Why does your envoy in Washington talk as he does in testifying before our Congressional Committees? Those Committees are serious bodies whose time is valuable to America. They pay that young man the courtesy of respectful attention. And you and I agree, in reading the records of the hearings, that he abuses Congress's courtesy. His statements are often

distortions and worse, not of opinion but of fact. He will surely get caught one day. And that cannot but be costly to those who give him his head."

"Yes," said my caller. "I begin to fear so. The trouble is, he is too young."

To ask a Filipino for an opinion on the work of the present American Administration amounts to asking for an opinion on Governor-General Wood, since the whole trend of the last two régimes has hinged on the personalities of the two American Executives.

Mr. José Abad Santos is an able lawyer and an ex-member of the Cabinet-one of those who resigned at "the Crisis." Up to that time as Attorney General and Secretary of the Department of Justice he had been a useful and diligent member of the Government. His statement runs:

"Governor-General Wood, had he come in Mr. Taft's place, would have been acceptable and probably successful. Neither Mr. Taft nor any other American could succeed as GovernorGeneral now. We have progressed too far. We want autonomy.

"The Jones Law is our Constitution. Governor Harrison's principle was that under that law the Governor-General's authority is confined to our foreign relations. In accordance with this interpretation we passed a considerable number of laws concerning our internal affairs.

"These laws the Wood-Forbes report pointed out to the President and Congress of the United States as laws that should be repealed. The final power lying with Washington, we waited for Washington's decision. Congress remained silent and has taken no action. Mr. Harding's personal response was: 'We shall take no backward step.'

"From these circumstances we have drawn the only deduction possible-namely that Congress disapproves the findings of the Wood-Forbes report and sustains our interpretation of the Jones Law; and, further, that Mr. Harding was of like opinion.

"Congress and the President are our court of last resort. The question has been put squarely up to them, and they by silence have rendered their negative decision on the recommendations of General Wood.

"The Jones Law, like most laws, is capable of more than one interpretation. We and Governor-General Harrison agreed on our interpretation. The United States Congress and the President, by silence, sided with us. Now comes a new Governor-General and gives us a new interpretation.

"We are now told by some Americans:

"Ah, but this is a Republican Administration. Mr. Harrison and Mr. Wilson were Democrats. Under another party you must expect another policy.'

"Where does that leave us? Each time you in America change parties, are we in the Philippines to expect a change of the laws under which we live? Evidently this is literally the case. Is it reasonable to think that we can ever consent to live under a government that administers with so uncertain a hand?"

My notes record a large number of such opinions, very few of which may here be attributed to their sources by name. Each statement now to follow comes, however, from a mestizo Filipino in high standing in the cacique ranks, whether in public life or in other fields. And each is chosen for the reason that it represents the private expressions of a considerable class.

An eminent legal personage not in politics, a man of undoubted sincerity, said to me, in March, 1924:

"I consider the Jones Bill a measure for testing our ability to run our international affairs without interference from the Governor-General. The Wood-Forbes Commission went to the records and found we had gone astray-that we had not done as well as they hoped and expected. The GovernorGeneral [Wood] has not exceeded his power. He has been careful. He is accused of abusing the veto:-We must remember that the veto power is given for a reason to check

movement harmful either to the Filipinos or to the United States. It has been used by General Wood so often as to make the impression of arbitrariness. But many of the laws proposed in the present legislature are proposed solely to force the veto, so that the cry of tyranny may be raised.

"Again, our political leaders accuse General Wood of spite against the country in his action on the Bank and the Railroad. As to the Bank, the action of the Governor-General was just and considerate. As to the Manila Railroad, unfortunately the impression was set going that the GovernorGeneral sympathizes with the great Interests in the United States and wants to further their wishes here. It must be considered that, when we bought that railway, it was not so much to make money as to control the property. We were told that the royalty of England had interest in the road and that England might therefore protest against our independence. Mr. Harrison personally gave much currency to this idea, and it was generally believed. I do not yet know the truth about it.

"The greatest trouble here is made by Americans themselves -people in the United States who continually demand investigations and removals. It may not hurt the object of the attack in the United States, but it certainly hurts your Governor-Generals here. And, far more than that, it very seriously damages the prestige of the United States in the eyes of our people.

"No one can get far into our political atmosphere without finding that we have lost our respect for the President of the United States, not as a man, but as an authority. Whoever he is, he is so soon gone that we always feel his weakness. Because his successor hastens to overturn all that he did his promises or his threats therefore mean little. Presidents seem not to dare to begin to handle us, knowing that they cannot make good whatever ground they take. And the same with Congress. At best we have lost our respect for Congress