IMPORTANT POLITICAL ACT Political Declaration of Lcdo. Albizu Campos Recently, a political meeting was held in the city of Ponce where the leaders of the Unión and prestigious persons of the majority party were present. Among those attending said meeting were Mr. Guillermo Schuck, Vicente Usera, Guillermo Vives Valdivieso, Mr. Ohms, Mr. McJones, Lcdo. Brunet and other significant elements within the party. Before an immense audience, in which capital, intelligence, and labor were represented, the cultured young lawyer Pedro Albizu Campos, licensed in philosophy and letters, licensed in law from Harvard University, Massachusetts, after having studied with great attention the actions of the parties in the country, determined to formally enter the ranks of the Unión de Puerto Rico party. Mr. Cordero Matos, a significant political figure from Ponce, introduced Lcdo. Albizu Campos, who began his speech that might better be considered an athenaeum conference, and whose most salient points were more or less as follows: “Mr. Albizu Campos affirmed in a calm manner and with absolute mastery of the subject he was going to treat, that he was known as a nationalist in the United States where he held several conferences on small nationalities and the imperialism of the great powers. That the Puerto Rican Republican party would always agitate within a minority, for being a centralist party and wanting to receive its Executive power from Washington without relying on regionalism which is so necessary to found a “state” of the federation. Upon reaching this point, the speaker skillfully, eloquently and clearly distinguished confederation from federation, explaining that confederation is nothing other than true sovereign states linked almost always only for defense against foreigners and gives as an example the United States before the current Constitution, and federation is the state in the central unit. That the so-called states lack sovereignty; the sovereign is United States, and not any state by itself or in aggregate with the others, something that it could not do even if it pretended to and gives as an example United States. The speaker explains the consequences saying, that the federation demands, as a unit that it is, homogeneity in its constituent parts and for that reason no community has been admitted to the federation, in which the Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic element has not been governing, which have given shape to the nation, and unless the ancestry of said elements has been probable. That the ancestry of said groups among us is impossible due to the density of our population and because Puerto Rico possesses a civilization older than United States. The speaker said that this was the tradition of that people and the basis of its expansion and that it could not be asked to upset the foundation of its existence; that for Puerto Rico it would be as it has been for each “state”, the extinction of its personality, understood by this, the distinctive in a people in the community of sovereign states in the world. The young lawyer then discoursed about the citizen in its confederative aspect and said that, each state being sovereign in fact and in law, it is the only sovereign over its citizens and that the federation being the only sovereign, it is the sovereign of each citizen, and of course, orders it according to its interpretation of the needs of the sovereign; and it can mobilize the citizens within each “state”, to destroy it if it believed it necessary to the only sovereignty, giving as an example the civil war in United States from 1861-65. Referring to the socialist party, the young speaker said, that said party only addresses an economic program, being indifferent to it the personality of Puerto Rico, so necessary for the development of any economic program that wants to be put into practice. That such a party postulates the class struggle, dividing our people who require a joint effort for their salvation. He also alluded to the nascent Partido Nacionalista de Puerto Rico and said that it unfortunately divides the regional forces. He also spoke about the Bill Jones calling it the myth of the rights contained therein and affirmed categorically and within an irrefutable logic, that the right is right, when its “ultimate” sanction is in the community that exercises it. The Bill Jones, said the speaker to the audience, has lengthened the procedure in the approval of the laws; but its substance is identical to that of the Bill Foraker. All Legislation, no matter how beneficial it may be to the country, ultimately stumbles upon the “absolute veto” of the President of Estados Unidos. The agents of the executive of the Nation in Puerto Rico, who are incapacitated, easily reveal that truth and therefore are not as harmful as a cultured and intelligent agent, who can disguise the true source of power, and hence the imperative need to work so that Puerto Rico has, within the right that assists it, a government responsible to it alone and elected by it and that the ultimate sanction of all its laws is in our people: and hence that it is not the removal of an agent of the executive power of Estados Unidos and of the policy that he develops by his instruction, because that would be to leave the sacred rights of our people at the mercy of individuals in the Presidency: the important thing is to fight tenaciously with faith and patriotism for the repeal of the current Organic Act, replacing it with a Constitution that establishes a government responsible only to our people. Finally, the young speaker advised the need to abandon, to banish the bad habit of supplication and petition; that Puerto Rico should demand what it is entitled to by right, belongs to it and then and only then, it will deserve the respect and admiration of