SLAVERY AND PEONAGE
Chattel slavery existed in the Philippine Islands when Magellan
discovered them in 1521. It exists there to-day.
Morga, who was in the Philippines from 1595 to about 1608, and is
admittedly the most reliable chronicler of the events of those early
days, has given the following interesting account of the conditions
then existing: [62]--
"There are three classes of persons among the natives of these
Islands, by which the commonwealth is divided: principales, of
whom I have spoken before; timawa which is the same as plebeians,
and slaves, of principales as well as of timawa. These slaves were
of various classes: some are in entire servitude and slavery, like
those which we have, and these are called sagigilir; they served
in the interior of the houses and so also the children descended
from them; others, who have their own dwellings, which they inhabit
with their family, away from the house of their master, and these
come in at times to help the latter in their fields and crops, as
also aboard the vessel when they embark, and in the construction
of their houses whenever they erect such, and they also serve in
their houses whenever there is a guest of some distinction, and
they are under obligation, whenever the master has them called,
to come to his house and to serve him in this ministry without pay
or other stipend; these are called namamahai, and their children
and descendents are slaves of the same condition. Of these slaves
sagigilir and namamahai there are some who are slaves entirely,
and others who are only half slaves, and others who are slaves
only for a fourth part. This originates thus: if either the father
or the mother was free and they had a single child, the latter
was half free and half slave. If they had more than one child,
the children were distributed in this way: the first followed the
condition of the father, be he free or a slave, and the second
that of the mother; and if the number was uneven, the last child
was half free and half slave; and those descended from such child,
if they had a free father or a free mother, remained slave only
for a fourth part, because they were children of a free father,
or mother, and of a half slave. These half or quarter slaves,
namamahai or sagigilir, serve their masters only every second
month, respectively, in proportion to their condition as slave.
"Among the natives the ordinary price of a slave sagigilir used
to be, if much, ten taes of good gold, worth 80 pesos, and if he
is a namamahai half of that, and thus in proportion the others,
taking into account the personality and age.
"It cannot be established as a principle from where these classes
of servitude among the natives arose, for they are all of the
islands and not foreigners; it is understood that they made
them in their wars and differences; and the most certain is
that those who were most powerful made and took as slaves the
others for slight causes and occasions, and most often through
loans and usurious contracts current amongst them, the payment,
risk and debt increasing with the lapse of time until they became
slaves; and thus all these forms of servitude have their violent
and unjust origin, and it is about them that there arise the
greater part of the lawsuits that exist among the natives and
with which they keep busy the judges in the forum of the court,
and the confessors in that of the conscience."
To the last of the preceding paragraphs Rizal makes the following
annotation, which, mutatis mutandis, should give leading Filipinos
of to-day matter for reflection:--
"This class of slaves exists even now in many parts, and before
all in the province of Batangas, but it must be confessed that
their condition is very different from that of a slave in Greece,
or Rome, from that of the negro, and even of those made in later
times by Spaniards....
"Filipinas, in spite of so many centuries of christianization,
in spite of the efforts of some few noble minds, priests as
well as civilians, continues still, and is desired to continue,
almost in the same state as formerly, for those who direct the
country look more to the present than to the future, and because
they are guided not by confidence, but by fear. The efforts of
the religious corporations to improve this state of things have
never been as efficacious, nor as strenuous, as might have been
expected from them."
Morga continues: [63]--
"These slaves are the greatest wealth and capital which the
natives of these islands possess, because they are to them very
useful and necessary for their labors and farms; and among them
they are sold, exchanged, and made objects of contract, like any
other merchandise, from one pueblo to the other, from one province
to the other, and likewise from one island to the other. For which
reason, and in order to avoid so many lawsuits that would arise,
if the question of these servitudes, their origin and beginning,
were taken up, they [the slaves, Tr.] are retained and kept as
they were kept formerly."
Rizal comments on this passage as follows:--
"Thus catholicism not only did not liberate the poor class from the
tyranny of the oppressive, but with its advent in the Philippines
increased the number of tyrants. Time alone, and instruction,
which with it brings suaver customs, will ultimately redeem the
Pariahs of the Philippines, for we see that the apostles of the
peace did not find in themselves sufficient valour to battle
with the oppressors, and this in times of great faith; on the
contrary, they rather contributed indirectly to their misery,
as we see from the foregoing."
The most frequent cause, already mentioned above, from which these
conditions of servitude arose, is again pointed out by Morga in the
following passage: [64]--
"Loans with interest were in very common practice, excessively
high rates of interest being current, so that the debt doubled
and multiplied all the time during which the payment was deferred,
until there was taken from the debtor what he possessed as capital,
and, when ultimately nothing more was left, his person and his
children."
Of these statements Rizal says:--
"This is the sad truth, and so much the truth that it subsists
until now. In many provinces, and in many towns, there is taking
place, word for word, what Morga says, it being to be lamented that
at present not only Indios [Filipinos, Tr.] continue this usury,
but also the mestizos, the Spaniards, and even various priests. And
it has come to this that the Government itself not only permits
it, but in its turn exacts the capital and the person in payment
of the debt of others, as occurs with the cabeza de barangay."
It would be easy to compile passages similar to the preceding from
other authors, but those given are explicit and authoritative enough
to make it clear, first, that slavery existed in the Philippines at
the time of the conquest as a general tribal institution of social
and economical character and in minutely regulated form; and, second,
that although it lost, with the advent of the Spaniards, the character
of an institution, and indeed was formally abolished by early edicts
from Spain, it continued to exist as an unauthorized practice, so
that Rizal, writing at the close of the nineteenth century could say
that slaves still existed in many parts of the country.
In a statement recently published in the New York Evening Post, Señor
Quezon, Resident Delegate from the Philippines to Congress, has said:--
"Since there is not, and there never was, slavery in the territory
inhabited by the Christian Filipinos, which is the part of the
Islands subject to the legislative control of the Assembly, this
House has refused to concur in the anti-slavery bill passed by
the Philippine Commission."
Whom will the American public believe, Morga, the historian, and Rizal,
the Filipino patriot, or Quezon, the Filipino politician?
While I entertain no doubt as to the answer, I shall nevertheless
discuss at length the more recent history and present status of slavery
and peonage in the Philippines, because of the vital importance of
full knowledge of the facts to intelligent consideration of the claim
that the Filipinos have arrived at a stage of civilization comparable
with that of the more advanced nations of the world, and are capable
of establishing and maintaining a just and humane government.
The Spanish Penal Code did not prohibit or penalize slavery, or the
purchase or sale of human beings. It did contain provisions against
forcible detention of individuals and the abduction of minors, but
in the Philippines at least they were more honoured in the breach
than in the observance during the Spanish régime.
The Moros raided the towns of the peaceful Filipino inhabitants of
the Visayan Islands and of Luzón until within quite recent times. An
unhappy fate awaited the prisoners whom they took. Men were frequently
compelled to harvest for their captors the crops which they themselves
had planted, and were then mercilessly butchered. Women, girls and
boys were carried away into slavery, the former to serve as household
drudges or as concubines, and the latter to be brought up as slaves
pure and simple. Some men met a similar fate. The only reason that
more were not enslaved was that it was usually considered too much
trouble to make full-grown individuals work. Slaves were held as
chattels if it suited the convenience of their masters to retain them,
and otherwise were sold, bartered or given away. Zamboanga was at
the outset largely populated by escaped Moro slaves who had sought
the protection of the Spanish garrison there. Coming originally from
widely separated parts of the archipelago, these unfortunates had no
common native dialect, hence there arose among them a Spanish patois
now known as Zamboangueño.
The American occupation brought many and brusque changes in political
conditions. The attitude of Americans toward slavery and peonage was
very different from that of the easy-going Spaniards, who had never
sanctioned it but had never made any determined effort to break it up.
From the effective establishment of United States sovereignty in
1899 until July 4, 1901, the Philippines were under military rule,
which has one great advantage: its methods usually bring quick results.
Doubtless the majority of the slaves then held in the islands were too
timid, and too suspicious of the character and purposes of Americans,
to appeal to them for protection; but there were not a few whose lives
had become so unbearable that they were prepared to take almost any
risk on the chance of securing release. People of this class ran away
from their masters and sought the protection of army officers. I
am glad to say that in every such instance which has come to my
knowledge it was promptly given. Not only were they advised that they
could not be held in bondage, and were free to go where they pleased,
but when practicable their masters were warned against attempting to
regain control over them. It is probable that the large majority of
such cases were never officially reported. Most of the army officers
concerned were in some doubt as to their legal status in the premises,
but they knew that the constitution of the United States prohibits
slavery; their sympathies went out to the wretched human beings who
appealed to them for aid, and they decided to be a law unto themselves.
After the establishment of civil government some army officers
continued to exercise arbitrary powers in dealing with such cases of
slavery as came to their attention, while others contented themselves
with reporting them to the civil authorities.
The conditions which prevailed in the Moro Province in 1902 are
concisely described by its military governor, General George W. Davis,
in a report written on August 25 of that year. He said:--
"With a people who have no conception of government that is not
arbitrary and absolute; who hold human life as no more sacred
than the life of an animal; who have become accustomed to acts of
violence; who are constrained by fear from continuing the practice
of piracy; who still carry on slave trade; who habitually raid the
homes of mountain natives and enslave them; who habitually make
slaves of their captives in war--even when of their own race;
who not uncommonly make delivery of their own kindred as slaves
in satisfaction of a debt for liquidation of which they have not
the ready money; who habitually observe the precepts of the Koran,
which declares that female slaves must submit to their masters,--it
is useless to discuss a plan of government that is not based on
physical force, might, and power."
