89 any nature when the very North American power has just formally recognized the independence of Puerto Rico through the expression of its executive power. It is not necessary to comment on Senator Tydings’ bill, since, as we have said, if it becomes law, it exclusively obligates the United States and never Puerto Rico. We are interested, however, from the point of view of knowing the intention harbored by the directors of North American politics regarding the treaties that are to govern relations between that nation and ours. We reject, in the first place, the insinuation of a four-year purgatory period. The entry of merchandise produced in Puerto Rico into the United States market is restricted in said bill, but the entry of merchandise produced in the United States into Puerto Rico continues unlimited. An identical clause has been imposed on the Philippines. American importations remain unlimited in the Philippines, but Philippine importations into the United States are restricted during the ten-year trial period. Meanwhile, the Filipinos are told to seek markets in other nations for their products, but deprived as the Filipinos are of the power to make treaties that may empower the entry of products from nations other than the United States, all nations, despite the sympathies they have for Philippine products, buy nothing from them. Such a system has been able to lead to the strangulation of the economic life of the Philippines, but the Filipinos, albeit reluctantly, have accepted it as a lesser economic evil than the military occupation by the United States. For the United States to pretend to impose an identical clause in Puerto Rico is something so petty that, analyzed before an enlightened opinion, it would shame the North Americans themselves. If the plebiscite is improper, even more improper would be new elections.
90 Why a plebiscite if the independence of Puerto Rico is recognized? Why new elections under a regime of military intervention if the independence of Puerto Rico is already recognized? Both things are anachronistic provisions given the fact of the recognition of national independence. It is an illogical and improper anachronism to the detriment of the good relations that should exist between Puerto Rico and the United States. The case of Puerto Rico vs. the United States is of continental and global interest. Finally, enlightened North American opinion has achieved the recognition of our independence by the executive power of the United States. That independence was recognized by all powers. The North American military occupation obstructed our life of international relations. Upon the cessation of this intervention, our normal national life will be immediately resumed, internally and externally. Our agriculture will revive, our industry will re-emerge, our financial life will be rebuilt, we will once again be a maritime commercial power, our art and our science will occupy their position of honor in contemporary civilization. Puerto Rico will once again be rich in name and in fact, in material wealth and in the infinite spiritual wealth of the immortal soul of the Homeland.