« 이전계속 »
eral Del Pilar informed a Spanish officer that the Americans would attack Manila on August 2, and General Ricarte gave warning of the attack of August 13.^1
The verdict of history must be that the United States was guilty of neither false pretenses, breach of faith nor treachery toward the Filipino insurgent leaders. Aguinaldo was not so simple-minded as to rely on the statements of consuls, and he was not in fact misled by their statements or their actions. Instead of trusting the Americans, his attitude, at least from the time of the arrival of the army, was unfriendly and suspicious.
No promises were made by Admiral Dewey or by any responsible army officer. The government at Washington disapproved the conduct of Pratt and Wildman, but its disapproval was not made public until after the treaty of peace was signed. As its policy was undetermined, no other reasonable course was possible. It could not be expected to communicate its disapproval of the alleged acts of the consuls to Aguinaldo. However, certain of the letters sent by the State Department to the consuls might very well have been made public, and it would have been better had Admiral Dewey protested against Aguinaldo's assumption of civil authority. It is very certain, however, that the course of events would not have been thereby affected. It would simply have made a better record and deprived Aguinaldo's friends of one of their arguments." 71 The following letter from a Spanish officer is self-explanatory:
“SINGALON, Aug. 10, 1898. "Señor Don Artemio Ricarte:
"MY DEAR SIR-I have received to-day your very kind letter giving warning of the attack on Manila, and I thank you for your personal interest in me, which, on my part I reciprocate. I assure you I am yours, most truly and sincerely,
"Luis MARTINEZ ALCOBENDAS." Phil. Insurg. Recs., 1187, 5. 72 In 1904 a leading Filipino wrote to Mr. Le Roy as follows:
"In my judgment the Americans who held the first conferences with some of the Filipinos in 1898, in the United States, in Hong Kong, and in Singapore, ought to have been persons of high standing, duly authorized by their government, and they ought to have spoken plainly and set forth concretely what was in the thought of the McKinley Government. ... Those definite and concrete proposals ought to have been expressed without ambiguities or doubts, but with absolute plainness and blunt frankness. ... It appears as though certain Americans, and even military and naval officers, allowed to outline itself in perspective the future absolute independence of the country,
The United States was fighting Spain, and the Philippine Islands were Spanish territory. In the eye of international law the insurgents were rebellious subjects of Spain, but subjects nevertheless. After Spain ceded the territory to the United States the inhabitants owed allegiance to the new sovereign. They chose to exercise their fundamental right to try for independence, and failed.
a promise more or less indecisive or at any rate lacking formality; asked and reasked afterward by the Democrats during the presidential campaign; all which did much damage and deceived the people of only moderate education and still more the ignorant who to this day believe that independence is the panacea of the ills and backwardness of the country. ... And it was necessary also that the Democrats should not have supported the desire for independence of many Filipinos.
To the latter there were said and promised many things which could not be carried out, especially independence, by Americans who were speaking and acting according to their own judgment; and the result was what we have already seen, more than three years of war and at this time in spite of peace we still have trouble-brewers abroad, or partisans of independence who really are devoting themselves to the robbery of the Filipinos." Mr. Le Roy describes the writer of this letter as “one of the foremost Filipinos for experience, legal attainment, and a character, universally recognized as the highest." The Americans in the Philippines, I, p. 380, note. The letter was printed in the issue of the New York Evening Post of May 17, 1904.
Of course no authorized Americans ever held conferences with the Filipinos in Hong Kong, Singapore, or the United States during 1898. The United States then had no policy with reference to the Filipinos other than that conveyed to Pratt, Wildman and Dewey, to have no political dealings with the insurgent leaders. It would have been well indeed if there had been a little plain and blunt speaking to Aguinaldo and his friends then and later. In fact, most of the difficulties of American administration in the Philippines during the past sixteen years has been due to the fear of injuring the sensibilities of the Filipinos by speaking with "absolute plainness and bluntness."
The Period of Military Occupation-Suspended Sovereignty
Military Occupation-Powers of a Military Occupant-Merritt's Instructions -The Proclamation-Organization of Civil Affairs—The Peace Protocol – Spanish Claims Thereunder-Relations with Insurgents—No Joint Occupation -Aguinaldo Required to Withdraw His Troops—Consolidation of Civil Offices—The Courts-Trade and Commerce-Prisons-Ownership of Bonds and Money in the Treasury-Spanish Prisoners-Spanish Priests and Nuns as Prisoners—The Chinese-Closing up Spanish Affairs-Difficulties at Iloilo -The “Benevolent Assimilation" Proclamation-Aguinaldo's Response-Conferences with Insurgents—The Schurman Commission-The Attack on Manila.
