4 c\ YYl - 
 
 Pac.^. I®, 
 
 n ' 
 
 r 
 
 THE PROBLEM OF DEMOCRATIC 
 GOVERNMENT IN THE PHILIP- 
 PINES— ITS SALIENT 
 ASPECTS 
 
 LECTURE DELIVERED BY THE HON. SERGI O OSM ENA. 
 PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE PHILIPPINE 
 SENATE AND SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE OF 
 THE PHILIPPINE LEGISLATURE. BE- 
 FORE THE UNIVERSITY OF 
 MICHIGAN. ANN ARBOR. 
 
 DECEMBER 14. 1925 
 
 
 PHILIPPINE PRESS BUREAU 
 905 Investment Building 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
THE PROBLEM OF DEMOCRATIC GOV- 
 ERNMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES: 
 
 ITS SALIENT ASPECTS 
 
 (Lecture delivered by the Hon. Sergio Osmena, president pro tempore 
 of the Philippine Senate, and .special representative of the 
 Philippine Legislature, before the University of 
 Michigan, Ann Arbor, December 14, 1925.) 
 
 The continued occupation of the Philippines by the United States after 
 the termination of the -war with Spain could not be easily justified before 
 the conscience of this great Republic. Dedicated to liberty from the very 
 first moments of its existence it has consecrated its best efforts to the 
 upholding of the right of nations to trace out for themselves their own 
 destiny. To vindicate this right and in pursuance of humanitarian pur- 
 poses war was declared, a war which placed Cuban territory under the 
 protection of the Stars and Stripes. And because America emerged tri- 
 umphant Cuba obtained her independence. 
 
 When on the signing of the treaty of peace which disposed of not only 
 the fate of Cuba, but also that of other Spanish possessions, America de- 
 cided to remain in the Philippines, the moral justification which she gave 
 to the world was the desire to liberate the Filipinos from misgovemment 
 and oppression, and to secure to them the privileges of self-government. 
 According to the testimony of Doctor Schurman, the chairman of the first 
 commission sent to the Philippines, the supreme consideration which moved 
 President McKinley, and which so touched the fibers of sentiment of Amer- 
 ican hearts as to induce them to give active support to his administration 
 was not selfish but humanitarian: “* * * it was not the vanity of 
 
 self-aggrandizement; it was not the greed of power and dominion; no, no; 
 not these, but altruism, caring for the happiness of others, philanthropy 
 relieving the Filipinos of oppression and conferring on them the blessings 
 of liberty.” 1 
 
 The immediate problem which the United States had to face when she 
 decided to remain in the Islands was the establishment of a democratic 
 government in which the Filipinos would have the greatest participation 
 possible. As the Schurman Commission stated in a proclamation, “The 
 most ample liberty of self-government will be granted to the Filipino peo- 
 ple which is reconcilable with the maintenance of a wise, just, stable, ef- 
 fective, and economical administration of public affairs and compatible with 
 the sovereign and international rights and obligations of the United 
 States.” 1 Using the words of the statesman mainly responsible for Amer- 
 ican occupation of our country, the authority of the United States has been 
 
 1 J. G. Schurman, “Philippine Affairs.’’ 
 
 7 Proclamation of April 4, 1899, Report of the Phil. Commission (1900), Vol. 1. 
 
 s 
 
4 
 
 established in the Philippines “not to exploit but to develop, to civilize, to 
 educate, to train in the science of self-government.” * 1 The American people 
 were to be the bearers “of the richest blessings of a liberating rather than 
 a conquering nation,” and it was their purpose “to make them [the Filipino 
 people] whom Providence has brought within our jurisdiction feel that it 
 is their liberty and not our power, their welfare and not our gain we are 
 seeking to enhance.” 2 These declarations were not only confirmed but 
 strengthened by the successors of President McKinley and, above all, by 
 the congressional enactment which gave to the Filipinos an autonomous 
 government as preliminary to complete independence. 
 
 Despite these declarations of altruistic purposes, the establishment of 
 the new regime could not be effected without serious resistance. In the 
 midst of war the government necessarily had to be of a military character, 
 in which executive, legislative, and judicial powers were concentrated in 
 one head, although the exercise of his functions could, if he so desired, be 
 delegated to different persons or entities. It is to the credit of the Amer- 
 ican military commanders of the time that it is possible to say of them 
 that they considered extremely dangerous a government of concentrated 
 powers without the intervention of the people and that they established, 
 even in the midst of armed resistance, the foundations of civil institutions. 
 Filipinos were called upon to make recommendations regarding a system 
 of municipal government which would be popular and eminently democratic. 
 This system was immediately instituted in the towns occupied by American 
 military forces. In the judicial branch, in which many Filipinos had dis- 
 tinguished themselves during Spanish rule, native judges and magistrates 
 were appointed. The best known native jurist was placed at the head of 
 our highest tribunal of justice. The public schools, the basis of order and 
 progress, also received immediate attention. The Filipinos will never for- 
 get the inspiring spectacle of American soldiers leaving their guns and, as 
 emissaries of peace and good will, with book in hand, repairing to the public 
 schools to teach Filipino children the principles of free citizenship. Thus, 
 in the earliest period of the military regime, when it would have been easy 
 to find legalistic grounds for governing the Filipinos by pure force, there 
 was established, as far as possible, the milder sway of civil government. 
 Instead of excluding the natives from the government, against which the 
 people were still in open rebellion, the representatives of the United States 
 considered it a duty to enlist their cooperation and to listen to their counsel. 
 