the peoples who have struggled to perfect their personality, as the people of Estados Unidos themselves have done.” “THE FEDERAL STATE FOR P.R. IS NOT ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE IT WILL DESTROY OUR COLLECTIVE PERSONALITY” We must not and cannot dispense with the socialists, adds Lcdo. Albizu Campos Our correspondent in Ponce has held the following important interview with Lcdo. Pedro Albizu Campos. These ponceños deserve our sincere congratulations for their noble effort. We must distinguish the political collectivity from the political parties. The political collectivity is necessarily indivisible. It contains the indisputable basis of the Homeland. It requires unanimous consensus. It cannot be discussed without endangering the existence of the country. The political parties are limited to offering means to maintain and enhance the bases laid for national existence. The republic or the monarchy, being dependent or independent, are forms of political existence, which cannot be attacked where they exist without endangering public safety and without paralyzing all activities, except political ones, with the consequent setback or stagnation in the other orders. In our country there is no consensus regarding the basis of its life as a political entity, and hence why we consume our best efforts in what we call politics. Each party offers a basis that it believes is indisputable and fundamental enough to build a great Homeland upon it. Each one goes to the bottom and is a true adversary of the others. We must not forget this fact if we want to reach an understanding regarding our status. To illustrate the problem, let us note that in Estados Unidos there is practical unanimity regarding national sovereignty and regarding the representative form of government. The major parties differ in procedure, with the exception of the socialist which touches the bottom again, and that is why they treat it as a dangerous adversary. However, a single political party is not possible. All Puerto Ricans must unite to demand the status that we believe we deserve. It would be unfair as well as imprudent to exclude the socialists. They represent an attitude that is increasing and this factor of opinion must be recognized in order to be able to demand responsibility from them when it is their turn to administer public affairs. To win in the coming elections, the Unionist Party does not need understandings with any party. We will never deserve the respect of a free people like the American if we continue ASKING what should be done with us. We must seek the legal means, the sanction of Congress if necessary to meet in a Constituent Congress, which drafts the constitution that it believes worthy for our people. We will have powers and we will be responsible. That way all discussion regarding our status will end. No colonial regime is acceptable in a country like ours, of a civilization older than that of its rulers and of a culture at least equal to that of these. The Federal State formula is not acceptable because it would destroy our collective personality. There has been much talk of the personality and sovereignty of the so-called States of the Union. They had that when they were CONFEDERATED and they lost it when they FEDERATED when the current constitution was adopted in 1787. In the political sense, in Estados Unidos, there is one personality: the American and one sovereign: Estados Unidos. I do not believe the Federal State is possible. National unity requires homogeneity in the element that must govern in each “state”. This element has to be Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic, because it is the one that has given shape to the nation. No community has been admitted to the union until this element has gained definitive ascendancy. In Puerto Rico that is impossible due to our geographical isolation, due to the density of population, due to having a culture as high or higher than the North American, and due to being a people that defends its history and its civilization with tenacity. I do not know of any overseas Federal “state” in Estados Unidos. No. The socialist party must be disarmed with economic concessions. The great majority is unaware of the political, philosophical, and religious theories that inspired socialism. What they want is material well-being, and opportunity to educate themselves, to which the one who works has perfect right. I believe that the Republican party will end up failing unless it joins another party if the government of Washington continues to insist that this party should exist by means of suffrage instead of wanting to depend on the central power. I think the coalition with the socialists is dangerous for the same due to the determined opposition that the federal government makes to these. The power of the socialist party depends on economic malaise, let’s attack this and that will disappear. As long as it lasts as a party and recognized as such it has the right to participate in the Administration where it is authorized by the electorate, only then can it be held responsible. PEDRO ALBIZU CAMPOS Ponce, P.R., May 31, 1923. PEDRO ALBIZU CAMPOS JOINT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2 TO MY COMPATRIOTS By virtue of our constitutional rights, the People of Puerto Rico can now demand entry into the American Union as a federal “state”. The legal procedure to follow without the intervention of Congress would be the following: meet in a constituent convention to draft the constitution of Puerto Rico, approve said constitution, elect the senators and representatives who should represent Puerto Rico in the American Congress, and demand our admission as a “state”. Congress could not refuse. Our right within the Federal Constitution is indisputable. The federal “state” would