Señor Quezon, in describing conditions in the Moro country, has said:
[65]--
"American authorities made treaties with the Sultan of Joló whereby
slavery was legalized and recognized among the non-Christian
Moros and received the protection of the United States army and
civil authorities. This state of things continued for a long time
under official recognition and even after the treaties in question
were abandoned it was allowed to go on despite the protests of
Filipino and American students of the question."
It is true that General Bates attempted to negotiate a treaty with
the Sultan of Joló, in which he felt himself compelled to recognize
slavery as an existing Moro custom. This action was unauthorized and
was disapproved by his superiors. It did not legalize slavery. Neither
Moro nor any other kind of slavery was ever protected by the civil
authorities.
The act providing for the organization of the Moro Province was passed
on June 1, 1903, and hardly had the civil officers therein provided for
been appointed when, on September 24, 1903, the legislative council
passed an act entitled "An Act defining the crimes of slaveholding
and slavehunting and prescribing the punishment therefor," [66]
which was promptly approved by the Philippine Commission and thus
came to have the force and effect of law. Under it active measures
were adopted to break up slavery in the Moro Province. They have
resulted very successfully, and persons who have captured others to
be held or sold as slaves, as well as persons who have actually sold,
bought or kept slaves, have been convicted and punished.
Señor Quezon's statement relative to the attitude of the civil
authorities in this matter is therefore recklessly false.
The existence of slavery in the Moro Province was well known from
the outset, hence the immediate enactment of legislation to meet the
special conditions which prevailed there.
Little by little the commission learned that slavery was by no means
confined to Moro territory, and that peonage was general throughout
the islands.
Before going further, I wish to make clear the sense in which I use
these terms.
I define slavery as the condition of a human being held as a chattel
and compelled to render service for which he is not compensated. As
food and clothing are necessarily furnished by the slave owner,
they are not considered to constitute compensation.
Peonage I define as the condition of a debtor held by his creditor
in a form of qualified servitude to work out a debt.
On April 28, 1903, the senior inspector of constabulary in Isabela
wired the first district chief of constabulary, Manila, as follows:--
"In this province a common practice to own slaves. These are
bought by proprietarios [property owners.--D. C. W.] from
Igorrotes and Calingas who steal same in distant places from
other tribes. Young boys and girls are bought at about 100
pesos, men 30 years old and old women cheaper. When bought,
are generally christened and put to work on ranch or in house,
and I think generally well-treated. In this town a number sold
within last few months, and as reported to me, Governor has bought
three. Shall I investigate further? Instructions desired.
(Signed) "Sorenson."
Senior Inspector Sorenson was instructed to make a thorough
investigation of, and a detailed report on, the slave question.
On May 2 he complied with these instructions, [67] describing the
conditions under which slaves were taken by the neighbouring Kalingas
and Ifugaos, whom he wrongly calls "Igorrotes," the methods employed
in selling them, and the treatment subsequently given them by their
purchasers.
He also furnished a list of "Igorrotes" sold in the province during
the past year, with names of the purchasers and prices paid. The ages
of these unhappy individuals varied from eight to twenty-seven years,
the prices paid for them, from one hundred and ten to two hundred
and fifty Mexican dollars.
This report led Governor Taft to write to Governor Dichoso of Isabela,
who was charged with owning a slave, asking him for a frank statement
of the facts as to the prevalence of slavery in his province.
Governor Dichoso's reply, dated September 9, 1903, will make
interesting reading for those who claim that slavery does not exist,
and has never existed, among the Filipinos. I give it practically in
full, omitting only the titles of the governor:--
"Having noted the contents of the official letter of the Honourable
the Civil Governor in the Philippine Islands, Mr. W. H. Taft,
dated the 8th of August, last, and of the copy of the report
annexed thereto, which were received yesterday, I have the honour
to respectfully reply that during the 21 years, more or less,
that I have resided in this provincial capital (Ilagan), I have
never thought of buying a member or a child of the race mentioned
in the report, or of any other tribe, to serve as a slave in my
household, not for the reason that this is prohibited and punished
by section 484 and the following sections of the Spanish Code
now in force, relative to the crime of kidnapping, but because
it goes against my nature to treat in this manner a person who,
like all human beings alive, is a likeness of the Highest. This
I prove by means of the documents annexed hereto.
"I could easily have done so in time of the late Spanish
Government, because I had good opportunities for doing so, and
could have afforded to do so on account of my social position from
that time on up to date, during which period I held successively
the following public offices:--
"This having been my status, and considering the power and the
opportunity which I had for obtaining slaves, I might not have
had only one, but enough to harvest the tobacco on my plantation,
and the other crops which I had planted.
"Under the past Government there existed slaves in this province,
but only a small number, for only wealthy families could afford
to keep them. The same was the case in the neighbouring Provinces
of Nueva Vizcaya and Cagayan; in the former they also used to
have slaves of the Ifugao tribe, and in the latter Negritos,
but very few of these.
"Since the glorious Star-Spangled Banner has been unfolded
over the Province of Isabela, the slaves existing in the same,
which had been purchased in that time and recently, are very
well treated and seem to be members of the family, because the
military authorities prohibited their masters from ill-treating
them as they were wont to do. Since then many of the slaves
have run away from their owners and have sought new masters
who treat them well, as it happened in the case of an Igorrote
woman of the Ifugao tribe, who was about 40 years of age, and
who had been in the service of a lady in the pueblo of Echague
for many years. When, in the year 1900, the military enforced
the prohibition of ill-treatment of slaves in the said pueblo,
this Igorrote woman ran away and presented herself at my house,
I being at this time justice of the peace of this provincial
capital, and asked me to employ her as servant. My principle not
to have slaves preventing me from complying with her wishes,
I directed her to apply to Mr. Andres Claraval and his wife,
Filomena Salinas. They accepted her, and a short time afterwards
they had her baptized and christened Magdalena Claraval. She is
being treated like an adopted daughter by them.
"The gentlemen who are mentioned in the report as having purchased
slaves really acquired Igorrotes by purchase and keep them in their
house, some of them having died since. Some of these transactions
were made in the Spanish times, as in the case of the late
Mr. Policarpo Gangan, who bought 6 or 7 Ifugaos, whom on his death
he left to his children, Mr. Pedro Gangan, Mrs. Susana Gangan,
Miss Maria Gangan, and Mrs. Rufina Gangan, and others were made
recently and secretly, while I was absent from town on official
business in the pueblos of this province. Mr. Thomas Gollayan,
the late provincial secretary, bought two Igorrotes while I was in
Manila in December and January, last. They were well aware of the
fact that I prosecuted kidnapping with tenacity, my object being
to put a stop, if possible, to this abominable practice, which
has since some time prevailed in the pueblos of this province....
"In order to prove that I endeavoured to make the proper
investigation for the purpose of proving whether slavery really
existed in this province, I have the honour to annex an affidavit
by Agapito Telan, a resident of Ilagan, in which it appears that
he sold Igorrotes of the Ifugao tribe to several residents of this
town. I was unable to ascertain the numbers of Igorrotes of the
same tribe sold by Modesto Sibal, Lorenzo Montevirgen, Lorenzo
Montalvo, Andres Castro, and Cosme Ferrer, who are engaged in the
same business as Agapito Telan, as it appears from the deposition
of the latter, for the reason that these persons did not appear
before me, although in 1902 I had on several occasions verbally
requested the late municipal president, Mr. Pascual Paguirigan, to
cause them to appear in an unofficial manner. I was not surprised
that they did not appear before me, as Paguirigan was involved in
the investigation, as it happened in the case of the aforesaid
Agapito Telan, who appeared before me when I asked the acting
municipal president to have him do so.
"I was afraid to direct those persons to appear before me by means
of written orders, because I had not document or complaint whereon
to base them, as required by the procedure now in force, and feared
that on account of the unlawful nature of the summons they might
proceed against me for coaccion, and sue me besides for damages.
"According to my personal observation and to what I have seen in
the other pueblos of this Province of Isabela, but principally in
the provincial capital, the Igorrotes who are said to be slaves
cannot be considered as such since the times of the military
government, as they are considered and treated as members of
the family of the chief of the household. Nevertheless, I am and
shall continue to be inexorable in the prosecution of slavery,
as it is a crime and should be prosecuted as such, in order to
prevent at least that the persons engaged in this business commit
this crime again.
"It is my humble opinion that an act should be passed to the end
of eradicating this practice which has become general throughout
the Cagayan Valley. [68] Otherwise, as I have seen in my continual
efforts, the provincial authorities cannot do anything to check
the evil, however they may try. It is necessary that some one
should be made to feel the rigour of the act suggested and suffer
the punishment designated by it.
"As a rule the inhabitants of this province already understand
personal liberty and know that a person is entitled to go wherever
he pleases, which liberty has given birth to the humane treatment
of the fellow-men which now prevails.
"Caciquism is still existing in parts of this province, but I
am confident that with the coöperation of sensible persons in my
continuous efforts it will be completely eradicated, and personal
liberty will reign supreme, as in every republic where the laws
assure complete and real liberty, the liberty from slavery."
As supporting evidence Governor Dichoso forwarded with his letter a
number of statements from persons resident in the capital of Isabela
to the effect that during the twenty-one years that he had lived
there he had never purchased, intended to purchase, or kept in his
house any Igorrote of the Ifugao or any other tribe.