 This cooperation became more manifest after the inauguration of civil 
 government in July, 1901. Native resistance having been weakened by 
 the fall of the government of the Philippine Republic, and the surrender 
 of many native military chieftains, President McKinley sent to the Philip- 
 pines a second commission under the presidency of Mr. Taft to exercise 
 civil powers — powers exercised up to then by the military commander — 
 and to offer to the Filipino people a practical illustration of the kind of 
 government they would have under American sovereignty once peace and 
 tranquility had been secured. In his instructions to this commission Presi- 
 dent McKinley expressly prescribed, with reference to popular participa- 
 tion in the government, “that in all cases the municipal officers who ad- 
 minister the local affairs are to be selected by the people, and that when- 
 
 1 President McKinley’s Message to Congress. 1899. 
 
 1 Instructions to the first Philippine Commission, Jan. 20. 1899. 
 
6 
 
 ever officers of more extended jurisdiction are to be selected in any way 
 natives of the Philippine Islands are to be preferred, and if they can 
 be found competent and willing to perform the duties they are to receive 
 the offices in preference to others.” 1 
 
 Following these instructions, the Taft Commission organized the Philip- 
 pine Government by the enactment of a municipal code in which local 
 autonomy was granted to the natives, and of a provincial code by which 
 considerable popular participation was granted in the government of the 
 provinces; by the organization of a civil service in which, under equal cir- 
 cumstances, the natives, it was declared, would be given preference over 
 Americans; by the establishment of different offices charged with govern- 
 mental activities, such as the constabulary, public works, sanitation, and 
 the insular treasury; and, finally, by the creation of four executive de- 
 partments. In the establishment of local governments the commission 
 followed, as far as possible, the same administrative divisions which had 
 been in existence since ancient times. The “Barangay,” a primary unit 
 of local government which antedated the Spanish conquest and which the 
 Spaniards reoognized, was in essence equally respected. 
 
 One year after the Taft Commission had entered upon the exercise of 
 its legislative labors, three Filipinos of the conservative group were ap- 
 pointed to its membership in order to give representation to the natives. 
 It was not then possible to appoint members of the radical elements be- 
 cause these were either still in open rebellion or unwilling to accept office. 
 But the first three Filipinos in the commission undoubtedly served public 
 interest to the best of their ability under those circumstances and acted 
 as advisers of the Governor General and the commission in many adminis- 
 trative matters and especially those referring to the appointment of 
 Filipinos to governmental positions. 
 
 The government established at that time, although inspired by North 
 American constitutional principles, was not strictly the American type in 
 the sense that it was an exact copy of the Federal Government or of the 
 government of any of the States in the Union. For example, in the Fed- 
 eral Government or in that of the States the Chief Executive as well as 
 the members of the legislature are elected by the people, while in the 
 Philippine Government of that period such officials were appointed by the 
 President of the United States. In the Federal Government and in that of 
 the States members of the legislature do not occupy executive positions, 
 while in the Philippines not only was that not the case but there was ex- 
 press arrangement that the civil governor, who was the chief executive, 
 and the departmental secretaries who formed his cabinet were to be at the 
 same time president and members of the legislative commission. This 
 system, recommended by the Schurman Commission, was similar to that 
 adopted by Congress for organization of the successive Territories of 
 the Union. Its immediate model was the legislation enacted for Louisiana 
 at the time of Jefferson. Its more remote source was the colonial type 
 which existed previous to the Revolution. It is well to note the fact that 
 in the government headed by Mr. Taft, which President Roosevelt char- 
 acterized in a message to Congress as a constitutional government, what 
 the defenders of the presidential system termed the complete separation 
 of powers did not exist, as it did not in the form of government first ap- 
 
 1 Instructions to the Second Philippine Commission, April 7, 1900. 
 
6 
 
 plied to American Continental Territories or during the colonial period. 
 Neither did the separation of powers obtain in the English Government 
 at the time of Blackstone, whose works influenced to no small degree the 
 fathers of the American Constitution. And the experience of this country 
 for a century and a half has shown the necessity of discovering methods 
 for securing cooperation between the executive and legislative branches 
 of the Government. Leaving aside the question whether or not the sepa- 
 ration of powers is really characteristic of the American constitutional 
 system, it is certain that it was never applied in the Philippines as it has 
 been in the United States. 
 
