[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 7 (Thursday, February 5, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H374-H376]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           CENTENNIAL ANNIVERSARY OF THE SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 1997, the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, this year 1998 marks the centennial 
anniversary of the Spanish-American War. History tells us that it was 
fought to liberate the Cuban people from the yoke of Spanish 
colonialism. Historians and scholars are still debating America's true 
motivation for engaging in a fight between the Spanish empire and its 
long-held colonial possessions in the Caribbean and in the Pacific. 
They are still addressing, at least in an academic sense, the long-term 
effects and the many uncomfortable and the unresolved political issues 
that are the aftermath of the Spanish-American War. For 100 years now, 
the American flag has fluttered, both literally and philosophically, 
over the spoils of what has been termed the splendid little war.
  In the months ahead I am sure that students throughout the Nation 
will be introduced to historical anecdotes which set the stage for the 
Spanish-American War in 1898. In the wake of the Civil War, the U.S. 
was cementing its identity not only as a unified Nation of separate 
States, but also as a rising power rich in natural resources, growing 
and prospering and spreading the benefits of American democracy from 
the Atlantic to the Pacific. Against this backdrop the plight of 
opposed Cubans and the depravity of a crumbling European power became 
rich fodder for American newspapers. The Cuban uprising, the sinking of 
the USS Maine, Teddy Roosevelt and his Rough Riders and the charge up 
San Juan Hill, are likely to command the most attention, while the 
capture of Guam, the Filipino insurrection, General Emilio Aguinaldo 
and his Freedom Fighters and the Battle of Manila Bay will certainly 
not get equal attention.
  The Pacific theater of the Spanish-American War is as colorful and 
rich in history as the Caribbean theater, but it is certainly not as 
well-known. Even here in the hallowed halls of Congress, few understand 
the 100-year progression between the arrival of an American warship on 
Guam in 1898 and the presence of a Guam delegate in the U.S. House of 
Representatives today. It is ironic, Mr. Speaker, that a war fought 
over Cuba and over issues pertaining to the Caribbean saw its first 
strike in the Pacific within a month.
  The warship that stopped on Guam, the USS Charleston, under the 
command of Captain Henry Glass, was transporting American troops to the 
Philippines en route from Hawaii. Captain Glass received orders to stop 
and take the island of Guam. The Charleston arrived at Apra Harbor on 
June 21, 1898, and then, at that time, Guam was part of the Spanish 
empire, pretty much underfunded and pretty much forgotten within the 
realm of the Spanish empire.
  What then was the U.S. interest in Guam in 1898 that a warship should 
be detoured from its intended course and ordered to take possession of 
what was a run-down Spanish garrison and its ill-informed commanders? 
Well, alas, like the declining Spanish empire, the emerging U.S. empire 
wanted a foothold on Asia's doorstep. Under American rule, Guam was 
converted from a reprovisioning port for Spanish galleons to a cooling 
station for naval ships, American naval ships. And while seemingly 
undramatic, this conversion reverberates with profound effects to this 
very day.
  The Spanish-American War ended in December 1898 with the signing of a 
peace treaty in Paris. The Treaty of Paris ceded Guam, Puerto Rico and 
the Philippines to the United States and charged Congress with 
determining the civil rights and political status of the innovative 
inhabitants of these areas. A few days after the signing of the treaty 
on December 23, President William McKinley placed Guam under the full 
control of the Navy, ordering the Secretary of the Navy to ``take such 
steps as may be necessary to establish the authority of the United 
States and give it the necessary protection and government.'' Once 
again, Guam, like in the previous 200 years, was given over to military 
rule.
  Like their Spanish predecessors, the American naval officers who were 
assigned to Guam lamented the lack of adequate funding for support of a 
naval station, but they managed to build some roads and schools and 
raise some health and educational standards, and improve the lives of 
the Chamorro people. After more than 100 years of neglect under Spanish 
rule, the people of Guam were grateful for the improvement in their 
lives and hopeful for a bright and prosperous future under American 
rule. In fact, so eager were they to prove themselves worthy new 
members of the American household that in the interim, which lasted 
almost a year, in the interim between the removal from Guam of all 
Spanish government officials as prisoners of war and the arrival of 
Guam's first American naval governor, the people of Guam attempted to 
establish their own civilian government patterned after the American 
model under the leadership of Joaquin Perez. Guam's first naval 
governor arrived in August 189 and the naval government of Guam began 
to take shape in the months that followed. In its efforts to erase 
every vestige of foreign rule and establish America's presence and 
influence, the naval government imposed many new rules and regulations. 
Its orders were unilateral and beyond question. Its rule was strict and 
often clumsily racist, and still hoping to secure the benefits of 
American democracy for Guam, a group of island leaders drafted a 
petition in 1901 asking Congress to establish a permanent civilian 
government for Guam, one that would enable the people to mold their 
institutions to American standards and prepare themselves and their 
children for the rights, obligations and privileges as loyal subjects 
of the United States, and one which would remove the yoke of military 
government over Guam. That petition was not adhered to until 49 years 
later.
  Mr. Speaker, 100 years ago the United States acquired Guam from Spain 
and established a military government of Guam. Now Guam was considered 
at that time a possession of the United States, and there is still much 
confusion as to what these small territories are in actual practice. 
Sometimes the term ``possession'' is used, sometimes the term 
``territory,'' sometimes a ``protectorate,'' and as a ``position,'' as 
if it were a thing to be owned and moved around. But in reality, the 
actual term and the appropriate legal term, which is also a part of the 
legacy of the Spanish-American War, is ``unincorporated territory of 
the United States.''
  An unincorporated territory of the United States means that we are 
owned by the United States, but we are unincorporated. We are not fully 
a part of the United States. Until we change that status, congressional 
authority, congressional plenary authority, remains in full effect and 
the Constitution applies to Guam only to the extent that Congress sees 
fit to apply it to Guam. That is what happens when something is a 
territory; the Constitution applies to all American citizens, except in 
the territories when Congress decides which parts of the Constitution 
apply.