In addition he forwarded a somewhat unique document in the form of
a sworn statement by a slave dealer which is of such interest that
I give it in its entirety:--
"I, Agapito Telan, a resident of this provincial capital
(Ilagan), certify: On the 19th of June, 1903, I was summoned
by the provincial governor, Mr. Francisco Dichoso y Reyes, and
when I was with him in the office of the provincial government,
he and the secretary took my sworn deposition, as follows:--
"Upon being asked to state the number of children of the infidel
tribe of the Ifugaos sold by me to several residents of this
provincial capital, the approximate age of these children, the
names of the persons to whom they were sold, the number of children
bought by these persons, the value of each of the said children,
their sex, and the year, month, and day on which the said sales
were made, deponent replied that in the year 1902, in the month of
September, and on a day which he cannot remember, he sold to the
late Policarpo Gangan two Ifugao boys, of the ages of 8 and 9,
respectively, for the sum of 360 Mexican dollars, another boy,
9 years of age, he sold to Juan Dauag for the sum of 180 Mexican
dollars, and another boy, 8 years of age, he sold to Seferino
Malana for the sum of 160 Mexican dollars, the latter two being
sold on the same month and year aforementioned, and in Ilagan also.
"In the year of 1903 the deponent sold a boy and a girl of the
Ifugao tribe, who, judging by their physical development, were
about 6 and 8 years old; the boy, six years of age, he sold to
Pascual Paguirigan, late municipal president, and the girl to Doña
Rufina Gangan, for the sum of 180 Mexican dollars each. This was
in January, but deponent does not remember the day.
"In February he sold a boy and a girl of the same tribe, 8 years
of age, the former to Cirilo Gantinao and the latter to Salvador
Aggabao, for 180 Mexican dollars each. The purchasers are residents
of this town.
"Upon being asked who are the other persons who, like deponent,
are engaged in taking Ifugao children from the settlements of
the infidels and then selling the same to whomever wants them,
and that he state where they reside, deponent replied that the
persons who are engaged in the same business as he, are Modesto
Sibal, Lorenzo Monte-Virgen, and Lorenzo Montalvo, residents of
the pueblo of Gamú, and Andres Castro and Cosme Ferrer, residents
of this provincial capital.
"Upon being asked whether he knew if these persons are like
him engaged in the purchase of minors and what was the number of
children taken by each during the year of 1902 and 1903, and if so,
to state to whom they were sold, and at what price the deponent
replied that he is completely ignorant of the matter in regard
to which information is requested, but that it was possible that
they had taken more children, as they are living nearer to the
settlements from which they are taken, and as they are able to
make the trip three times to the defendant's once.
"Asked what methods they employ for the purpose of getting children
from that tribe, deponent says that all they do is to enter into
a contract with those whom they consider their dattos or chiefs,
and who come down from the mountains with the children, which
are purchased from them by the persons engaged in this trade.
"Asked to state the price of the children bought at the accustomed
places for these transactions for the purpose of reselling them,
the deponent states that the children are sold at the same price
at which they are purchased at that place.
"He having thus stated, the foregoing was read to him, and he
agreed to it, signing it after the Provincial Governor, which I,
the secretary appointed for this act, attest.
"Francisco Dichoso,
"Provincial Governor.
"Agapito Telan,
"Fernando Domingo.
"Secretary appointed.
(Sgd.) "Agapito Telan.
"Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of September,
1903.
(Sgd.) "Francisco Tauad,
"Clerk of the Court, Ilagan."
The existence of slavery in Misamis, a regularly organized province,
had been disclosed at a still earlier date.
In May, 1902, its Filipino governor, Sr. Manuel Corrales, was asked
to report, and did report, on slavery in that province, under the
following circumstances:--
On May 2, 1902, General George W. Davis telegraphed the
Adjutant-General, Manila:--
"Following telegram respectfully repeated: 'Zamboanga, May 1, 1902,
via Malabang, to Wade. Commanding Officer, Misamis, reports April
30, that Presidente notified him that he was going to send armed
party to capture two Moro slaves which have escaped from their
Filipino master whose names were not given. Says there are many
Filipinos who own slaves. Presidente was told that the troops had
nothing to do with civilian affairs. I have no doubt but that the
Filipinos on the north coast here have many slaves. At Butuan I
saw one in November that had been recently purchased.'"
Governor-General Wright referred a copy of this telegram to Governor
Corrales with an indorsement--
"calling his attention to the within communication. Information is
desired as to whether or not the within facts are true as stated,
and also whether there are any persons held in involuntary
servitude other than convicts within the province, and if so,
that full particulars be given."
Governor Corrales himself has none too good a record in connection
with the treatment accorded the non-Christians of his province, and
would certainly not paint a darker picture than was called for by the
facts, yet in his reply [69] he gives the names of six towns in which
"one still finds a few slave servants, most of them acquired many
years ago." He adds:--
"At the present time, there are but few sales of slaves proceeding
from the mountain tribes, which are now relatively civilized. In
Iligan and Misamis, I have heard that such sales were more
frequent, for two reasons: (1) the Moro race is more despotic
and more numerous; (2) the weekly market in Iligan gives them
an opportunity to carry on that sort of business, although they
have to do it by stealth, on account of the watchfulness of
the authorities.
"I will call your attention to the fact that the slaves proceeding
from the Moro district constitute, in the Moro villages, an
inferior social class, the slave family, whose origin is due to the
prisoners taken by the Dattos on their expeditions; when they are
transferred to the Christians in Iligan or Misamis, because their
masters wish to make money, or are hard pressed by the famines
which are so frequent in the region of the Lanao, their condition
is considerably improved by the good treatment and the better
and more abundant food which they obtain in their new situation,
by the mere fact that they live with a more civilized people.
"Those who come from the mountain tribes are not born slaves;
with few exceptions, the chiefs and principal men of these
tribes do not own slaves which they use for their service or for
agricultural work, as the Moros do. Slaves are generally obtained
in the following way:--
"It happens that a chief with bellicose and sanguinary instincts,
who leads a nomad life and does not belong to the peaceful class
which is given to farm life, organizes a gang of men of his sort,
makes incursions in the wildest parts of the woods and raids
the lone huts inhabited by savage and nomad families; he kills
by treachery the grown-up people and carries off the children,
which he can easily master; he then sells them to the peaceful farm
dwellers, who sell them in their turn to the Christian pueblos.
"As I have already said, such cases are happily rare. In Iligan
and Misamis, which are far from the capital of the province,
and therefore from the Court and the provincial authorities, the
slaves have had less opportunity to claim their rights, and it is
not astonishing that neither the slaves nor their masters have
a true notion of what is meant by individual liberty, although
the former are at least sure of their lives since they left the
jurisdiction of the Moros, at whose absolute mercy they were,
and are much better treated among the Christians.
"I intend taking all necessary measures within my jurisdiction
in order to put an end to such a hateful trade, and wait for any
further instructions which you may deem it convenient to give me."
Unfortunately neither the measures taken by Governor Corrales nor
those adopted by his successors have sufficed to end this "hateful
trade" in the province of Misamis.
In July of the present year, [70] a man accused of holding two Bukidnon
children in slavery did not deny the charge, but set up the defence
that he was a resident of Misamis, where there was no law against this
crime. He had been proceeded against under an anti-slavery law passed
by the commission for the provinces under its exclusive jurisdiction,
on the theory that he resided in Agusan. He won his case, proving
that his house was about a hundred yards over the line.
The revelations contained in the reports above mentioned naturally
called for action. Inspector Sorenson's report was referred to the
commission with the following indorsement:--
"Office of the Civil Governor,
"Manila, August 13, 1903.
"The Senior Inspector of Constabulary in the Province of
Isabela reports that there is quite a slave trade in the Cagayan
Valley. The report of Sorenson, the Inspector, is submitted to
the Commission and I suggest a reference to Commissioner Wright
in order that he may include in the Criminal Code some clauses
which will enable us to reach this abuse.
(Signed) "Wm. H. Taft,
"Civil Governor."
The report was, by direction of the commission, referred to
Commissioner Wright as suggested by Governor Taft for consideration in
connection with a proposed new Criminal Code which was being prepared,
under his general supervision, for enactment. An immense amount
of work was necessary on this code, and it was never completed and
enacted. Various matters needing attention have since been reached
through the medium of special laws, and it is obvious that it was
intended to pursue this course in this instance, as is shown by the
fact that Governor Dichoso's reply was forwarded to General Wright
on October 19, 1903, with the following indorsement:--
[First Indorsement]
"Executive Bureau,
"Manila, October 19, 1903.
"Respectfully referred to the Secretary of Commerce and Police,
for his information and consideration in connection with the
proposed Act denouncing slavery and kidnapping and kindred offences
as crimes.
(Signed) "Wm. H. Taft,
"Civil Governor."
Why such an act was not drafted and passed I do not know. I was
then absent on leave, and did not even learn of the existence of
any of the above-quoted documents until years afterward. My personal
attention was forcibly drawn to the existence of slavery outside of
the Moro territory when I first inspected Nueva Vizcaya in 1905. The
territory occupied by the Ifugaos, since separated as a sub-province
of the Mountain Province, was then a part of Nueva Vizcaya, which had
been organized as a province under a special act and was, in a way,
subject to my executive control.
Its governor, Louis G. Knight, called my attention to the fact
that Ifugao children were frequently enslaved by Filipinos of Nueva
Vizcaya and Isabela. I asked him to get specific data so that we might
prosecute the offenders. He soon sent to the Executive Secretary a
report [71] which gave full details of a number of recent cases of
the buying and selling of Ifugaos as slaves, contained a statement
that Governor Knight, who was himself a lawyer, could "find nothing
whatever in the penal code defining or punishing as a crime the
buying or selling of human beings," and recommended that "this crime
be defined and punished in the proposed new penal code."
The report was referred to me by the executive secretary on September
20, 1905, and on September 22 was by me forwarded to the Honourable
Luke E. Wright, governor-general, with an indorsement--
"inviting attention to the inclosed statements from the Governor
of Nueva Vizcaya, relative to the traffic in Igorrote children
in his province.
"The undersigned has reason to believe that Negrito children and
children of other non-Christian tribes are occasionally bought and
sold by civilized natives, and is strongly of the opinion that
in case the Penal Code does not provide adequate punishment for
such offences, it should be so amended as to make it possible to
inflict severe penalties upon those who buy and sell human beings
in this Archipelago.