While the people of the United States were busy with the questions of national policy involved in the acquisition of territory in the Far East the army was governing Manila under military law. Until the treaty of peace had been ratified by the proper authorities in Spain and the United States, and the fact duly notified and proclaimed, the sovereignty over the Philippines remained vested in Spain, subject to the provision of the Peace Protocol, which granted to the United States possession of the city, bay and harbor of Manila. This possession carried with it the right and the duty to govern the territory so occupied. Spain retained the right to govern the rest of the Archipelago, and a Spanish governor continued his nominal rule from the city of Iloilo. As the terms of the Peace Protocol implied the possible permanent retention of Manila, the military government from the first naturally thought to some degree at least in terms of permanency. Hostilities were suspended, and the strong temptation to exercise jurisdiction over the adjacent territory for the purpose of maintaining order was generally resisted. The instructions which General Merritt carried with him to the Philippines assumed that the occupation of Manila would be that of a military conqueror, and his powers and duties were defined and announced upon that theory. The original occupation was under the articles of capitulation, and the provisions of the Peace Protocol, by which the city, bay and harbor of Manila were to be placed under the control of the United States pending the determination of the future of the islands, never really controlled the action of the military authorities. The possession, from the time of the capitulation until the formal transfer of sovereignty under the treaty of peace, was treated as a military occupation, and it was assumed that the powers of the authorities were derived from military law.
The instructions to the commanding general, dated the day before the first expedition sailed from San Francisco, stated that the army of occupation was being sent to the Philippines for the twofold purpose of completing the destruction of the power of Spain in that part of the world and giving order and security to the islands while they were in the possession of the United States. He was directed immediately upon his arrival to publish a proclamation announcing that the Americans came not to make war upon the people or upon any party or faction among them, but to protect them in their homes, employments, and personal and religious rights.
The occupation was to be made as free as possible from severity, although, if necessary for the maintenance of law and order, the commanding general was authorized in his discretion to remove native officials and establish new judicial tribunals. It was announced as a principle of public law that the first effect of military occupation of an enemy's territory is the severance of the former political relations and the establishment of a new political power. The powers of a military occupant are absolute and supreme and operate immediately upon the political condition of the inhabitants, but the ordinary municipal laws of the conquered territory, those which affect the private rights of persons and property or provide for the punishment of crime, continue in force until suspended or superseded by the acts of the occupying power. In practise these local laws are not usually abrogated, but are administered by the ordinary tribunals substantially as they were before the occupation. This enlightened practise was as far as possible to be adhered to on the present occasion.
The substance of these instructions was embodied in a proclamation which was issued by General Merritt on the day after the surrender of the city. It was announced that the municipal law would remain operative so far as compatible with the purposes of military government and would be administered through the ordinary tribunals, but by officers appointed by the government of occupation. A provost-marshal-general would be appointed for the city of Manila and the outlying districts, with deputy provost-marshal-generals for designated subdivisions, charged with the duty of making arrests and bringing offenders before the proper courts. The port of Manila and all other ports and places in the Philippines in actual possession of the American land and naval forces would be open while such occupation continued to the commerce of neutral nations in articles not contraband of war upon the payment of the duties in force at the time of the importation.
All churches and places devoted to religious worship and to the arts and sciences, all educational institutions, libraries, scientific collections and museums would, as far as possible, be protected, and their destruction and effacement, save when required by urgent military necessity, would be severely punished.
The army thus displaced the Spanish officials and assumed the government of the city and its environs. The management of financial affairs was assigned to Brigadier-General F. V. Greene, who assumed the duties of the Spanish intendente general de hacienda. Lieutenant-Colonel C. A. Whittier was made collector of customs; Major B. C. Bement, collector of internal revenue; Brigadier-General Arthur MacArthur, provost-marshal-general and civil governor of Manila; Captain Henry Glass, of the navy, captain of the port, and Lieutenant-Colonel Jewell, provostjudge. A military commission was created, to try cases of arson,