                              {time}  1600

  One of the main elements of great discussion about political theory 
today and the appropriate relationship between the Federal Government 
and the local government is the use of the 10th amendment of the 
Constitution where certain powers are reserved to the States or to the 
people.
  We frequently hear references to the 10th amendment on the floor of 
the House in order to describe the appropriate relationship between the 
Federal Government and State governments and individual citizens. The 
concept of devolution in those cases used, as a core article, obviously 
draws its faith from the full application of the 10th amendment. 
However, the 10th amendment is not applied to Guam or any of the small 
territories as decided by Congress.

[[Page H375]]

  It was not until after World War II, and during which Guam suffered 
an horrific occupation by the Japanese, with the passage of the Organic 
Act that Guam was called an unincorporated territory. And the Organic 
Act of Guam is the governing document, is the basic law of Guam, and it 
simply means the organizing act of Guam.
  For 50 years, the Navy was the primary instrument of government over 
Guam and the commanding officer of the naval station was also the 
Governor of Guam. The commander of the Marines was the head of the 
Department of Public Safety. The Navy chaplain was automatically the 
head of the Department of Education. This was the system of government 
which existed on Guam for the first 50 years after the Spanish-American 
war.
  Under naval rule, political participation was very limited for island 
residents. A Guam Congress was authorized, but it was entirely advisory 
in nature. Certainly unlike any of the citizens of the 50 States, or 
even the District of Columbia, the citizens of Guam do not enjoy all 
the full protections of the U.S. Constitution. And by being and 
remaining an unincorporated territory in its current form, the U.S. has 
broad powers over the affairs of Guam and ultimately the future of the 
Chamorro people of Guam.
  After the passage of the Organic Act in 1950, Guam had a civilian 
government under the U.S. flag. And in 1970, Guam was authorized the 
right to elect its own governor. Here we are 100 years later and we 
still have not solved the final political status situation for Guam.
  It is ironic that in this, the 100th year of the commemoration of the 
Spanish-American war, there are really two remnants of that war which 
cry out for attention. Those are Guam and Puerto Rico. So it is a very 
difficult time for those two areas, and I cannot speak for Puerto Rico, 
but I can certainly speak for Guam, that it is a very difficult item 
for us to try to relate to.
  How do we seek to commemorate 1898? In 1898, we had a flag raising on 
Guam. Implicit in that flag raising was the promise of the fulfillment 
of American democracy. One hundred years later, that promise has yet to 
be fulfilled.
  How Guam commemorates the 100th anniversary of 1898 will be, in many 
respects, a measure of how Guamanians who are today U.S. citizens, see 
themselves as a society.
  The other areas that were a part of the process of the Spanish-
American war, namely Cuba and the Philippines, as political projects 
are complete. But Puerto Rico and Guam are not complete. Guam remains 
one of the two last pieces of the puzzle of 100 years that has come 
from the Spanish-American war. And it is interesting to note that when 
Spain lost the Spanish-American war, Spain had claims not only to the 
Philippines but throughout much of the central Pacific; all of the 
islands in Micronesia, including the Northern Marianas, much of the 
Caroline Islands, Palau, Yap, Ponape, Chuuk and Kosrae.
  And even though America had the opportunity to inherit those claims, 
it chose not to and it only took one island out of the whole 
Micronesian region and that island was Guam. The remaining islands were 
then sold by Spain to Germany. Then, after World War I, those islands 
became a part of a League of Nations mandate that was given over to 
Japan. After World War II, those islands were then given as a United 
Nations trust territory over to the United States.
  All of those islands have had their political status resolved by 
today. Three freely associated governments, the Republic of Palau, the 
Republic of the Marshalls, and the Federated States of Micronesia and 
the new Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas all came out of those 
islands which the United States chose to ignore in 1898. It makes one 
think that perhaps had Guam been ignored at that time, by this time 
