"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."