 The truth is that it was never thought of the United States in establish- 
 ing her authority over the Philippines to Americanize the Filipino people 
 or their institutions. With all their defects, and there is no civilization or 
 human institution without them, there existed in the Philippines on the 
 arrival of the Americans a Christian and progressive civilization. Her 
 inhabitants had been accustomed for centuries to a government of law 
 and order. Americans did not propose to destroy that civilization, but to 
 preserve and improve it. Schurman, the precursor of civil government, 
 the American who made a thorough investigation of the islands and on 
 whose reports America’s policy was based in large part, rejected as im- 
 possible the idea of Americanizing them. 1 The primordial thought was to 
 organize a native government which would not necessarily be a copy of 
 the American constitutional system. Let us recall what President McKinley 
 said to the second commission. “In all the forms of government, in the 
 administrative provisions which they are authorized to prescribe, the com- 
 mission should bear in mind that the government which they are estab- 
 lishing is designed not for our satisfaction or for the expression of our 
 theoretical views, but for the happiness, peace, and prosperity of the people 
 of the Philippine Islands, and the measures adopted should be made to 
 conform to their customs, their habits, and even their prejudices to the 
 fullest extent consistent with the accomplishment of the indispensable 
 requisites of just and effective government.” 1 
 
 In the discharge of his official duties, as well as in his dealings with the 
 Filipinos, Governor Taft, and the same may be said of those who suc- 
 ceeded him in office, insisted emphatically that the government which had 
 been established was for the benefit of the P’ilipinos, and that as they dem- 
 onstrated ability to exercise political power they would be given increasing 
 participation in the government. 
 
 The famous doctrine, “The Philippines are for the Filipinos,” which 
 characterized the Taft administration, was insistently and openly pro- 
 claimed in spite of the opposition of the great majority of Americans in 
 the Philippines. These, quite a number of whom had come with the ex- 
 peditionary troops, asked for a “strong” government, which would aim 
 principally at the prosperity of American interests in the Philippines. 
 Taft disregarded the severe criticisms of his fellow countrymen and con- 
 tinued his work with vigor, defending his doctrine, in the realization of 
 which, according to him, “was involved the honor of the United States.” * 
 
 The government by the Commission continued until October, 1907, the 
 date of the inauguration of the first elective national assembly under 
 
 1 J. G. Schurman, ‘‘Philippine Affairs.” 
 
 ’ Instructions to the Becond Philippine Commission, April 7, 1900. 
 
 ' W. H. Taft. ‘‘The Duty of Americans in the Philippines,” December, 1903. 
 
7 
 
 American rule, and from that time the national lawmaking body was com- 
 posed of two chambers, the Commission or the upper house, and the As- 
 sembly or the lower house. The establishment of the Assembly was a 
 logical and decisive step in the development of popular government. Until 
 then the Filipino people did not have real representation in the Legisla- 
 ture, because although there were three Filipinos in the Commission, these 
 did not hold office by the suffrage of the people, but by appointment from 
 the authorities in Washington. Thereafter there was participation by the 
 representatives of the people in the preparation and approval of the laws, 
 and those representatives constituted in law a power equal to the Com- 
 mission, at least in the affairs concerning the Christian population of the 
 islands. 
 
 The concession of a legislative assembly was not brought about with- 
 out effort. During and after the American-Philippine conflict many ac- 
 cusations were launched against the leaders of the Philippine Republic 
 and against the Filipino people. None had more serious results than that 
 which was repeated for years against the national unity of the Filipino 
 people. This accusation which never had any foundation in fact created 
 a profound impression among American governmental authorities and made 
 congressional approval of the idea of an elective assembly difficult to ob- 
 tain. But finally, there was incorporated in the law through the efforts of 
 Representative Cooper, chairman of the Committee on Insular Affairs of 
 the House of Representatives, the provision recommended by Mr. Taft. 
 The Assembly was established during the administration of President 
 Roosevelt, who attached great importance to this step. These were his 
 words: “We are endeavoring to develop the natives themselves so that 
 they shall take an ever-increasing share in the Government and as far 
 as is prudent we are already admitting their representatives to a govern- 
 mental equality with our own. If they show that they are capable of 
 taking a sane and efficient part in the actual work of the Government, 
 they can rest assured that a full and increasing measure of recognition 
 will be given them.’' 1 
 
 The Assembly was organized in 40 minutes. Although it adopted sub- 
 stantially the rules of the House of Representatives of the Fifty-ninth 
 Congress, the changes introduced from the very beginning foreshadowed 
 some of its tendencies. There was then being formed in the United States 
 that opposition which later produced an uprising against the system that 
 permitted the Speaker to exercise control over the affairs of the House 
 through the chairmanship of the Committee on Rules, which he occupied. 
 From the first day of the Philippine Assembly the Speaker never presided 
 over the Rules Committee. On the contrary, the conduct of business was 
 given to a committee under the chairmanship of another member of the 
 Assembly. 
 