(Signed) "Dean C. Worcester,
"Secretary of the Interior."
The papers were referred by Governor-General Wright to the
Attorney-General--
"for an opinion as to whether there is not some provision in the
present Penal Code which will provide adequate punishment for
such offences as are related herein."
The opinion of the Attorney-General rendered in response to this
request [72] encouraged me to believe that something could be done
under existing law.
I returned the papers, together with the opinion, to the governor
of Nueva Vizcaya and three test suits were brought as promptly as
possible.
One of them has become historic. It was brought against Tomás Cabanag,
a well-known slave dealer who made a business of buying and selling
Ifugao children. He was charged with illegal detention in connection
with the admitted sale, by him, of an Ifugao girl named Gamaya. [73]
He was convicted in the Court of First Instance. I quote the following
extract from the decision of the court:
"The Congress of the United States has declared that human slavery
shall not exist in these islands and while no law, so far as I can
discover, has yet been passed either defining slavery in these
islands or affixing a punishment for those who engage in this
inhuman practice as dealers, buyers, sellers, or derivers, the
facts established in this case show conclusively that the child
Jimaya was by the defendant forcibly and by fraud, deceit and
threats unlawfully deprived of her liberty and that his object
and purpose was an unlawful and illegal one, to wit, the sale
of the child for money into human slavery. This constitutes the
crime of Detencion ilegal defined and penalized by Article 481
of the Penal Code and this Court finds the defendant guilty as
charged in the information."
The case was promptly appealed to the Supreme Court and was there
lost on March 16, 1907.
Gamaya, a thirteen-year-old Ifugao girl, had been purchased from her
mother for pigs, hens, rice and a cloak, under the absurd pretext that
the object of the purchase was to keep her at home, where she would, of
course, naturally have remained in any event. She was allowed to stay
with her mother during a period of some three years. In this manner
the purchaser was saved the cost of boarding her while she was growing
up. Having now reached what the Igorots consider a marriageable age,
she was sold to a man who was engaged in the business of buying in
Nueva Vizcaya children to sell in the lowlands of Isabela; in other
words, to a slave dealer. He sold her to an inhabitant of the town of
Caoayan, in Isabela, who had instructed him to buy a girl. Caoayan is
distant many days of hard overland travel from this girl's home. When
taken there she was among an alien people of another tribe and another
religion, and although, as stated by the Supreme Court, she was not
kept under lock and key and although that court held that:--
"... There can be no unlawful detention under article 481 of the
Penal Code without confinement or restraint of person, such as
did not exist in the present case."
and held further that:--
"Under the complaint for this crime it is possible to convict for
coacción under proof of the requisites of that offence ... but
among those requisites is that of violence through force or
intimidation, even under the liberal rule of our jurisprudence
...; consequently the charge of coacción against the accused
cannot be sustained upon the evidence."
it is nevertheless true that this child, who had been thrice sold,
was detained just as effectively in Caoayan as if chained to a post
in the house of the man who bought her, and was required by him to
perform menial labour without compensation. It would have been utterly
impossible for her to escape and to make her way back through Isabela
and Nueva Vizcaya to her own people, no matter how strenuously she
might have endeavoured to do so.
It is extremely difficult to prove forcible detention in connection
with most cases of slavery in these islands. Negrito slaves are
usually purchased when mere babes and later have no recollection
of their parents or of their former wild life in the hills. Babes
or very young children bring a better price than do older children,
for the reason that they are less likely to run away.
Adult Negritos, and adult members of other tribes held in slavery,
have, as a rule, been made to feel the heavy hand of the oppressor
and are so afraid of their lives that they will not testify. Only
under very exceptional circumstances will they admit that they are
being held against their will, although they are quick to make their
escape when a favourable opportunity presents itself.
The difficulty involved in protecting these simple people is
illustrated by the following case which came to my personal
attention:--
An eleven-year-old Bukidnon girl was carried away from northern
Mindanao to Bohol by a Filipino school-teacher who had been discharged
from the insular service. Her parents gave every indication of bitter
grief and begged to have their daughter restored to them. This
was finally accomplished, to their great joy, as a result of my
efforts. The kidnapper was ultimately brought into court, but before
the case came up for trial the parents had been subjected to such
"influence" that when called to the witness-stand they swore that
the kidnapper had taken their daughter with their full knowledge
and consent.
In order to be reasonably effective, laws in these islands must be
so framed as to make it possible to protect people too ignorant,
or too timid, to protect themselves.
Returning now to the Supreme Court decision, the court also held
that:--
"... the defendant appears to have engaged in the business
of buying in Nueva Vizcaya children to sell in the lowlands
of Isabela."
But it further held that:--
"Not even the abhorrent species of traffic apparently carried on
by the accused justifies a sentence not authorized by law."
More important still, the court held that:--
"The judge below quotes the Bill of Rights of the Philippines
contained in the Act of Congress of July 1, 1902, declaring that
'neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
shall exist in said Islands.' This constitutional provision is
self-acting whenever the nature of a case permits and any law
or contract providing for the servitude of a person against his
will is forbidden and is void. For two obvious reasons, however,
it fails to reach the facts before us:--
"First. The employment or custody of a minor with the consent
or sufferance of the parents or guardian, although against the
child's own will, cannot be considered involuntary servitude.
"Second. We are dealing not with a civil remedy but with a criminal
charge, in relation to which the Bill of Rights defines no crime
and provides no punishment. Its effects cannot be carried into
the realm of criminal law without an act of the legislature,"
and also that:--
"To sum up this case, there is no proof of slavery or even of
involuntary servitude, inasmuch as it has not been clearly shown
that the child has been disposed of against the will of her
grandmother or has been taken altogether out of her control. If
the facts in this respect be interpreted otherwise, there is
no law applicable here, either of the United States or of the
Archipelago, punishing slavery as a crime."
In view of the facts above cited the necessity for legislation
seemed obvious.
The commission in its capacity as sole legislative body for the
territory inhabited by Moros or other non-Christian tribes might have
passed an act prohibiting and penalizing slavery, involuntary servitude
and peonage in that territory; but such an act unless supplemented
by a similar one applicable to the neighbouring Filipino territory
where most of the slaves are actually held would obviously have been
ineffective, while the desirability of having uniform legislation
throughout the Philippines was evident.
The Philippine Assembly was about to meet for the first time. The work
of drafting a proper bill was duly provided for and I am sure that no
member of the commission for a moment entertained the belief that there
would be any difficulty in securing the concurrence of the assembly in
the passage of a reasonable act prohibiting and penalizing slavery,
involuntary servitude, peonage and the sale and purchase of human
beings. The gentleman charged with drafting the bill encountered
difficulty in so framing it that it would accomplish the desired
end without unduly interfering with the rights of parents over their
children. Long delay ensued.
I myself finally drafted a bill entitled: "An Act prohibiting slavery,
involuntary servitude, peonage, or the sale of human beings in the
Philippine Islands," and introduced it in the commission.
It was passed, in slightly amended form, on April 29, 1909, and sent
to the Philippine assembly, where it was introduced on May 6, 1909. On
May 7 it was referred to the Committee on Revision of Laws, and on
May 17 it was returned by that committee with the following report:--
"May 17, 1909.
"Mr. Speaker: The committee concurs with the Commission in the
approval of Bill No. 100 with the following amendments:
"(a) That the word 'slavery' be stricken out of the title of the
Act, because it does not exist in the Philippines.
"(b) That from section 1, page 1, lines 7 and 8, the following
words be stricken out: 'take the fruits of his labours, compel
him to deliver to another the fruits of his labours,' since the
acts contained therein constitute other crimes that may be robo,
hurto, or estafa.
"(c) From line 11 in the same section the words: 'less than six
months nor;' and from line 12 the words: 'less than one hundred
pesos and not;' because the acts penalized in section 1 may be of
such slight importance that they should not deserve a punishment
of imprisonment for six months or a fine of one hundred pesos.
"(d) From line 22 (p. 2), the word: 'peso,' substituting for it:
'two pesos and a half.'
"With these enactments Commission Bill No. 100 is drawn up,
according to the one attached hereto.
"For these reasons the committee submits for the consideration of
the Assembly Commission Bill No. 100 and recommends its approval
with the amendments introduced.
"Respectfully submitted.
(Signed) "Aguedo Velarde, "Chairman, Committee on Revision of Laws.
"To the Honourable,
"The Speaker of the Philippine Assembly."
This report, if adopted, would have emasculated the bill by striking
out the minimum penalties, but it was not adopted. On May 19 the
assembly laid the bill on the table without discussion.
So began a long struggle to secure the coöperation of the assembly
in the enactment of legislation on this important subject.
I did not feel that the assembly ought to be allowed to make a joke of
the provision of the Act of Congress of July 1, 1902, that "Neither
slavery, nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist in said
islands," and inserted a frank statement of the case in my annual
report. During my absence it was cut out by the governor-general
acting on the cabled suggestion of General, then Colonel, McIntyre,
speaking for the secretary of war. The Secretary, it is understood,
based his decision on the statement of alleged facts and the argument
in the above-mentioned memorandum prepared by General McIntyre,
and signed by General Edwards, then chief of the bureau of insular
affairs. Various of these statements of alleged facts were incorrect,
and much of the argument was fallacious, but the toute ensemble was
plausible, and likely to mislead any one not thoroughly familiar with
local conditions in the Philippines. I did not see this communication
until three years later, and so had no opportunity seasonably to
discuss it, or to present my side of the case.
On learning that all reference to slavery had been cut out of my
report, I sent the following memorandum to the governor-general:--
"Baguio, February 28, 1909.
"Memorandum for the Honourable the Governor-General.