be, however, suicide for Puerto Rico and a serious inconvenience for Estados Unidos. Then, it is of common interest for both parties that Puerto Rico be constituted as an international entity. The constitution for that purpose can now be drafted by a Puerto Rican constituent convention that the American Congress would have to recognize in principle because our right to have a government responsible only to us is indisputable. Our current legislature can facilitate the procedure by declaring itself a constituent convention when it meets in its next ordinary session. Of course, an ad hoc convention would be preferable. Duty requires us to study, deliberate, and immediately resolve our definitive status as a people. We can only do that ourselves, because we are the only ones who know our problems and the only ones with the duty to solve them. It is not honorable to transfer the responsibility to others. We must not delay the solution any longer if we do not want to irreparably harm our Homeland. This is a humble contribution to the preliminary study; let this continue, let the discussion come and let the resolution be immediate. THE AUTHOR CONFERENCE Mr. President, Gentlemen: It is a privilege to take part in this celebration, Día de la Raza, to celebrate the third anniversary of the founding of La Asociación Nacionalista de Ponce y su Distrito, and the anniversary of the discovery of America. This is of universal significance but that is not without transcendence, being fundamental in our collective life whose existence has international importance. The discovery of the New World was the experimental verification of a theory. The doubt regarding the spherical shape of our planet was replaced by the verified fact. Certainty resulted and mathematical deductions found demonstration in the new science of navigation. Upon the man of the idea who kept him attached to the supposed terrestrial plane, he was seen traveling across the earth through infinite space and began to understand the marvelous intra-relation of the cosmos and formulated mathematically the most fundamental notions of time and space. There have succeeded in rapid and obedient order to logic, mathematics, terrestrial navigation, astronomy, that is, navigation in infinity, physics, chemistry, biology and psychology, which is the return of the mind itself, since man is the microcosm. The certainty of the unity of the universe found perfect parallel in the certainty of human unity, truth, which despite being evident, not many men are devoted to it. It befell in the providential order of things, that the ancestors of this people were the ones who gave the light to the world. In the logical order it could not be otherwise because the only civilization in the West is Greco-Latin. Faithful to their mission they were not satisfied with seeing clearly the terrestrial sphere, the beautiful unity of the universe and human unity and devoted themselves to this and with the indigenous race and the African race, they gathered humanity integrating it into the Race of which we are part, unique by constitution, to be a faithful interpreter of life and of the purposes of existence. The Anglo-Saxons followed in the footsteps of our parents and settled in latitudes similar to those they inhabited. But they have not learned the human significance of the discovery, which is the discovery of humanity by itself and have exterminated the indigenous race, and remain separated from the African race, imported to exploit the conquered land, within a purism of race, false because it is contrary to human unity. They have betrayed the providential mission, and what they call a race problem is more fundamental, it is a problem of civilization, which cultured men and peoples reveal through harmonious coexistence with their fellow human beings. These two peoples are seen face to face across the border traced by the Río Grande and the Antilles. Hence the importance of the founding of this Association that defends the integrity of our collective personality. We are at the forefront, not defending it is betraying it and the ignominy of not having fulfilled our duty in history would fall on our succession. I have come, gentlemen, to present you with a juridical-political study of Joint Resolution No. 2, which our legislature has just approved. It has carried out patriotic work by unanimously approving said resolution, thus uniting the will of all the representative groups of public opinion. It is the first joint effort that is being made to definitively resolve the status of our collective personality, which is the basis of collective existence. Our fellow citizens will devote themselves to the solution of this, our most fundamental problem, to the detriment, however, of the other activities of the intelligence. That is why the control of our economic life has passed into foreign or non-resident hands, and the reason that explains our stagnation or regression in the struggles of thought. The definitive status of Puerto Rico must be resolved by our constituent convention. To restore a Homeland unanimous consensus is required and this is achieved only through the deliberation of a constituent congress representative of all the living forces of the country. Instead of meeting for the study and resolution of vital issues, our men have become more and more apart due to the partisan struggle, which has made the common effort sterile during the last twenty-five years. The legality of the procedure is indisputable under the Foraker Act as well as under the Jones Act, because the right of the people to meet peacefully to demand a government worthy of itself and consonant with its legitimate aspirations is inalienable and is a principle that informs American political institutions. It would then demonstrate capacity to govern ourselves