today we would have our political status fully resolved.
  It is ironic that those who have been most associated with the United 
States in the Pacific are those who have waited the longest to see 
their political dreams fulfilled.
  Because Congress is constitutionally mandated to make all of the 
decisions regarding the territories, and please bear in mind that we 
are talking about very small units, it is particularly incumbent upon 
this body to examine Guam's quest for political status change.
  Now, in the year 1998, in the 100th anniversary of the centennial, 
now is an appropriate time to take a look at the issue of Guam's 
political status and its quest for commonwealth.
  I would also like to focus upon another issue which is directly 
related to the centennial celebrations. As we celebrate in the United 
States the centennial of the Spanish-American war, the people of the 
Philippines will celebrate the centennial of their Declaration of 
Independence.
  The Philippines declared its independence in 1898 but did not 
actually achieve it until 1945. And although most of us recognize 1898 
as the beginning of our long relationship with the Republic of the 
Philippines, I think it is most unfortunate that I believe a majority 
of Americans today are unaware of the dynamics and the nature of our 
initial relationship with the Filipinos.
  F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Cheyenne, Wyoming, a former Army post 
occupied by Army Indian fighters, plays host to historical artifacts 
that are becoming a concern to more and more Americans and is already a 
concern to many, many Filipinos. I am referring to a couple of church 
bells taken from a Catholic church in the Philippines by members of the 
11th Infantry in 1901. Known to many as the ``Bells of Balangiga,'' 
which have become the center of a century-old controversy which have 
placed the people of the Republic of the Philippines and many of the 
residents of Cheyenne, Wyoming, at odds.
  The people of the Philippines have repeatedly requested the return of 
the bells, and they would particularly like to have them back for their 
100th anniversary celebration of this year of their declaration of 
independence from Spain. Several residents of Cheyenne, however, have 
expressed strong opposition to this request.
  On November 7, 1997, I introduced H. Res. 312, a resolution urging 
the President to authorize the transfer of the ownership of one of the 
two bells currently displayed at F.E. Warren Air Force Base to the 
people of the Philippines. My purpose here is neither to glorify any of 
the actions taken nor condemn any of the atrocities committed at the 
time the bells were taken, but to shed light upon and clarify the 
issues behind the Bells of Balangiga.

  At the onset of the Spanish-American war in 1898, the American fleet 
under George Dewey was ordered to attack the Spaniards at Manila Bay. 
Admiral Dewey and E. Spencer Pratt, the American consul in Singapore, 
convinced Filipino rebel leader, Emilio Aguinaldo, to ally his troops 
with the Americans, indicating that independence would probably be 
granted to the Philippines.
  After Spain's defeat, however, it became evident that the Americans 
never intended to recognize the legitimacy of the Philippine republic 
declared in 1898. Aguinaldo, whose troops lacked the arms and 
discipline required to directly engage Americans in combat, issued a 
proclamation calling upon Filipinos to employ guerrilla tactics against 
Americans. The next few years saw a war which engendered much 
controversy in this country, but which is not well understood today, in 
which 4,200 Americans and an estimated 220,000 Filipinos lost their 
lives. Needless to say, atrocities were committed on both sides.
  Mr. Speaker, 4,200 Americans died subduing the Philippines. In the 
course of the entire Spanish-American war, including the charge up San 
Juan Hill, only 398 Americans died in battle. But in subduing the 
Philippines over the next few years, 4,200 Americans died.
  One particular example of the tragedy of the so-called Philippine 
insurrection occurred in the island of Samar. In September 26, 1901, 
rebels disguised as women smuggled weapons, mostly bolos, past 
inattentive sentries. While preparing for breakfast, the townspeople 
simultaneously attacked and killed Members of the Ninth Infantry ``C'' 
Company. Reinforcements were sent through the 11th Infantry and, in 
retaliation, Brigadier General Jacob Smith ordered every village on the 
island of Samar to be burned and every male Filipino over 10 years of 
age to be killed.