"Practices in the matter of purchasing and practically enslaving
the children of wild people, and holding wild people in the state
of peonage, closely approaching slavery, are more grave and more
common than is ordinarily understood here; and, in my opinion,
as stated in my report, ought to be brought to the attention
of the Congress of the United States if the situation is not
dealt with effectively by the Philippine Legislature at its next
regular session.
"I do not object to the omission from my report of the matter
treating on this subject, with the understanding that a strong
effort will be made here to secure legislation which will, at
least, penalize the sale for cash or other valuable consideration
of human beings.
"As things stand at present, we should be placed in a somewhat
embarrassing situation if any one thoroughly acquainted with
the facts were to ask us what we had done to make effective the
provisions of the Act of Congress prohibiting slavery.
"Dean C. Worcester,
"Secretary of the Interior."
The following year I introduced in the commission the bill which
the assembly had rejected. Action upon it was postponed, pending
the receipt of information which was requested from the assembly as
to the reason for the failure of that body to pass 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 document 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. Dickinson 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 passed on that date and was duly
forwarded to the assembly. 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 assembly
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]....
"Señor 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 assembly 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, passed the bill
for Agusan, Nueva Vizcaya and the Mountain Province.
The same act was again passed by the commission for the territory under
the jurisdiction of the legislature, when that body reconvened. The
assembly 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 Assembly in the passage for the territory under the
jurisdiction of the Philippine Legislature of an Act identical
with, or similar to, Act No. 2071, entitled '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 pass 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 assembly and that nothing remained but to appeal to congress to
pass 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 passed
the bill. The assembly 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 passed laws prohibiting and penalizing slavery and
peonage annually during four successive years, and that the assembly
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 assembly 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 Association,
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 attitude
of the assembly 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 passed 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 passage cut out of my 1909
report was certainly on file there, and it explicitly stated that
slavery existed in the Islands.
The similar passage 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
passing the following resolution:--
"Whereas the Act of Congress passed 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 passed Act No. 2071, and as a branch of
the Philippine Legislature has in four successive sessions passed
an act prohibiting and penalizing slavery, involuntary servitude,
peonage, or the sale of human beings, and
"Whereas during each of said sessions the Assembly has failed to
concur in the passage 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 entitled 'An Act prohibiting slavery, involuntary servitude,
peonage, or the sale of human beings in the Philippine Islands'
as passed by the Commission in the last session of the last
Legislature, but which failed of passage in the Assembly, 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 embarrassment
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.
The printing of the report was delayed until July 19, 1913, and I
brought it up to that date, as evidence continued to pour in.
In this document I gave specific cases of chattel slavery in the
provinces of Nueva Vizcaya, Isabela, Tarlac, Zambales, Pampanga,
Batangas, Palawan, Agusan, Ambos Camarines, the Moro province,
the Mountain province and Manila itself, describing quite fully
the conditions under which Ilongots, Ifugaos, Negritos, Tagbanuas,
Manobos, Mandayas, Moros and Filipinos are bought, sold and held as
chattel slaves.
I will here only briefly summarize them.
The Negritos are savages of low mentality, and most of them lead a
nomadic or semi-nomadic life. They constantly get the worst of it in
the struggle for existence and to-day are found only on the islands of
Mindanao, Palawan, Tablas, Negros, Panay and Luzón, where for the most
part they inhabit very remote and inaccessible mountain regions. Owing
to their stupidity and their extreme timidity it is comparatively easy
to hold them in slavery, and they are probably thus victimized more
than are the people of any other tribe. They are constantly warring
with each other in the more remote of the mountain regions which they
inhabit. It would be going too far to say that their moral sense has
been blunted. It is probably nearer the truth to say that they never
had any. It is therefore a simple matter for Filipino slave dealers to
arrange with Negritos for the purchase of their fellow-tribesmen. The
latter then proceed to obtain captives by raiding some hostile group
of their own people, killing ruthlessly if occasion arises.
They are more ready than are the people of any other Philippine
tribe to sell their children or other dependent relatives, and do
this not infrequently when pressed by hunger, a condition apt to
arise because of their utter improvidence. Unfortunately, the matter
does not end here. It is by no means unknown for Filipinos to join
in their slave-hunting raids, or even to organize raids of their own,
killing Negrito parents in order to get possession of their children. I
submit the following case to illustrate this latter procedure:--
"Camp Stotsenburg, Pampanga, P. I.,
"September 26, 1910.
"The Adjutant,
"Camp Stotsenburg, Pampanga, P. I.
"Sir: I have the honour to inform you that a report has this
day been made to me that a party of hostile Filipinos, about
15 in number, armed with 1 rifle, 1 revolver and the remainder
with bolos, presumably ladrones, entered a small Negrito barrio
situated about one and one half miles directly southeast from
the Post during the forenoon of Tuesday, September 20, 1910,
and killed three men and carried away two small children. I have
visited the barrio and the body of one man showing frightful
mutilation, both head, feet and hands completely severed from the
body, was found. This settlement is situated in a dense jungle
and the other bodies were presumably carried away or hidden,
so that they could not be found.
"But one person can be found who witnessed the affair, an aged
Negrito woman, who can scarcely walk from the treatment she
received at the hands of these outlaws. She states that she
would be able to recognize and identify some of the party. I am
informed by Negritos living in the vicinity that this party of
outlaws has a rendezvous a short distance east of Solbac where
they might be apprehended.
"The killing took place without the reservation, but the matter
is of sufficient importance, since all the Negritos living in
the vicinity of the post are greatly excited and disturbed,
to warrant the recommendation that it be referred to the Senior
Inspector of Constabulary, San Fernando, Pampanga, P. I., for
such action as he may desire to take.
"Very respectfully,
(Signed) "Kyle Rucker,
"1st Lieut. and Squadron Adjutant, 14th Cav. Intelligence Officer."
The subsequent fate of these Negrito children is made plain by the
following letter:--
"Philippine Constabulary,
"San Fernando, Pampanga, P. I.,
"October 4, 1910.
"My Dear Holmes: We have a case up here of murder committed near
the town of Angeles in which several Negritos are mixed up.
"We managed to locate two Negrito children who had been sold by
the man who killed their father. They were in the possession of
a man named Ambrocio David who says he paid sixty pesos for them
and says they are his property.
"I think that we can convict the murderer of the children's father,
if we can catch him, but this sale of Negritos has gone such a
pace that almost every family in Pampanga has at least one as a
'Companion' of their children, they say, but really as a slave.
"The Fiscal says there is no law against the sale or purchase of
Negritos and I cannot find it, although I seem to remember a law,
but whether it alludes to Negritos or only Moros I am unable
to say.
"If there is a law, what number is it, and if not, can you get
me an opinion of the Attorney-General or some ruling so as to
show us how to act in this and future cases of this kind.
"Yrs.
"W. S. North,
"S. I."
In this case one of the kidnappers was convicted of murder, but
nothing could be done to him for selling the Negrito children nor could
anything be done to Señor Ambrocio David for buying the children or
for claiming that they were his property.
Like many primitive peoples, the Negritos are inordinately fond
of strong alcoholic drinks. It is strictly against the law to give
or sell any of the white man's liquors to them, but this naturally
does not restrain slave hunters, who frequently get adults deeply
intoxicated and then trade with them for their children or kidnap
the drunken persons themselves and drag them away. Negritos are held
to-day in bondage, in considerable numbers, in provinces like Zambales,
Pampanga, Tarlac, Pangasinan and Cagayan. While they are not displayed
for sale in any market in Pampanga, they can be readily negotiated
for in several different public markets of that province; and if
none happen to be available at the moment, the would-be purchaser is
assured that the supply in the mountains is inexhaustible and that
his needs can soon be met.
The publication of my report has caused consternation among slave
owners in many provinces. Some slaves have since escaped and little
effort has been made to recapture them. Others have been voluntarily
set free by their masters, but in Pampanga the trade still goes
merrily on. Until recently Negritos have been peddled around the
country adjacent to Manila like carabaos or horses, and it is but a
short time since their purchasers have in some instances refused to
give them up, stoutly asseverating that they were their property. Now,
however, warned by experience, owners make no such claim, but advance
various more or less ingenious explanations of the fact that they
have Negritos in their possession and deny that they are slaves. Some
of them insist that it is a Negrito custom to kill orphan children,
and that they have taken orphans out of kindness in order to save
their lives. Patient investigation has failed to show the existence
of any such custom among the Negritos.
Perhaps the commonest procedure of all is to claim that Negrito slaves
are "adopted children" or "members of the family." The presumption
against a Filipino's taking into his family one of these little
woolly-headed, black, dwarf savages is strong. In no single case have
I been able to obtain evidence of real, legal adoption. The following
document illustrates the procedure which seems invariably to have
been followed:--
"On the 25th of December, 1912, I, the authorized curate of this
district, Lubao, Province of Pampanga, baptized solemnly, and put
on the blessed Oleos in this church in my charge on one Negrita
ten and eight years of age (18), and have given the name of Juana,
daughter of a father poor and unknown. The foster mother, Doña
Pia Vitug, married in this town received the charge as a parent
to care for the spiritual welfare and other obligations.
"I for the truth sign,
"Friar Pedro Diez."
(Girl given the name of Juana de Jesus Vitug.)
A document of this sort imposes no legal obligation whatever on the
owner of a slave, and makes no change in the status of the slave,
but merely serves as a basis for the claim that he or she "is treated
as a member of the family."
This is a cheap and easy method of securing a slave, and the child
thus "adopted" may be compelled to labour for a lifetime without
compensation, or turned over for a consideration to be similarly
"adopted" by some one else.
Other Filipinos who do not claim that their Negrito slaves are members
of their families find complete justification for purchasing them
in the allegation that they have taken them to Christianize, thus
preventing their going to hell!
