Beveridge Why The USould Stay In The Philippines

1035 Words3 Pages

In 1900, Senator Albert Beveridge, a Republican from Indiana, gave a speech in response to “The Philippine Question”. Beveridge was asked by senators and members of the House of Representatives to give a speech on the Philippines. At this time, the United States was in discussion of what the future steps would be after the Spanish-American War, which resulted in a win and subsequent acquisition of the Philippines. Senator Beveridge responded to the idea that the United States should stay in the Philippines for its available resources for the United States, its impact it gives the United States in the Pacific Ocean, and the destiny the United States has in spreading democracy. Senator Albert Beveridge makes a strong argument of why the United …show more content…

He describes the islands as the last lands left in the oceans, and suggests that taking over the island through the Asian and Australian markets would create a United States influence in the Pacific. The only markets that the United States have not done business with are the Asian markets, so the expansion could prove to be financially beneficial. With the United States needing to become more involved in Asian commerce, the Philippines could eventually become an American resource with the importation and exportation. It is Beveridge’s idea that if the United States were to take action in the Philippines, it would cause a “win-win situation” for both …show more content…

Spain occupied the Philippines for 300 years and did help the Filipino besides make them Christian. When the opportunity to get rid of Spain the Filipino people decided to help the United States defeat the Spaniards for freedom. Emilio Aguinaldo asks then why did the United States come to the Philippines to get rid of one oppressor to become another.
Beveridge’s largest oppositions in the United States were the leaders of business and commerce within the United States. Beveridge describes the Philippines as a resource of goods, but some Americans were unsure if the acquisition of such goods is worth the cost and effects of war. The control of the Philippines is a controversial topic for the United States, as the impact on foreign relation and casualties of war would be unpredictable.
One controversial issue mentioned was the legality of the annexation. Beveridge uses an excerpt of the Constitution, “Congress shall have the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory belonging to the United States”, as evidence. He interpreted the Constitution to say it is legal for the United States to assist and create a government in the Philippines. However, is occupying the Philippine considered to be respecting the territory? Even though the Constitution gives the power to the United States, it does not mean action must be

More about Beveridge Why The USould Stay In The Philippines

Open Document