[[Page H376]]

  Evidence suggests that the priests at Balangiga rang the town's 
church bells every time the American troops were about to engage in 
search and destroy missions. The church bells were most likely 
confiscated by American troops in an attempt to ensure the secrecy and 
heighten the efficiency of these missions.
  Three of these bells are known to exist. The survivors of the Ninth 
Infantry ``C'' Company took possession of one bell, which is now in a 
traveling collection maintained by the Ninth Infantry in Korea. The 
Eleventh Infantry also took two bells and a 15th-century English cannon 
with them to the U.S. when the unit was assigned to what was then Fort 
D.A. Russell in Cheyenne, Wyoming.
  In 1949, Fort Russell was converted to the present Air Force base 
which house the Bells of Balangiga after having been left there by the 
Eleventh Infantry. There was a time when the officers at F.E. Warren 
wanted to get rid of the bells. These brass relics have no relevance 
for F.E. Warren Air Force Base, which is a missile base. Few people 
seemed to know or care about these bells. That is until the government 
of the Philippines asked for their return.
  The President of the Philippines, the current President, Fidel Ramos, 
first became interested in the bells as a West Point cadet in the 1950s 
as he attended the U.S. Military Academy.
  In the late 1980s, as defense minister, Fidel Ramos sought the help 
of his U.S. counterpart, former Wyoming U.S. Congressman Dick Cheney, 
who was then the Secretary of Defense.
  For the 50th anniversary of Philippine's independence from the United 
States in 1996, the matter was brought to President Clinton's 
attention. However, these efforts, along with those of many others, 
including mine, have fallen on deaf ears. It seems that a vast majority 
of the people involved have made a decision that, instead of being on 
the right side of this issue, they would certainly rather be on the 
safe side.
  It is true that there has been some vocal opposition against the 
return of the bells. However, this opposition may not fully understand 
the events of the past.
  Although the insurrection cost the lives of American soldiers, let us 
not forget that the U.S. sent troops to the Philippines in 1898 in 
order to subdue a country that wanted to be independent. Let us also 
not forget that, later on, these very same people and their descendants 
suffered, fought, and died fighting with our troops for a common cause 
in the battlefields of Bataan, Corregidor, Korea and Vietnam, making 
the Philippines the only Asian country that has stood with the United 
States in every conflict in this century.
  For almost 100 years, the Philippines has been our closest friend and 
ally, and in the name of friendship and cooperation it would only be 
fitting and proper for the United States to share the Bells of 
Balangiga with the people of the Philippines for their centennial 
celebrations.
  Still, there are a number of veterans groups in Wyoming vehemently 
opposing the return of the bells, claiming that by doing so a sacred 
memorial would be desecrated and dismantled.

                              {time}  1615

  I beg to differ. Although Filipinos and the majority of the people 
with whom I have come into contact feel that both of the bells should 
be returned, a proposed compromise offered by the Philippine Government 
calls for the United States and the Republic of the Philippines to 
share the bells. The bells will be recast and duplicates made. The 
United States and the Philippines will each keep one original and one 
duplicate, and the Philippines Government has even offered to absorb 
all of the costs involved. H. Res. 312 would facilitate this proposal.
  I assure everyone that this compromise would not in any way desecrate 
or dismantle the memorial at Trophy Park. What we presently have at 
F.E. Warren is a century-old reminder of death, suffering and 
treachery, brought about by vicious guerrilla warfare in a highly 
misunderstood conflict. By having the bells and duplicates both in the 
Philippines and in Wyoming, this solitary memorial will be converted 
into fitting monuments located on both sides of the world, dedicated to 
the peace, friendship and cooperation that have since existed between 
the American and the Filipino people.
  The memory of those who perished, both Americans and Filipinos, will 
then be associated with a compromise of peace and friendship, cemented 
100 years after they volunteered to travel halfway around the world to 
seek and secure this same peace and friendship from the people of Asia 
and the Far East. We have the world to gain and nothing but silly pride 
to lose.
  My grandfather, from whom I got my name, although I am a native of 
Guam, James Holland Underwood, was a marine who served during the 
Spanish-American War prior to being mustered out on Guam. His brother 
and my namesake, Robert Oscar Underwood, was also a veteran of that 
war. He served in the Philippines during the time of the Philippine 
insurrection. I am sure that these men would understand and support the 
concept of having national symbols such as the Bells of Balangiga unite 
us and not divide us, those of us who care about independence and 
democracy and freedom for peoples around the world. Had they been alive 
today, I am sure that they would applaud my efforts because they will 
surely realize that the Bells of Balangiga would always mean more to 
the Filipinos than they could ever mean to us.
  Sharing the Bells of Balangiga with the Filipinos is the honorable 
thing to do. It is the sensible thing to do. It is the right thing to 
do.
  On behalf of a growing number of people who have expressed their 
support, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor H. Res. 312.

                          ____________________