In the provinces of Agusan and Surigao the slave-taking raids of the
Mandayas and Manobos are historic. In the more remote parts of these
provinces they continue from time to time up to the present day. While
one of them lies within the territory for which the commission has
been able to legislate, what shall we say of those who contend that
slavery does not exist in the Philippine Islands in the face of such
occurrences as have taken place there? The same query holds for
the sub-province of Ifugao in the Mountain Province and for Nueva
Vizcaya. The Ifugaos have been especially victimized. The following
kinds of servitude are recognized by them:--
Jim-bút. This is the name applied to real slaves. The Jim-bút becomes
an article of commerce and often changes owners several times before
reaching the country of the Ba-li-uon (Christians).
Nij-cóp. This is the name applied to children who have been really
adopted under a formal contract made with their parents or nearest
relatives in case the parents are dead. The Nij-cóp acquire certain
property rights from their new parents-by-adoption.
Baj-ál. This is the name given to orphan children who have been
formally taken in charge by some well-to-do Ifugao and who are unable
to support themselves. The Baj-ál is a tentative Nij-cóp, for if he
turns out to be bright and industrious, he may become a member of
the family and acquire property rights.
Ta-gá-la. This is the name applied to servants who receive regular
compensation.
It is a matter of common knowledge throughout the sub-province that
there are living to-day in Isabela hundreds of Ifugaos who have been
sold to Filipinos as slaves.
In Nueva Vizcaya it has been possible to deal with the more flagrant
cases since the passage by the commission of the law above referred
to, but the commission is powerless to pass a law effective in Isabela.
The holders of slaves now seek to evade the law by nominally hiring
them at a monthly salary which is not paid. The promulgation of Act
No. 2071 prohibiting and penalizing slavery enabled Lieutenant-Governor
Jeff D. Gallman of Ifugao to liberate some forty boys and girls held
by Filipinos in Nueva Vizcaya. In no single case, however, could it
be proved that the child had been sold. The persons who held them
testified in each instance that they were "hired servants."
When they learned of the provisions of the above-mentioned act they
were easily prevailed upon to pay "salaries" long overdue to their
"servants" and the latter were allowed to return to their homes.
It was found that some of the persons originally sold into slavery in
Nueva Vizcaya had run away from their masters and become vagabonds. Few
really wanted to return to their parents, whose language in many
cases they had almost forgotten.
I wish this were the worst, but the worst is yet to come. Not only
do the Filipinos buy, sell and hold the wild people as slaves, but
Filipino children have been kidnapped, or enticed from their homes, by
other Filipinos, and sold as slaves to their own kind. Young girls have
been sold outright to Chinese who purchased and kept them for immoral
purposes. They have been sold to panderers and keepers of houses of
prostitution and compelled to enter upon lives of shame. Filipino
children and young women have been sold to Chinese who have taken them
to China. God only knows what fate may have befallen them there. In
such cases the victims disappear from these islands, never to return.
Some slaves are well treated. Others are half starved, brutally beaten,
injured or even killed. The Manobos and Manadayas of Agusan and
Surigao, and the Bagobos of the Moro Province, have been accustomed
to sacrifice slaves to appease their heathen deities. The Manobos
on occasion even have their boys take lances and try the effect of
different thrusts on slaves tied to trees or posts.
Those who desire long lists of specific cases of slavery will find
them in my report. I think that I have here abundantly demonstrated
the fact that genuine slavery exists in the Philippine Islands. It
can never be successfully checked until there is a law of general
application throughout the archipelago penalizing the sale, barter,
or purchase of human beings. What reason has the Philippine Assembly
for refusing to pass the necessary act?
Without hesitation I assert that, apart from false and foolish pride
which makes the persons concerned unwilling to admit the fact of the
existence of slavery, their chief reason for objecting to this law
is that it would not only prohibit and penalize slavery, but would
prohibit and penalize peonage, which is so common and widespread that
it may properly be called general. Indeed, I have no hesitation in
asserting that it prevails in every municipality in the Philippine
Islands.
Slavery is a serious matter, but peonage is far more serious because
of the very much larger number of persons involved. It lies at the
root of the industrial system of the Philippines.
Much has been said relative to the probable attitude of large American
landowners toward Filipino labourers. Thus far their attitude, and
that of all other classes of Americans, has been infinitely better
than has that of the wealthy Filipinos themselves. The truth is that
peonage is repugnant to the average American. One of the complaints
persistently made against us by the Filipinos is that we have raised
the daily wage throughout the islands, and this is true. When I was
there in the Spanish days, it was possible, in many regions, to obtain
abundant labour at five cents per day with food, and ten cents with
food was the general rule. Now the same class of labour costs at least
twenty-five cents per day with food, and in some provinces it costs
fifty cents or more. It must be frankly admitted that Americans are
responsible for this sad condition of affairs! American landowners who
desire to pay their employees regularly a living daily wage encounter
difficulty in doing so, for the reason that the labourers have become
accustomed to the old system, the evils of which they know, and are
afraid of a new one, fearing that it may involve worse evils of which
they know nothing.
Incidentally, Americans have learned that their labourers are worth
more if well fed, and this is another grievance held against us in
certain quarters.
With many of the Filipinos it is a different story.
The rich and powerful man, commonly known as a cacique, encourages
the poor man to borrow money from him under such conditions that the
debt can never be repaid, and holds the debtor, and frequently the
members of his family as well, in debt servitude for life. One might
fill a score of volumes with records of cases and I can here do no
more than to select a few typical illustrations of the workings of
this vicious system.
The Filipinos are born gamblers. Gambling is their besetting sin. The
poor are usually glad to get the opportunity to borrow money, and will
do this on almost any terms, if necessary, in order to continue to
indulge in their pet vice. They are thoughtless about their ability
to repay loans, and thus readily fall into the power of the cacique
money-lenders, who thereafter use them as house servants or labourers,
under conditions such as to render their escape from debt-servitude
practically impossible.
Indeed, if they seek to escape, the caciques often threaten them with
the law, or actually invoke it against them, while if they endeavour
to homestead public land and thus better their condition, the caciques
only too often cause opposition to be made to their claims and keep
it up until they become discouraged.
The following facts have been furnished me by Hon. James A. Ostrand,
judge of the court of land registration.
"In 1907 a woman, whose surname, I think, is Quintos, asked me to
lend her twenty-five pesos with which to 'redeem' her daughter who
had been mortgaged for that amount to a Chinese merchant, whose
name at present I do not recall, but who had his establishment
on the ground floor of the house of Ubaldo Diaz in Lingayen. The
woman stated that the Chinaman was corrupting the morals of the
girl, and that this was the reason why she wanted to make the
redemption. I told her that under the circumstances no redemption
was necessary, but that I would see that the girl was allowed to
leave the Chinaman, who, on proper representations, was induced to
let the girl go home. She stayed with her mother for a couple of
weeks but, by adding P75 to the mortgage debt, the Chinaman got her
back and shortly before I left Lingayen I learned that the girl,
though scarcely fifteen years old, had given birth to a child."
"In 1907 a woman from the town of Balincaguin in Pangasinán
came to my office and stated that she, about six years before had
'mortgaged' [the terms 'salda' in Ilocano and 'sanla' in Pangasinán
are usually translated mortgage, but also imply pledge, as the
creditor generally takes possession of the mortgaged property] her
twelve-year old son for some twenty pesos to Don Cirilio Braganza,
the member of the second Philippine legislature for the district
in which I was then living; that her son had been working for
Braganza ever since, and that, according to her reckoning, the
debt had already been paid, but that Braganza had unjustly charged
the loss of a carabao to her son's account, thus adding P120,
if I remember correctly, to the debt. She further stated that
she had asked Braganza to release the boy, but that he refused
to do so. I informed her of the provisions of the Philippine Bill
in regard to involuntary servitude, and advised her that her son
was free to leave Mr. Braganza's services if he so desired. She
said that if the boy should leave, she was afraid something might
happen to him as Braganza was very influential in that locality. I
then gave her a note for Braganza requesting him to let the boy
go. Shortly afterwards Braganza came to me and gave me his version
of the case, stating that he had always treated the boy well,
and that the loss of the carabao was entirely due to the boy's
negligence, and that he, Braganza, would not consent to the boy's
leaving him before the carabao was paid for. At last reports the
boy was still with Braganza and may be there yet. I may add that
I believe Braganza told the truth, and that the boy was guilty
of negligence in connection with the loss of the carabao."
The net result in this case was that a boy was "mortgaged" for a
P20 debt and after six years the debt had very largely increased,
probably in part as a result of the carelessness of the boy.
In a letter to Judge Ostrand I had defined peonage as "the condition
of a debtor held by his creditor in a form of qualified servitude to
work out a debt." Of its prevalence the judge says:--
"While practising law in the Province of Pangasinán, during
the years 1905 to 1909, hardly a week passed but what cases of
involuntary servitude, as defined in the within communication,
came under my observation."
He also calls attention to the fact that interference with the system
does not increase one's popularity:--
"Interference by third parties in cases of involuntary servitude
is not looked upon with favour, and is generally considered highly
reprehensible. I remember, for instance, a case where Mr. Pedro
Sison [not the member of the Legislature], then a prominent
resident of Lingayen, was, as he himself regarded it, made the
victim of unwarranted interference. A woman bought a small parcel
of land from Mr. Sison, agreeing to work out the purchase price,
forty pesos. She worked with Mr. Sison for six years, at the
end of which period the debt had increased to over sixty pesos,
according to Mr. Sison's accounts. In the meantime the woman became
a Protestant, and Rev. E. S. Lyons, the Methodist missionary
in Pangasinán, advised her to leave Mr. Sison's service. Upon
her doing so Mr. Sison became very indignant not only at her,
but also at Mr. Lyons, and for some time thought seriously of
having the latter criminally prosecuted. He appeared to be very
much surprised when he found that there was no penal provision
covering Mr. Lyons's action. Mr. Sison was otherwise a very
estimable and good-natured man, but he never until his dying day,
which occurred a couple of years afterwards, got over his bitter
resentment toward Mr. Lyons."