 In the rules of the House of Representatives of the Fifty-ninth Con- 
 gress there were various committees which dealt with appropriations and 
 one Committee on Ways and Means. In the rules of the Philippine As- 
 sembly provision was made for one appropriations committee composed 
 of 25 members, most of whom were chairmen of other committees. The 
 work of the Philippine Assembly during its inaugural session was received 
 
 Message of President Roosevelt to Congress, December 6, 1904. 
 
8 
 
 by the American Government with satisfaction. The Governor General 
 congratulated the legislature in the following terms: 
 
 “The work which has been done by the Philippine Assembly at its 
 inaugural, first, and special sessions, of the first legislature has exceeded 
 all expectations, and it must be eminently gratifying to the Assembly and 
 the people whom they represent that there has been such a happy realiza- 
 tion of all that has been expected of them, those constituting the first 
 representative legislative body that has ever existed in the Philippines.” 1 
 
 Mr. Taft, then Secretary of War, who was present at the inauguration 
 of the Assembly, returned to the United States with the report (Special 
 Report to the President of the United States) that that body was func- 
 tioning normally. President Roosevelt transmitted to Congress this re- 
 port of the Secretary of War in which a thorough review was made of 
 conditions in the Philippines and the policy followed by the United States. 
 In a subsequent message to that body, he expressed himself in this fashion: 
 “Hitherto this Philippine Legislature has acted with moderation and self- 
 restraint * * * the Filipino people with their officials are therefore 
 
 making real steps in the direction of self-government. I hope and believe 
 that those steps mark the beginning of a course which will continue until 
 the Filipinos become fit to decide for themselves whether they desire to 
 be an independent nation.” 1 
 
 Contrary to the prognostications of certain prophets who had antici- 
 pated all kinds of disaster for the government and for the country by 
 the establishment of the Assembly, which they considered premature, the 
 normal progress of the government continued, relations between the Com- 
 mission and the Assembly, on one side, and these two chambers and the 
 executive, on the other, were harmonious, and the public business obtained 
 prompt and appropriate consideration. This was due mainly to the full 
 comprehension by the Filipinos of their public responsibility and the role 
 which they were to play in the government of their country; but a great 
 contributory factor toward this satisfactory result during the period of the 
 Assembly was the circumstance that there were placed at the head of the 
 government able men with open minds and liberal sentiments, men, in 
 short, who immediately comprehended that their duty was to aid the 
 Assembly in order that the latter could function freely, with dispatch, 
 with all the attributes and responsibilities of a coordinate branch of the 
 Legislature. It would have been easy for them and for the Commission 
 to place difficulties in the way of the Assembly. A rupture with the latter 
 would not have obstructed the routine functioning of the government. 
 But they did not do so. The disagreements that occurred over appropri- 
 ations and other matters did not break the amicable relations which ex- 
 isted between the two chambers. 
 
 Responding to this course of action, the Assembly cooperated as far as 
 possible with the Commission and the Governor General, and was an effi- 
 cient instrument in the development of self-government in the Philippines 
 and the adoption of progressive legislation. The first law enacted was an 
 appropriation of PI, 000, 000 for the construction of rural primary school 
 buildings — a measure which effectively silenced those who had prophesied 
 destructive policies on the part of the Assembly. 
 
 * Message of Governor General James F. Smith to the Assembly. 
 2 Message of President Roosevelt to Congress, 1908. 
 
9 
 
 The first allotments of funds for inter-provincial roads were made, 
 thereby establishing what is popularly termed the “Politica de Carreteras” 
 (good roads policy). Our first state university of the American type was 
 established. And, unfolding a comprehensive plan of progressive legis- 
 lation, there was undertaken the reform of old and enactment of new laws 
 of economic, social, or administrative character, such as those referring to 
 municipal or provincial governments, sanitation, public order, normal and 
 higher schools, land registration, production, economics and finance, and 
 relating to conciliation of capital and labor. 
 
 The success of the Assembly justified in the eyes of the American Gov- 
 ernment the next step forward made by President Wilson 1 in 1913 in giv- 
 ing the Filipinos control of the Commission, by which was realized the 
 plan of P’ilipinization announced previously by President McKinley and 
 later confirmed by President Roosevelt, when he spoke of transforming 
 the Philippine Government as soon as possible from a government of 
 Americans aided by P'ilipinos to a government of Filipinos aided by Amer- 
 icans. With a native majority in both houses of the Legislature, political 
 control of the government passed into the hands of the Filipino people. It 
 is true that there was still the Governor General, an official appointed by 
 the United States, who exercised control over the executive departments, 
 but the power to chart the policy of the government which belonged to 
 the Legislature had been taken out of the hands of the Chief Executive. 
 And not being elected by the people and not being the head of the party 
 which haiTcontrol of the Legislature, his position was so delicate that he 
 could hope to succeed only by gaining the confidence and obtaining the 
 counsel of the leaders of the people. 
 