and our conduct would deserve the respect of free men. It has been argued that once a bill has been approved by Congress and accepted by our people by virtue of a plebiscite, the aims pursued by a constituent congress would be achieved: a worthy government implemented with the consent of the governed. First, the men who make up the National Congress cannot become familiar with our point of view even if a perfect knowledge of our history and our institutions were possible, and second, the plebiscite is of the nature of the influence of power and not of conscious consent. Then the need for the deliberation of a constituent convention is imposed. If there were anyone so fearful in the exercise of his rights, to calm his conscience, the approval of a law could be required from the National Congress providing the means for our people to elect the delegates to the convention that drafts the constitution of Puerto Rico. The National Congress would never refuse to adopt a bill of that nature, because the procedure suggested emanates from the American Constitution. As proof of this, it is enough to remember the series of “enabling acts”. Furthermore, the right to decide what the status of Puerto Rico should be lies exclusively with the people of Puerto Rico. This thesis was defended by the speaker in his interview with El Mundo on May 31 of this year. Although requesting from Congress and the President of E.E.U.U. that they define their purpose regarding the definitive status of Puerto Rico, as provided in Joint Resolution No. 2, does not alter the right of our people to define their status, however, any concrete declaration by said powers would serve to drown public opinion in our country that was contrary to what was expressed by the aforementioned authorities, and that effect would be to the detriment of our right and subversive of American institutions. (a) American citizenship is not contrary to the complete sovereignty of Puerto Rico. (b) The American Constitution has been in force in Puerto Rico since the Treaty of Paris was signed. Joint Resolution No. 2 is in harmony with the formula that defines our collective status: Preserve the necessary relationship between Puerto Rico and Estados Unidos with the maximum of power in the People of Puerto Rico. Within it fit all the solutions advocated until now including independence. American citizenship makes the harmonious relationship between both peoples permanent and is not an obstacle to the complete sovereignty of Puerto Rico. The British Empire has just resolved the conflict between the local sovereignty of its dominions with the necessary cohesion of the empire. The solution surprised the world, because it is based on the recognition of local sovereignty despite British citizenship. Thus Canada, Australia, South Africa, Ireland, have become part of the League of Nations as equals among the free peoples of the world, by virtue of the most perfect recognition, which is that of the mother country, England. That has postponed for some considerable time the feared disintegration of the empire, whose power and prestige is maintained today by means of the democratic principles of equality and voluntary cooperation. We must note that American citizenship was granted to Puerto Ricans on the eve of an international crisis that could have endangered national existence and that therefore, it was necessary to establish the legal principle to demand the cooperation of our people, which had to be based on fellow citizens and equality. But the Jones Act, while thus ensuring solidarity between both peoples, left the people of Puerto Rico free to obtain their sovereignty and rejected incorporation. The policy traced in 1898 is still in force. Let us explain. Many of our compatriots have spent twenty-five years requesting that the American Constitution be extended to Puerto Rico, for not having noticed that it was established in Puerto Rico since the Treaty of Paris was signed. The Spanish-American War, the conquest of Puerto Rico, and all the acts of government carried out in Puerto Rico until now are constitutional acts and that have been able to be carried out because they have been constitutional. The declaration of the American courts that the constitution does not follow the flag refers exclusively to the civil side of the constitution. War, conquest with all its consequences are constitutional acts, and it is because the famous instrument of government has two faces, one civil and the other military, as constitutional as each other. Internally, the President is the only power that determines when civil rights should be suspended, to establish a military regime that restores public safety. Externally, the President and Congress must concur to declare the state of war, with all its consequences, conquest, etc., between the nation and its enemies. The military aspect of the Constitution is in force in Puerto Rico until now. However, the state of war and its consequent conquest do not imply that the legal relationship between the parties has ceased, only that new rights and obligations arise between them. The absorption of a people without their consent is the greatest humiliation to which they can be subjected, but it is based on the fiction of international law that establishes the consent of the absorbed community. The military regime continues and the absorption has not been declared. Faithful to their constitution, the Americans have been unable to do anything other than respect our collective personality. The President governs in Puerto Rico in his capacity as military, head of the navy and the army, but subject to regulations established by Congress and accepted by him, to which he has been given the sonorous name of organic charters. By virtue of these regulations, the President as he is responsible