Judge Ostrand summarizes the results of his observations as follows:--
"Nearly all the involuntary servitude cases of which I have any
knowledge have arisen from the practice of mortgaging half-grown
children. The sum advanced is usually some twenty or thirty
pesos. As the money seldom draws interest at a lower rate than
ten per cent a month, and the creditor furnishes the child food
and such clothing as it may need, its services are ordinarily
not considered worth more than the amount of the interest, and
the debt instead of being reduced usually increases as the years
pass. I venture to say that among the Filipinos in some sections
of the Islands the majority of house servants are obtained and
employed in this manner."
It would indeed seem that with interest at the rate of 120 per cent
per year and the creditor in a position to fix his own price for food,
clothing and other necessaries furnished his debtors while they were
trying to work out their debts, they would not be likely to succeed
in doing so!
In this connection I call attention to the fact that in the course
of the discussion recently caused by requests for the resignation
of certain public officials who had been loaning money at usurious
rates of interests, several of the native papers took the attitude
that 18 per cent per year was a very moderate rate of interest.
If the unfortunate peon finally rebels, the rich cacique often
invokes the law against him by having him prosecuted on some false
criminal charge.
In this connection the following letter is of interest:--
"Philippine Constabulary,
"Office of the Senior Inspector,
"Pampanga, San Fernando, September 26, 1912.
"The Superintendent, Information Division, P. C.,
"Manila, P. I.
"(Thru' Adjutant, District of Central Luzón.)
"Sir: Reference to the prosecution of Maria Guzman before the
Justice of the Peace of Apalit for 'Infraction of Law 2098'
(your file No. 8634-75) I have the honour to attach copy of
decision in the case, and remarks:--
"About three (3) years ago Simeon de los Reyes, by and with the
consent of his wife Maria Guzman, borrowed and signed receipt
for fifty pesos (P50) to Maria Santos of Apalit, contracting that
his wife work out the debt moulding earthen jars--that for every
hundred jars made Maria Guzman received P1, 25 centavos of which
was to go on the debt. The woman states she could make about fifty
jars per week, so that her actual wages were 50 centavos per week,
or $.005 per jar. This without board, as the woman states that
any money she got for food was charged on original debt.
"By the first part of this year the debt had 'decreased' to P70,
when another receipt for that amount was signed by the husband,
de los Reyes, and the old receipt for P50 destroyed. In the month
of August ultimo the Santos woman refused to advance Maria Guzman
more money, so Maria Guzman left and joined her husband, who was
working in Manila. The debt at time of trial amounted to P79 and
a fraction.
"Warrants of this nature are being continually sent from Pampanga,
either by messenger or mail, direct to the Superintendent
Information Division, without passing through my hands. The reason
is evident.
"It is respectfully requested that in the future all warrants
reaching your office in this way be referred back to me before
execution.
"Very respectfully,
(Signed) "L. T. Rohrer,
"Senior Inspector."
This woman, if she succeeded in making fifty earthen jars per week,
received wages amounting to twenty-five cents against which her
creditor charged her food and doubtless also her clothing. In other
words, she was in effect charged for the privilege of making fifty
jars per week for her master. The interest on her debt was meanwhile
piling up while the principal steadily increased, and when she grew
weary of her hopeless task and ran away, her taskmaster prosecuted her.
The following letter presents a typical case of peonage:
"Rosales,
"March 26, 1912.
"Chief of the Secret Service Dept., Manila:
"Dear Sir: On behalf of Garegorio Almario a young girl residing
at my house I write to ask you if you cannot have this matter
attended to.
"Six years ago a man named Tomas Almario, living at present
in Rosales, borrowed some money (twenty pesos only). This
man was unable to repay this money so he sold this girl named
Inocencia Almario to a Mr. Galban. I think he is the President of
Bautista. Her sister has been to Bautista to take this girl away
but she has been rebuked by these people in my presence. They state
she owes P60 the extra P40 being interest on the P20 borrowed 6
years ago. They have got this girl and another girl working as
slaves and to-day I heard that the girl escaped in a carromatta
but they sent an automobile after her and took her into Bautista
beating her all the way. In the interest of justice I hope you
will have this girl released and hand her over to her sister in
my house here out of the hands of those wretches. I also found
out that this girl is being sent from place to place amongst
men who take girls to cover debts. If you send a man here to
Rosales I have the proof and will show you where this girl is
and will get the evidence against these people. I understand that
the President of Bautista is the man who is at the bottom of the
whole affair. I hope you will put a stop to this slavery. I have
the man here who owes the money and sold the two girls to this
man. I have the sister here; also the other relatives to prove
that this girl has worked as a slave for 6 years to cover a debt
of twenty pesos and now they want 60 before they will release
her. Please release my sister and oblige
"Yours truly,
"+ Garegorio Almario.
Witness: (Signed) "W. A. Cole.
"Address Garegorio Almario,
"c/o W. A. Cole, Rosales, Pang."
I have not made the slightest effort to get the peonage records of
Philippine assemblymen, but have taken cases as they came, yet three
of the limited number here discussed concern members or ex-members
of the assembly. Is it any wonder that that body refuses to consider
a law prohibiting and penalizing peonage?
My investigation of this matter has developed some interesting phases
of human nature. Knowing the certain unpopularity which would result
from telling the truth, not a few persons who might have given
valuable testimony refused to tell what they knew, or even denied
that they knew anything. Others made written statements which I was
unable to use, as they insisted that their names be withheld, and
I wanted testimony only from witnesses who had the courage of their
convictions. Fortunately there was no lack of people unafraid to tell
the truth. Among witnesses to the existence of chattel slavery were
army officers, constabulary officers, the Manila chief of police and
many men of the police force of that city, judges, Catholic priests,
the mother superior of a convent, the insular auditor and a number
of his deputies, provincial governors, both Filipino and American,
provincial treasurers, the director of education, school teachers,
an ethnologist, newspaper men, business men and women both English and
American. I accepted only written and signed statements. The long list
of cases in my official report was a sample list, not an exhaustive
one. I stand ready to furnish specific instances of chattel slavery,
ad nauseam, giving names of slaves, their vendors and purchasers,
prices paid and dates of transactions. I hold more than a thousand
typewritten pages of evidence, and it continued to come in up to the
day of my departure from Manila.
The attitude of the Filipino politicians toward this great mass
of data and the witnesses who furnished it is a most interesting
study, from which may be deduced logical conclusions of far-reaching
importance. Let us examine it.
In the issue of the Boston Herald for June 24, 1912, Sr. Quezon,
resident delegate from the Philippines to Congress, published an
article entitled "The Filipinos as Legislators," [74] attacking
Governor-General Forbes for referring in a public speech to the
attitude of the assembly on the slavery question. I will quote and
comment on its essential statements:--
"The fact that the Assembly has refused to approve of the bill
referred to by Governor Forbes, bespeaks the legislative ability
of our Assemblymen, while, on the other hand, the passage by the
Commission of said bill indicates either the incompetency or the
negligence of the Commissioners. Do we have slavery and compulsory
service in the Philippines or not? If we do not, the bill to
abolish it is unnecessary. If we do, it is also unnecessary,
because the Act passed by Congress, creating the present Philippine
Government, which serves as our constitution, already prohibits
slavery and compulsory service, and, therefore, no act of the
Philippine Legislature is needed to declare it illegal."
This is a puerile quibble. The act referred to prohibits slavery,
but does not penalize it.
"If there is slavery and compulsory service in the Philippines,
the Governor-General as the Chief Executive, and the members of
the Philippine Commission, who, with the Governor-General, compose
the executive department of the Islands, are all of them guilty in
not enforcing and executing the constitution of the Archipelago."
False. The Supreme Court of the Philippines has held that the
"constitution" here referred to is non-enforceable without exactly
such suppletory legislation as the commission passed and the assembly
tabled.
"If there is anything in the Philippines akin to slavery or
compulsory service, it can not be found in the provinces to which
the legislative jurisdiction of the Assembly extends."
Utterly false.
"Should there be such a thing in the territories inhabited by
the few non-Christian Filipinos, which are under the exclusive
control of the Philippine Commission, I am sure the slaveholders
can only be the Government officials, who are appointed by the
Secretary of the Interior, the Honourable Dean C. Worcester, the
head of the executive department in charge of said territories."
False and absurd. The larger majority of existing slaves are held by
Christian Filipinos. Not a single official in the territory in question
was subject to appointment or removal by me. Not one has ever owned a
slave, to my knowledge. This statement illustrates Quezon's disregard
for the truth.
"It will not be out of place to indicate here the reason wherefor
the Philippine Commission has passed the bill alluded to by
Governor Forbes. The members of the Philippine Commission are
sternly opposed to Philippine independence. Moreover, they are
opposed to allowing the Filipino people to have a legislature
wholly constituted of natives for reasons too apparent to be
mentioned. One of their everyday arguments is 'that the premature
withdrawal of the United States would result in the establishment
of an oligarchy composed of small and favoured ruling classes
who would oppress the masses.'
"The passage by the Philippine Commission of the anti-slavery
bill placed the Philippine Assembly in a very awkward position
(as it was perhaps intended to do); to concur in the passage of
the bill was to admit that there is such a thing as slavery and
compulsory service in the Philippines, which is not a fact. To
reject the bill would be construed as indicating that the members
of the Assembly were advocates of slavery. The moral courage of
our Assemblymen was shown when they took the former course, that
of truth. The members of the Commission denounce the attitude of
their colegislators as proof of lack of sympathy for the masses
of the people."