 The man who in that stage of constitutional development of the Philip- 
 pines was at the head of the executive department understood that the 
 duty of cooperating with the Filipinos in the management of their govern- 
 ment was more imperative than before. This duty was performed. The 
 new concession was an important step by which the sense of responsibility 
 and political preparation of the P'ilipinos were again put to the test. Presi- 
 dent Wilson took this step because he had faith in the capacity of the 
 Filipino people. And, anticipating the success of the measure, he an- 
 nounced that other steps would be taken “with a view to the ultimate 
 independence of the islands and as a preparation for that independence.” 
 
 As in the past, prophets of disaster arose and predicted days of gloom. 
 Thus, again, a measure was characterized as premature. But the entire 
 administration, as one man, faced the situation with courage and the 
 Filipinos again emerged triumphant in the experiment. Constructive laws 
 were approved without a single instance of disapproval by the Congress 
 
 1 This step was formally announced in his message to the Filipino people, which reads 
 
 as follows : 
 
 “We regard ourselves as trustees acting not for the advantage of the United States 
 but for the benefit of the people of the Philippine Islands. 
 
 “Every step we take will be taken with a view to the ultimate independence of the 
 islands and as a preparation for that independence. And we hope to move toward that end as 
 rapidly as the saiety and the permanent interests of the islands will permit. After each 
 step taken experience will guide us to the next. 
 
 “The administration will take one step at once and will give to the native citizens ot 
 the islands a majority in the appointive commission, and thus in the upper as well as In 
 the lower house of the legislature a majority representation will be secured to them. 
 
 "We do this in the confident hope and expectation that immediate proof will be given 
 in the action of the commission under the new arrangement of the political capacity of 
 those native citizens who have already come forward to represent and to lead their people 
 in affairs." 
 
10 
 
 of the United States. The most complete harmony characterized the re- 
 lations between the Executive and the Legislature. The positions left by 
 the Americans who retired from the service were given to Filipinos, follow- 
 ing in this way the process of Filipinization announced 16 years previously 
 by President McKinley and adhered to by his successors. Mindanao, our 
 great island to the south, which has always been under military rule, was 
 transferred to the jurisdiction of the civil authorities and never, as during 
 that regime, was the reign of peace more complete or were the relations 
 between Christian and non-Christian Filipinos more cordial. The Philippine 
 Legislature during that period voted 1,000,000 pesos for the expansion of 
 the schools in Mindanao and other places inhabited by non-Christians. 1 
 
 The success of the plan of an elective assembly and a Filipino majority 
 in the appointive commission prepared the way for new advances in the 
 field of self-government. In 1916 Congress approved an act commonly 
 known by the name of its author, Representative Jones, of Virginia. This 
 law contains two essential points — an explicit promise of independence 
 and the concession of autonomy in domestic affairs as a logical step toward 
 fulfillment of that promise. The pledge of absolute independence, as it 
 appears in the preamble of the law, was a compromise between the radicals 
 in Congress who desired immediate independence (the Clarke amendment) 
 and the conservatives who were not in favor of a specific promise of in- 
 dependence. But if during the discussion of the law opposition was reg- 
 istered against the promise of independence, that was not the case with 
 regard to the matter of granting internal autonomy to the Filipinos. 
 Democrats as well as Republicans thenceforth found complete justification 
 for the step which gave to the Filipinos control of their internal affairs, 
 thus giving in this manner the greatest emphasis to the policy announced 
 by President McKinley from the very beginning. 
 
 Autonomy was secured by conceding to the Filipinos an elective leg- 
 islature vested with general and broader legislative powers. If the two 
 organic laws for the Philippines approved by Congress on July 1, 1902, 
 and August 29, 1916, are compared, it will be seen that the new legisla- 
 ture, wholly Filipino, enjoys powers which the preceding legislature com- 
 posed of the commission and the assembly did not have. The most im- 
 portant of these new powers is the authority to organize executive de- 
 partments. Under this authority the Philippine Legislature may make 
 or unmake the executive departments, change their designations, prescribe 
 the powers and duties of each, and determine the pi-ocess of appointment 
 and removal of department heads by the Governor General. 
 
 The most serious difficulty encountered by the Filipinos in the reor- 
 ganization of the executive departments under the new law was how to 
 secure the unity of action necessary for the efficiency and stability of the 
 new government. When there was only one representative body, the as- 
 sembly, its speaker was spontaneously recognized as the leader of the 
 Filipinos in the government and the authorized interpreter of popular 
 aspirations. Mow that instead of one there were three agencies which 
 represented the people, the senate, the house of repi-esentatives, and the 
 cabinet, the great need was the coordination of these instrumentalities so 
 that the unity of action so essential in a government could be possible. 
 
