K. Spanish text of news item in La Vanguardia of June 14, 1910, relative to the so-called "mass meeting" of "the Filipinos" to protest against sales of friar lands to trusts.... L. Spanish text of news item in La Democracia of June 14, 1910, relative to the so-called "mass meeting" of "the Filipinos" to protest against sales of friar lands to trusts... M. Opinion of the Attorney General as to what lands of the so-called "friar estates" are now to be considered as "vacant lands," and therefore requiring the publication of "bandillos," as provided by section 3 of act No. 1933, before such lands may be legally sold or leased by the director of lands.... N. Rent schedules effective from beginning of rent year 1908-9 on various friar estates... 1228 1229 1230 1232 1235 1236 1236 O. Table showing in acres the area included within the boundaries of each of R. Primer containing questions and answers on the public-land laws in force in the Philippine Islands (Tagalog edition). 1236 S. Free-patent circular (Spanish-English edition). T. Free-patent circular (English-Tagalog edition)...... U. Free-patent circular (Cebuano-Spanish-English edition). 1236 1236 1236 Y. Free-patent circular (Bicol-Spanish-English edition). 1236 Z. Circular letter from the director of lands to all provincial treasurers, requesting them to keep supplied with free-patent circulars.... 1237 Aa. Sample of a letter sent out by the director of lands to all provincial treas urers, requesting them to supply the various municipal treasurers in Bb. Sample of the leases entered into with Mr. A. F. Thayer.. 1238 1239 REPORT OF DEAN C. WORCESTER, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Manila, August 29, 1910. SIR: In accordance with your request, I have the honor to submit the following report relative to the charges reflecting upon the conduct of the affairs of the department of the interior and of the bureau of lands, made by Representative John A. Martin, of Colorado, in his speech entitled "Exploiting the Philippines," delivered on June 13, 1910. The use made by Representative Martin of extracts from government reports and public documents reminds me very forcibly of the use made of Holy Scripture by the New England clergyman who, in the days when it was customary for a preacher to take a tot of rum befor entering the pulpit on the Sabbath, got a drop too much and delivered an eloquent sermon on the text, "And Judas went and hanged himself. Go thou and do likewise!" In other words, Representative Martin, by the quotation and misinterpretation of passages which suited his purpose, and by the suppression of passages which if quoted would have made his contentions ridiculous, has succeeded in presenting an utterly misleading picture of the policy of the Philippine government relative to the disposal of friar lands. As an instance in point, I cite the following: The Philippine interior department (American) has fixed 100 pesos, that is, 100 Philippine dollars, as the minimum sale price of land, regardless of quantity. As that is more money than most of the little brown brothers ever saw at one time, the result has not been conducive to land ownership. It affords a partial explanation for the fact that up to June 30, 1908, but 675 Filipinos had acquired title to land under American occupation, and of the further fact that of the 60,000 tenant families on these lands at the time of their purchase not more than 20,000 remain. There is absolutely no limitation upon the size of the tract of friar land which an occupant may lease or purchase. The administrative limitation which, for a good and sufficient reason, hereinafter explained, has been adopted to prevent the purchase of excessively small tracts of land by the imposition of a very high price on such tracts is applicable to public lands only, as distinguished from friar lands. He has himself quoted in full the administrative regulation in question, yet he here misinterprets it and creates the belief that occupants have left friar estates because they were charged excessive prices for their small holdings. As an instance of the suppression of public records, I cite the following: LEASING FRIAR-LANDS ESTATES. It appears that while the sales have been a negligible quantity, over 100,000 acres of these lands have been leased to 20,000 tenants, at an average rental of $1.30 per acre per year. This is the annual rental per acre which our wards" have to pay and by the payment they acquire no interest in or any title to the lands upon which they live. Section 11 of the friar-lands act reads: SEC. 11. Should any person who is the actual and bona fide settler upon and occupant of any portion of said lands at the time the same is conveyed to the government of the Philippine Islands, desire to purchase the land so occupied by him, he shall be entitled to do so at the actual cost thereof to the government, and shall be allowed 10 years from the date to purchase within which to pay for the same in equal annual installments, if he so desires, all deferred payments to bear interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum. Section 13 contains the following proviso: And provided further, That the chief of the bureau of public lands in his discretion may require of any settler and occupant so desiring to purchase that, pending the investigation requisite to fix the precise extent of his holding and its cost, he shall attorn to the government as its tenant and pay a reasonable rent for the use of his holding; but no such lease shall be for a longer term than three years, and refusal on the part of any settler and occupant so desiring to purchase to execute a lease pending such investigation shall be treated as a refusal either to lease or to purchase, and the chief of the bureau of public lands shall proceed to oust him as in this act provided. In actual practice it has been assumed that all tenants on friar lands desired to purchase their holdings, and the leases which have been issued to tenants have been issued under the proviso just quoted, and therefore in themselves convey the right of purchase. In our administrative procedure we invariable recognize this preferential right. Tenants are well aware of the fact that they possess it, and in many instances such right has been sold for cash. Representative Martin had presumably read the whole friar-lands act, as he quoted from it such passages as suit his purpose; and he could hardly have been in ignorance of the facts. The last sentence in the passage quoted from his speech involves an additional and still more gross suppression of a vital part of the record. Under paragraph 6 of regulations approved by me on May 14, 1906, and published on page 139 in the Report of the Philippine Commission, Part 2, 1906, every cent of rental paid on any given piece of land is considered as a part payment of the purchase price, and is de ducted therefrom at the time the final charge is fixed. In view of these facts, how shall I characterize Representative Martin's statement above quoted? And what is to be said relative to the following statement? The fact that the Philippine government has executed over 20,000 leases and only 446 sales certificates on friar lands causes one to wonder if this result does not come from the adoption of a definite plan not to sell these friar lands in small tracts to tenants, but to hold them for other purpses. Not content with the damaging record he has thus made against himself, Representative Martin makes the following incorrect statement: That the policy pursued by the Philippine government in dealing with these natives is the same disastrous leasing policy that was pursued by the friars, and which policy it was stated was largely responsible for all the insurrections which occurred from 1870 to American occupation. The policy of the friars was to rent their lands to Filipino occupants. There was no possible way in which occupants could obtain title to their holdings. As above shown, the right to purchase their holdings has, by the Philippine government, been conferred by law upon occupants of friar estates. On July 1, 1910, 14,952 of them had already bought, the aggregate area purchased being 63,185 acres. The remaining occupants, 20,924 in number, held leases covering 82,755 acres, and have the right to purchase their holdings. I regret the necessity of calling your attention to the further fact that, to this misuse of public documents and records, Representative Martin has added false statements unsupported by a shred of evidence. Take, for instance, the following charge: That after appropriating #100,000 of the public funds to loan to agriculturists who had lost everything and were unable to put in their crops, rules and regulations were issued whereby these loans could be made only for the purpose of cultivating sugar cane in certain restricted areas where the tenants were compelled to furnish the cane to certain mills located on the estates which had been taken possession of by the Manila Railway Co., the Speyer Syndicate, of New York. The Manila Railway Co. has never taken possession of any friar estate, or part thereof, except a right of way 30 meters wide over certain of the estates near Manila, and a very small additional amount of land for station yards and ballast pits, the total area occupied being 423.08 acres. This land was purchased at the price fixed by law. This company has neither purchased nor leased any other friar lands from the government. Mr. Horace L. Higgins, the president of the company, states (see Exhibit J) that it has no interest direct or indirect in any other friar lands, and that it has no interest direct or indirect in any sugar mills. The tenants on the estates in question mill their own sugar, using for the purpose machinery so out of date that "antiquated" is the |