False, interesting, and important. There were four Filipino members of
the commission at this time, all of whom were in favour of ultimate
independence, and one of whom was a leading advocate of immediate
independence. All voted for the anti-slavery laws which the assembly
refused to pass.
The Filipinos were not wholly to blame for the existence of slavery at
the time of the American occupation, but the politicians are unable to
grasp the fact that the way to deal with a cancer is to cut it out,
not to deny its existence, and by their refusal to legislate have
now made themselves fully responsible for the continued existence
of slavery and peonage in the regularly organized provinces of the
Philippines. The Filipino newspapers have even gone so far as to
claim that there could be no slavery until a law defined it, hence
to enact such a law would create slavery.
Resident Commissioners Earnshaw and Quezon were prompt and emphatic in
their denials of the existence of slavery when Senator Borah read in
the Senate Chamber my letter to Dr. Stillman. Sr. Earnshaw did not know
any better. Sr. Quezon claims to know the facts. He himself has said:--
"As a Filipino familiar with the facts in the case, I do not
hesitate to qualify the letter of Secretary Worcester as being
at once false and slanderous. It is false, because there does not
exist slavery in the Philippines, or, at least, in that part of the
country subject to the authority of the Philippine Assembly. It
is slanderous because it presents the Philippine Assembly, by
innuendo, if not openly, as a body which countenances slavery."
He was unquestionably familiar with the facts, or many of them. Did he
know of the report of the Filipino Governor Dichoso, describing slavery
in Isabela; of that of the Filipino Governor Corrales, describing
slavery in Misamis; of that of the Filipino Governor Pimentel,
describing the sale of Filipino children into slavery to Chinese;
[75] of that of the American Governor George Curry, describing slavery
in Isabela; [76] of that of the American Governor Knight, describing
slavery in Nueva Vizcaya; [77] of that of the Filipino Governor Sanz,
[78] describing the enticing from their homes of numerous Filipino
children of Romblón and the disposal of them as peons or slaves; of the
reports of army, constabulary and police officers; and of the records
of courts on slavery and peonage? Under the circumstances explanation
or retraction would seem to be in order, but we have had from him only
two more puerile quibbles. In a published statement he has said that
slavery does not exist as an institution in the Philippines. Who ever
said it did? It exists there as a demonstrated fact, and it ought to
be made a crime. In another published statement, [79] Quezon says:--
"The allegation is a most serious one and we think it desirable
to meet the charge directly without hesitation by asserting that
it is unqualifiedly false and that the accusations made in the
report are not only not sustained, but cannot be sustained by
any evidence tending to show that such a 'system' exists."
The placing in quotation marks of a word not used by me fairly
illustrates one of the typical methods of the Filipino politician,
and for this reason alone I refer to it and to the following statements
from the same editorial, which will serve a similar purpose:--
"There is a very serious aspect of this report of Commissioner
Worcester's. If the system he speaks of exists and is known to
him--indeed has been known to him for a long time--why did he
never correct it? He says that the Philippine Assembly has blocked
action. The truth is that he and his fellows had absolute power
long before the Philippine Assembly ever came into existence.
"... Mr. Worcester now practically admits that he knew of similar
conditions elsewhere than among the Moros, but that he never had
anything to say about them and allowed them to go on until, it
would seem, he thought that he could make some political capital
out of a controversy with the Philippine Assembly regarding
anti-slavery legislation."
It did not lie in my power to correct it. On the Philippine
Commission rests the full responsibility for failure to enact
anti-slavery legislation from the time when it first learned of
the existence of this crime among the Filipinos until it passed its
first act prohibiting and penalizing it on April 29, 1909. As I have
already shown, the matter was dealt with, in 1903, by directing the
inclusion of proper legislation in a proposed new Penal Code never
completed. Valuable years were then lost in testing the adequacy of
existing law, and when it proved inadequate further time was, in my
opinion, needlessly wasted in drafting the necessary act. To this
extent, and to this extent only, the commission shares responsibility
for existing conditions. Since April 29, 1909, that responsibility
has rested on the assembly alone.
I have given two of the reasons for its refusal to act. There is
another, but I should have hesitated to give it, as it would have
been hard to prove, had not Speaker Osmeña furnished the necessary
evidence. He is commonly considered to be the leading Filipino
statesman of the day, so special importance attaches to his utterances
and he, if any one, can speak with authority concerning the attitude
of the assembly. The ominous rumble from the United States which
reached these distant shores led him to give out a newspaper interview
explaining the inactivity of that body. He said:--
"Never has Mr. Worcester attempted to furnish us with the facts
which he has placed before Congress. The bill itself was sent to
the Assembly for action but on account of the unfriendliness of the
members for the secretary of the interior and the lack of sympathy
between the Assembly and him, it was not given the consideration
that it would have received if Mr. Worcester had at the same time
sent us the facts which he has sent on to the United States.
"Mr. Worcester as the secretary of the interior, and not as
commissioner was in duty bound to furnish the Assembly with the
facts that he claims to have found. It is the duty of all of
the administrative officers of the government to enlighten the
legislature and to furnish it with information gained officially
by them. As a matter of fact, Mr. Worcester showed that he was
not anxious for the Assembly to consider the matter by never once
even mentioning the subject to me, as is customary with other
matters for legislation which the secretaries have wished taken
up by the Assembly."
If this were not so pathetic it would be very, very funny. The assembly
is now made up of 81 Filipino delegates representing 34 provinces. An
unfeeling American secretary of the interior, residing at Manila,
is charged with having failed to inform them of what was going on
under their very noses. All information deemed by the commission
necessary to justify legislation was transmitted by me to that body
when we lost our slavery case in the Supreme Court.
Never during all the years that this matter has been pending has there
been the slightest suggestion that the assembly desired to receive
information concerning it. If its members were to tell the half of
what they themselves know about slavery and peonage the facts which
I have been able to gather would fade into insignificance, but this
is not the important thing in this interview.
The important thing is that dislike of the person who happened to
introduce in the commission a bill prohibiting slavery and peonage
in the Philippines is considered a valid reason for the refusal of
the assembly to consider it during four successive years.
Shall thousands of suffering human beings be allowed to go on sweating
blood for such a reason?
It is my earnest hope that as a result of the publicity which has
now been given this matter there will be speedy action, either by
the Philippine Legislature or by the Congress of the United States.
I hope that every right-minded person who reads these lines will insist
that we have done with concealment of the truth and suppression of
the facts; have done with boggling over hurting the feelings of the
Filipino people; and will demand that those who have power to end the
disgraceful conditions which now exist in the islands shall promptly
and effectively exercise it.
The native press has naturally bitterly opposed any investigation of
the truth or falsity of my statements. The following extract from a
recent editorial is typical of its attitude:--
"Slavery is not slavery unless it has the characteristics
of frequency and notoriousness. Is there here, or has there
ever been, at least since Christian civilization has reigned,
anything that resembles it? Where is, or who has seen previous to
now, such characteristic slavery? Mr. Worcester? Let him point
it out, let him give a detailed account of it, let him define
it. What will you bet that he will not do so? How is he going
to do it if it does not exist! It was enough for him to say:
"There is slavery in the Philippines" for men, press, government
officials and every stripe of public elements in America to admit
the possibility of the affirmation and even an investigation of
its likelihood to be ordered.
"That is simply absurd. The mere investigation is an offense. The
proof must come solely from, and must be demanded solely of, him
who imputes the charge. If he does not demonstrate it, if he does
not make it patent, further investigation is not needed. All that
there was to investigate is investigated: it is that he has lied."
Nevertheless aroused public sentiment in the United States has forced
action here. Governor-General Harrison called the matter to the
attention of the assembly in his first speech, and that body is now
[80] investigating it. Unfortunately there is grave reason to doubt
its good faith.
It allowed me to leave Manila without the faintest suggestion that
it desired to hear me, and then had the governor-general cable me an
invitation to testify and to assist in the investigation when I was
halfway home and could not possibly return.
Assemblyman Sandoval, defending in the public press a friend charged
with buying a Tagbanua slave who had been thrice sold, says that
the several purchasers did not buy the unfortunate man but bought
his debt. A debt is not ordinarily purchased for itself and it is
admitted that in this instance the man went with it.
The Filipino politicians have hardly approached this matter in a
judicial spirit, and the timid and the politic, who refused to give
me the information they might have furnished, had some reason for
their fears.
The removal of Judge Ostrand and Director of Education Crone, who gave
valuable testimony, was loudly demanded on the ground that they were
"traducers of the Filipino people."
The people were urged to "get together" and disprove my statements.
I have been denounced as an enemy of "the Filipino people."
It has been claimed:--
That my charges were false, and without foundation.
That, if they were true, I myself was to blame for the continued
existence of slavery.
That I published my report when I did in order to hold my position.
That I published it when I did in anger because I had lost my position.
That I had been removed because I published it.
In just one instance, so far as I know, has a Filipino considered
the possibility that the motive which actuated me was a desire to
help many thousands of unfortunate human beings.
Good old Arcadio del Rosario, at one time insurgent governor of
Benguet, who has a kindly feeling for the wild-men and was glad to
note certain immediate results which followed the publication of
my report, has said: "Would that Sr. Osmeña [81] might have had the
glory of doing what Sr. Worcester has done."
What is needed to end slavery and peonage is congressional legislation
enforced by Americans.
Without hesitation I assert that their existence in the Philippine
Islands is the greatest single problem which there confronts
the government of the United States, in its effort to build up a
respectable and responsible electorate and establish representative
government.
Is it reasonable to suppose that the hand which to-day crushes down the
Filipino servant, the Filipino labourer, and the wild-man of the hills,
will to-morrow raise them up and point them on the way to freedom?