 'Special Report, December 1, 1915, of Brig. Gen. Frank McIntyre, Chief, Bureau of 
 In3ulnr Affairs, 
 
11 
 
 In the conferences held by the majority party of the legislature various 
 propositions were discussed. Some declared frankly in favor of a parlia- 
 mentary system, while others desired strict application of the presidential 
 type of government. It was discovered, after some discussion, that neither 
 the one form nor the other ought to be followed. The objection to the 
 parliamentary form lay in the fact that in those States where the system 
 operates most successfully the executive possesses the power to dissolve 
 the legislature, and this authority was not given by law to the Governor 
 General. The members of the legislature under the Jones Act held office 
 for a fixed term. Without the counterbalancing power of appealing to the 
 people through dissolution of the legislature, the right to cause changes in 
 the cabinet through an adverse legislative vote would be exercised in a 
 reckless and irresponsible manner. On the other hand, if the rigid presi- 
 dential type were applied with its complete separation of powers, the 
 Philippine legislature being elected by the Filipino people and the chief 
 executive appointed by the President of the United States, conflicts be- 
 tween those two powers would be probable and effective government 
 wanting. 
 
 The very fact that the office of Governor General is not elective 
 is in itself an argument against the application of the presidential system 
 in the Philippines. In that system, the Chief Executive being chosen by 
 the nation and being the leader of the party with a majority in the legis- 
 lature, is responsible, together with his party, for administration as well 
 as legislation. His position within the party and in the country enables 
 him to coordinate the powers of government and make them move together 
 in harmony. A separation of powers therefore is more nominal than real. 
 In practice there is less of separation and more of real unity of action 
 resulting from a common responsibility to the people. 
 
 In the Philippines, this separation would have been complete and ef- 
 fective and, as there would be no way of holding the two powers to a 
 common responsibility, disagreements would hamper the efficient conduct 
 of government. In that case its organs might have functioned mechani- 
 cally. But, lacking the unity of spirit which is the secret of a good con- 
 stitutional system, the prompt adoption of measures required by the public 
 welfare would not have been assured. Not only would the progress of 
 the government have been paralyzed, but also the constant friction would 
 have produced the impression of a lack of stability, a situation which 
 would have been fatal under the Jones law and which is unfortunately 
 the experience of other countries in which the executive and legislative 
 departments were completely separated. So it was with revolutionary 
 France where a series of constitutions based on Montesquieu’s separation 
 of powers successively failed. Constitutional stability was not attained 
 until the necessary connection between the powers of government was 
 provided for in the constitution of 1875. A similar adjustment is now a 
 common feature of European constitutions-. Again, in the Latin Amer- 
 ican republics conditions of instability were acute so long as the executive 
 and legislative departments were kept separate. No improvement was 
 noted until provision had been made for the necessary connection between 
 these two powers. 1 
 
 The formula conceived by those responsible for the new organization 
 
 1 H. J. Ford, “Representative Government.” 
 
12 
 
 of the executive departments was one which, without being incompatible 
 with the provisions of the Jones law, differed in some respects from the 
 presidential form. In the first place it was decided, in order that the 
 currents of public opinion as far as possible may be felt in the Cabinet, 
 that the department secretaries should be appointed, not simultaneously 
 with the appointment of the Governor General by the President of the 
 United States but after the organization of each legislature. The depart- 
 ment secretaries are to hold office not indefinitely, but during the term of 
 the Legislature at the opening of which they were appointed. The secre- 
 taries are given complete responsibility in the administration of their 
 departments, subject to the supervision of the Governor General. Instead 
 of keeping them distant from the Legislature under the specious pretext 
 that thus would the independence of the Legislature be better preserved, 
 it is provided that they may appear before either house to be heard on 
 matters affecting their departments and that each chamber may also 
 request them to appear to give information regarding those matters. They 
 are united with the leaders of the Legislature in one body, the council of 
 state, presided over by the Governor General, in order that instead of 
 dispersion and antagonism there may be harmony in the government, that 
 at all times a collective and responsible counsel emanating from the people 
 may be available, and that the government may move with all efficiency. 
 
 In the widest development of this system the leaders of the Legislature * 
 
 would sit with the Governor General as members of his cabinet. There is 
 nothing in the Jones law which prohibits this step; it would be in accord 
 with constitutional precedents in the Philippines. It would secure the 
 closest harmony between the Executive and Legislature, and it would give 
 to the initiative and recommendations of the former in matters of legis- 
 lation the weight which they would necessarily lack if the Executive were 
 to be kept apart from the representatives of the people. In such case it 
 might then be desirable to consider a readjustment of the present system, 
 so that the presiding officers of the two chambers would no longer be 
 political leaders but merely judicial officers charged with guiding the de- 
 bates according to legislative rules. 
 
 The working of this system of government as outlined above was 
 highly satisfactory. During the period in which that system worked in 
 its entirety the administration was normal, democratic, and effective. 
 