for the administration in Puerto Rico, has absolute control of it, and as he is obliged to maintain the status quo, has the absolute veto of all our bills. Of course, Congress has always retained the right to annul each and every one of our laws, approved by the President or his representative in Puerto Rico, the governor, which is the same thing. And as within every military regime, no rights emanate from the governed, logically they lack final responsibility, and therefore, our courts lack definitive jurisdiction and hence the true supreme court of Puerto Rico is located in Boston and in Washington. This system, like any military occupation, is harsh, but it maintains our separate personality, and in respect to it incorporation has been denied. National politics has offered us the opportunity to define our collective aspirations freely, but apparently we have not realized this fact. The anomaly of asking Congress and the President for a definition of our status stands out, when that concerns us exclusively. But the national government has additional reasons not to deviate from its policy. Incorporation is a step to the federal “state”. For the first time a community whose race, tradition, and institutions are fundamentally different from those would become part of the federation.
which predominate in each “state.” The Nation has been governed and is governed by the descendants of Anglo-Celts or Anglo-Saxons, who are those who have given it form. No “state” has been admitted to the union unless these ethnic elements have definitively acquired ascendancy in it. In Puerto Rico that is impossible, due to our geographic isolation, due to the density of our population that cannot be replaced, due to the difference in race and language, because we possess a culture at least equal to that of our rulers, being direct heirs of the only civilization that exists in the West, and because our people tenaciously resist losing their historical personality. These would be inevitable consequences of statehood, because the “states” of the federation lack personality and sovereignty in the international sense. They possessed this during the Confederation and lost it within the federation upon adopting the current constitution. If there was ever any doubt regarding these extremes, it was dispelled by the results of the civil war (1861-1865). In the nation there is one sovereign, Estados Unidos, and one personality, the American. Furthermore, the Nation’s policy of expansion is towards the South. Its international relations with Canada have been based on equality and cooperation, but with the nations south of the Río Grande, it has been based on penetration and conquest. That policy is directed against peoples who are our brothers in race, in culture, and of common history. No one can expect Puerto Rican senators to sanction the acts carried out in México, Cuba, Haití, Santo Domingo, Central América. In the National Senate we would be an obstacle, American statists see that clearly. That is why they have turned a deaf ear to the petition for federal “statehood.” To grant it would be to destroy the homogeneity of the leading elements, the basis of their expansion and their imperial greatness. The agrarian question can be resolved now. The rights of our people to have an elective governor, and complete autonomy to legislate in local matters, are obvious. Joint Resolution No. 2 requests them in terms for clear interpretation. The request for the right to legislate on the important problem of the agrarian question seems unnecessary to us. We have sufficient powers for this. Legislation on this extreme would have served and will serve as a touchstone to determine the intention of the current regime. The extension of Federal legislation to Puerto Rico is a setback. To request the extension of federal legislation to Puerto Rico is a step backwards, no matter how beneficial said legislation may seem. It is a demonstration of incapacity to resolve our problems, even if it is evident that these expenses for Puerto Rico come from here due to the exclusive that American commerce enjoys in our country, by virtue of the tariff. Need for judicial unity. (a) A supreme tribunal must be constituted. The Federal Court for Puerto Rico is unnecessary. Legislative unity and executive unity are demanded in the Resolution by placing federal appointments in the hands of the elective governor, but there is an omission of the judicial. A true supreme tribunal should be created, appointed by the elective governor of Puerto Rico with the consent of our senate, in place of the intermediate appellate court that bears that name today, with jurisdiction to definitively resolve all legal questions, with the exception of those that involve the interpretation of the Constitution and of public international law. This limitation is imposed by the necessary uniformity of interpretation, which the Supreme Court of Estados Unidos must make while the Nation is sovereign in Puerto Rico, and therefore responsible before the world in everything that affects the rights of other nations. The constitution of a supreme tribunal is essential for the following reasons: In the most important cases, the threat of an appeal to Boston by the party that has the means is enough for the other party that lacks them to have to give in so as not to sustain a litigation on appeal before the Circuit Court or before the Supreme Tribunal of Estados Unidos; furthermore, the fact that the tribunals that can resolve definitively are located in Estados Unidos has forced the system of decisions to be based more on precedents than on principles, which is the Anglo-American system, from which the great continental and English jurists struggle to free their respective countries. For Puerto Rico this constitutes a costly legal setback