To this letter Major Taylor has appended the following note:--
"(_Note by Compiler._--In a letter written in Tagalog to Aguinaldo on June 6 by Santos he describes the American consul general as having cried out 'Hurrah for General Aguinaldo, hurrah for the Republic of the Philippines' and then, having apparently taken several drinks, he passed up and down the room waving the American flag before giving it to the assembled Filipinos (P.I.R., 406.7).)" [24]
This final statement does not present the representative of the United States government at Singapore in a very favourable light, but I take the facts as I find them. If now we compare the speech actually made by Dr. Santos with Blount's version of it, we shall find that with the exception of the words "eternal gratitude" the passages which he encloses in quotation marks are not in the original at all. The glories of independence are not alluded to, nor is there so much as a suggestion that Aguinaldo had been enabled to arouse eight millions of Filipinos to take up arms, which he certainly had not done.
Dr. Santos in his speech did resort to a stereotyped Filipino procedure so very commonly employed that those of us who have dealt much with his people have learned to meet it almost automatically. It consists in referring to one's having said just exactly what one did not say, and then if one fails to note the trap and avoid it, in claiming that because one did not deny the allegation one has admitted its truth.
Aguinaldo himself later repeatedly resorted to this procedure in his dealings with Dewey and others.
In the present instance Santos employed it rather cleverly when he expressed the hope that the United States would "continue to support the programme agreed upon in Singapore, between your Excellency and General Aguinaldo, that is to say, the independence of the Philippine Islands under an American protectorate."
Now if this was agreed to, Aguinaldo later constantly violated his part of the agreement, for we shall see that he stated over and over again, in correspondence with members of the junta and others, that a protectorate would be considered only if absolute independence finally proved unattainable, but there is no reason to believe that any such agreement was made.