 The constitutional relations between the Executive and the Legislature, 
 which constitute the touchstone of all representative government, but 
 especially so in the Philippines, being based on mutual understanding, re- 
 mained normal and harmonious. The recommendations or suggestions of 
 one were received by the other in a spirit of frank cooperation. The 
 executive understood the true role and the responsibility of the Legisla- 
 ture and vice versa. He did not surrender his constitutional powers to 
 the legislature, but neither did he invade those of the latter. Both viewed 
 all matters submitted to their consideration exclusively from the point of 
 view of the welfare of the Filipino people. Consequently the government 
 as a whole could conceive, formulate, and realize constructive programs 
 needed under the circumstances in the social order as well as in the 
 economic and the administrative. There was established for the first 
 time a budgetary system by which was assured the formulation of an 
 annual fiscal policy based on a scientific examination of the income and 
 
IS 
 
 expenditures of the government. This is not the occasion to speak even 
 in summary fashion of the extensive legislative labor covering all kinds 
 of activities, from the allotment of 30,000,000 pesos for a vast program 
 of educational extension to the concession to the provinces and munici- 
 palities of the authority necessary to issue bonds for public works; from 
 the organization and financing of national companies for the development 
 of our undeveloped natural resources to the creation of the bureau of 
 commerce and industry for the purpose of fostering domestic and foreign 
 commerce; from the establishment of the office of public welfare with all 
 its new activities, especially for the reduction of infant mortality, to the 
 adoption of measures leading toward the increase of our food production; 
 and from the creation of the Philippine militia as a means of national de- 
 fense to the transformation of the government of the Province of Mindanao 
 with a view to making them a part of the general administrative system 
 of the Archipelago. 
 
 But where the spirit of cohesion and unity of that government and the 
 fact of its being in complete harmony with the wishes of the people can 
 best be seen is in those measures taken on the entrance of the United 
 States into the World War, and in the attitude of the Filipinos toward 
 the American people in those difficult circumstances. The Filipinos not 
 only responded liberally to every call for financial or humanitarian aid 
 made by the American Government but they also voluntarily offered men 
 and materials of war. The Philippine Government assumed the responsi- 
 bility of maintaining public order throughout its territory, and the United 
 States was thus enabled to withdraw her troops from the Philippines so 
 that they may be sent to the theater of war. Her flag was kept flying in 
 the Philippines under the safeguard of the affection of 12,000,000 Filipinos. 
 The latter went further. Through a supreme impulse of loyalty they 
 ceased to mention the word “independence” throughout the duration of 
 the war, confident as they were that the entrance of the United States 
 into the conflict meant the victory of liberty and democracy in all parts 
 of the world. 1 
 
 It is interesting to examine the position of the Governor General in 
 our government under the Jones law. He has ceased to be the chief 
 executive of the military regime in whom were vested or from whom 
 emanated all the powers of government. No longer is he the chief ex- 
 ecutive of the days of the Commission when, besides being Governor 
 General, he presided over the upper house with a controlling majority 
 in that body. Neither is he the Governor General of the latter and more 
 liberal era (1913-1916) in which, without having a majority in the Com- 
 mission, he continued nevertheless to be a member of it and occupied no 
 less a position than president. The Chief Executive no longer presides 
 over the upper house. He has the veto power, but two-thirds of the vote 
 of the Senate and House of Representatives may override it and place 
 the vetoed measure in the hands of the President of the United States. 
 He exercises supervision and control over the executive departments, but 
 can not appoint anybody he pleases to positions in those departments 
 without following the requirements of the law and obtaining the advice 
 and consent of the Senate. 
 
 If we examine the nature of the office in the light of these constitu- 
 
 ’ Reply of Secretary of War Baker to the Philippine Parliamentary Mission, April, 1919. 
 
14 
 
 tional precepts and the evolution effected by those democratic ideas, -which 
 have been the soul of the political institutions established by the Americans 
 in the Philippines, we can not escape the conclusion that the Governor 
 General no longer has the responsibilities which he previously had. The 
 power of administrative supervision and of veto has been given to him 
 to safeguard the rights of sovereignty and the international ‘obligations 
 assumed by the United States. But if they be well understood, these 
 powers have more of a negative than positive character. It is not expected 
 of him that he should frame the policy of the whole government, because 
 that task is assigned to the legislature,, and he is excluded from member- 
 ship in the legislative body. His role is that of a man of lofty character 
 with great moral prestige, beyond the reach of local partisanship, placed 
 by the government of his country to guard impartially the integrity of 
 the representative regime already established, and to see that the law 
 promulgated by the representatives of the people is faithfully executed. 
 In acting thus, he will be a salutary influence, capable of bringing together 
 the different parts of the government and promoting efficient and wise 
 administration. 
 
 The position of the Governor General has not changed in the least the 
 authority, the responsibility, and the essence of American sovereignty 
 in the Philippines. That sovereignty exists as fully as before. The leg- 
 islature can not enact laws in conflict with the Jones law because the 
 courts will declare them unconstitutional. Every bill or joint resolution, 
 to take effect, must be approved by the Governor General. The law even 
 after approval by the Governor General may yet be annulled by the Amer- 
 ican Congress. It is clear, then, that the rights of sovereignty have re- 
 mained intact. What has happened is an increase in the local power given 
 to the Filipino people and a corresponding decrease, naturally, in the 
 powers of the local representative of the American Government. The aim 
 of the present organic law is to grant us autonomy, while that of the 
 former one was to prepare us for autonomy. 
 
