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:--