for the science of law. Since all our tribunals are federal if we attend to the source of their jurisdiction, the Federal Court of Puerto Rico is unnecessary. A dual jurisdiction is currently maintained to the detriment of collective interests due to the complication it brings in the administration of justice. Furthermore, this tribunal naturally follows the precedents of the federal courts of the continent as law when it is resolving situations created in Puerto Rico, and although it adopts as law the precedents of the current supreme tribunal, of Puerto Rico in cases that involve the interpretation of our local laws, but since by necessity this has adopted the system of decision by precedents, largely taken from the continental tribunals with a legal system different from ours, one can see the damage that has been done to the science of law in Puerto Rico, when the Anglo-American jurists are struggling to abolish the system of precedents that has diluted and confused the principles and want to adopt the continental European system of interpretation, which was ours, we are trying to adopt the Anglo-American system. Legislation is necessary prohibiting the courts from following precedents as law. I invite you, gentlemen, to the serene study of our fundamental problems. To resolve them, the cooperation of intelligent men and women is required, gathered in an environment that inspires responsibility for what is said. Let us not forget that the cohesion of regional forces is essential to constitute a Homeland. PEDRO ALBIZU CAMPOS Ponce, Puerto Rico, Día de la Raza, October 12, 1923. INTERVIEW WITH LICDO. PEDRO ALBIZU CAMPOS The manifesto of Messrs. Barceló and Tous Soto is impressive, and for that reason requires a cold and equanimous analysis. The proposition to arrive at a definitive understanding on the political basis on which the politics of the country should revolve is a reason for satisfaction for the country. If this is self-government, as stated in the Manifesto, it will surely be welcomed among all the liberal elements of Puerto Rico. A government responsible only to us is imposed. This is a truth that we have been discussing for some time, but an agreement had not yet been reached among people with sufficient authority in the electorate. It seems incredible that there has not been that unanimous consensus until now. The greatest obstacle so far to reaching that extreme was the policy of intransigent unconditionalism of the Republican party, which, advocating for statehood, refused to preach to its people to demand the rights it has to govern itself. This policy accused a lack of understanding of what statehood is, which is only government by and with the consent of the governed. And although statehood limited the personality of our country to essential extremes for its existence as a defined people in the civilized world, it required to reach it that our people get used to exercising all the rights in Puerto Rico. The idea of statehood has been relegated to the remote and inconceivable, the official declarations such as those of Mr. Tous Soto have been clear and definitive. Within the proposed program, the complete development of our political personality is not limited in any way, and within it we can reach complete sovereignty, to which we have an indisputable right. The declarations regarding the preservation of our language, our culture, our material interests, and our distinctive civilization are not empty. Mr. Tous Soto has made a great sacrifice to reach this conviction that he frankly and honestly puts before his compatriots, unconcerned about the personal results, favorable or unfavorable for him. We admire the patriotic gesture. We must distinguish the indisputable constitution of the country from the means to realize what that constitution determines. I understand that our future constitution establishes a government responsible to us in certain important extremes. To develop the aspirations that this Constitution entails, the disappearance of any of the existing parties is not required. And this would be convenient because then there could be greater harmony between all. It seems clear to me that the proposition of Messrs. Tous Soto and Barceló that the Partido Unionista and Republicano reach a partisan understanding between themselves, or dissolve to constitute a new party, is not feasible and is out of place in Puerto Rico. I fear that Mr. Tous Soto is alone within his party in that important extreme. His Partido and the Partido Socialista, having been until now allies of adversity, feel an affinity between them of such a nature that it distances them as a group from the Partido Unionista. The immediate effect of the declarations made in the Manifesto will be to precipitate the Ligao General between the republicans and socialists, despite the official hostility with which the coalition would run into. There is no doubt that in Estados Unidos there is currently no room for tolerance towards socialist parties or coalitions with socialist parties. The partido unionista is then presented with a situation that requires immense internal organization to prepare for the electoral struggle that will be extremely passionate. The moment is one of expectation, especially for the socialists who have been disauthorized as a political party in the manifesto. This has been the reason for protests among all socialists. We sincerely believe that it would have had a better effect to invite them as well to a general understanding since they are a constituted party in Puerto Rico representing living forces in the country. Our duty is clear, whatever the result of the assemblies held by the militant parties, we will be within the liberals defending each and every one of the rights of our people to enjoy their civilization in its entirety.