 The Jones law can not be correctly interpreted in any way other than 
 that already indicated. That is the interpretation contained in its letter 
 and spirit. The theory of keeping the Governor General of the Philip- 
 pines completely apart from the representatives of the people, besides 
 being undemocratic, will make impossible the normal business of ad- 
 ministration and will create a chaos without precedent in our history. Un- 
 der such theory the Governor General would be isolated and, in his isola- 
 tion, would find himself tempted to antagonize the representatives of the 
 people and make undue use of the veto power. If he finds it impossible 
 not to approve bills passed by the legislature, he may impose conditions 
 regarding the enforcement of such measures and thus, without vetoing, 
 he would be in a position to nullify the intent of the legislature; he may 
 go above the laws if their enforcement limits the exercise of what is 
 assumed to be unrestrained executive authority; he may disregard public 
 opinion in the matter of appointments and the opinion of the heads of 
 departments in administrative affairs; and he may surround himself with 
 men who do not enjoy popular confidence but are willing to give him 
 that support which he would not obtain from the legislature from which 
 he had isolated himself. And if on top of this the Legislature also insisted 
 upon its constitutional authority, as is its right, not surrendering to the 
 
15 
 
 claims of the executive, we shall have the normal process of government 
 broken and the progress of public business halted. 
 
 Another theory, even more illogical and more violative of the spirit 
 and letter of the Jones law, is that which would make the Governor Gen- 
 eral the nerve center of the whole government, the dictator of its policy, 
 and the sole leader of the nation. Then we would fare even worse than 
 in the first days of military occupation. Our legislative chambers would 
 be converted into mere debating societies. To speak of representative 
 government then would be irony. There would be instituted a completely 
 irresponsible government, because it would neither be responsible to the 
 Filipino people, who would have no voice in the election of a chief executive, 
 nor to the American Government and the American people because of the 
 distance separating the Philippines from the United States. And, finally, 
 we would make of that archipelago, inhabited by 12,000,000 souls, a mere 
 colonial appendage of this country. 
 
 I am certain the American people will not look with approval upon such 
 a situation. It is not based on the accepted political doctrines of this 
 country. It is incompatible with America’s policy in the Philippines and 
 the most modern currents of opinion in the development of new de- 
 mocracies. Our constitutional legislation is the result of a gradual and 
 progressive development of self-government, a process which the Filipinos 
 were required to go through from the very first days of American occupa- 
 tion. Every increase in the political power of the Filipino people was 
 given in good faith and good will. For more than a quarter of a century 
 the Filipinos have been receiving the benefits of such a costly experiment, 
 which they accepted not because they doubted their own political canacity 
 but because they believed that it was a path that would also lead to liberty. 
 Every concession was the logical result of a preceding one, and this chain 
 of events and concessions has the indestructible strength of acquired rights. 
 Thus it was that when, within recent years, suggestions for a reactionary 
 policy in the Philipuines were heard, President Harding, guarding the 
 liberal tradition established without any interruption by his predecessors, 
 came forward and declared in a categorical manner that “no backward step 
 is contemplated, no diminution of your domestic control is to be sought.” 1 
 
 The idea of self-determination which at bottom is the basis of Amer- 
 ican policy in the Philippines has made much progress in the world in 
 recent years. Great powers which yesterday exercised complete dominion 
 over other countries and races are today loosening the ties of dependence 
 for the benefit of weak nations. An irresistible wave is again pushing 
 humanity toward the formation of new nations in present-day history. 
 The British Empire has terminated its protectorate over Afghanistan; has 
 recognized the independence of Egypt and Mesopotamia, subject to certain 
 restrictions. It has granted self-government to Ireland and a responsible 
 government to southern Rhodesia; it has also established a semi-resnonsible 
 government in India and Malta; and it has promulgated new constitutions 
 for Ceylon, Burma, and Nigeria. The French Government has established 
 parliaments in Tunis and Senegal. Italy has given parliaments to Tripoli 
 and Cyrenaica. 1 All these events have occurred since the approval of the 
 Jones law for the Philippines. The example of the United States, adminis- 
 
 1 Address of the President to the Philippine Mission, 1922. 
 ’See Buell, Atlantic Monthly, March. 1924. 
 
16 
 
 tering the Philippine Islands in trusteeship and preparing its inhabitants 
 for self-governmtnt and absolute sovereignty, is a brilliant page in con- 
 temporary history. But that example is no longer unique. 1 The govern- 
 mental concessions contained in the Jones law may have been appropriate 
 at the time of its enactment, but a thorough study of the system in rela- 
 tion to the unparalleled progress of the Filipino people and the advance 
 of democratic ideas the world over will perhaps find it no longer adequate. 
 The time to advance has come. Fortunately, the next step forward is 
 plainly indicated by the present law — a step which, when taken, will be 
 the crowning achievement in a great joint enterprise carried to a success- 
 ful conclusion by the good will of two friendly peoples. 
 
 1 Dutcher. "The Political Awakeninsr of the Eaet.*'