The San Francisco call., 1898-03-22
ABOUT PRECEDENTS.

HE Chronicle makes an airy skip-Jump-a and
 hop over the constitution in discussing annexa-
 ton by joint resolution. It says that Congress established precedent in the Texas case, and Con gress can now originate another precedent. It IS we'll not to forget the details of the Texas case All o Florida and Louisiana had been the property o Spain Louisiana included Texas. Spain by treaty ceded France all of her possessions on the conti nent except Florida In ISo6 the United States by treaty annexed to our territory all of Louisiana In 1870 we made treaty with Spain annexing Florida and cedng to her the Texan part of Louisiana The King of Spain did raty this treaty until after he had lost Mexico by the revolution. It was held therefore that his ratification only conveyed to the United States Florida over which he had juris dicton and that his ratification did not convey Texas to Mexico In this nice question was the germ of our contention with Mexico that finally led to war As result of the battle of San Jacinto, Santa Anna made treaty conceding the independence Of Texas which thereupon set up for herself rhe Lone Star Republic.
 It will be seen, then, that surrender of Texas by the treaty of 1879 was imperfect; that Mexicos claim was defective; and that admission of Texas by joint resolution State the actual recovery of domain which we had always retained shadow of title Texas not annexed territory, but was admitted State into the Union by express authority of the constitution granted to Congress Precedent followed not invented. The constitu- tonal theory and practice that alien territory can be annexed only by the treaty making power of the con- stitution left undisturbed.
 The Chronicle avows itself ready and willing now to establish precedent, which will ignore the treaty making power and arrogate to Congress power which no expounder of the constitution has pre- tended that it possesses. Congress establish precedent unwarranted by the fundamental law. It 1t could the work of Chief Justice Marshall, in def- milton of the powers of the three coordinate branches of the Government, would not be worth the binding of the books in which it IS inscribed.
 When Tim Campbell represented Tammany in Congress he introduced bill that declared constitutional by the Judiciary Committed Tim heard the report, and, addressing the chair, said, "Mr. Speaker, what's the constitution amongst friends?"
 The Chronicle seems to follow Tims construction of the fundamental law. Between such friends the island oligarcly and the Chronicle the constitution may not amount to much, but to the great body of the American people 1t amounts to the charter of all the rights they have and should not be violated in the smallest particular lest become ineffective in all its parts.
 Will the Chronicle say, once for a whether it favors the immediate admission of Hawaii State or whether 1t favors its annexation as a county of California, or whether 1t favors its annexation as territory, ultimately to be admitted as State?
 Will it also cite the constitutional authority for the accomplishment of the second and third plan by joint resolution instead of by treaty?
 Let it be remembered that this country fought four years of destructive and costly to establish the constitution as the supreme law of the land and if now that instrument may be set aside the sacrifice made in its behalf valor life and treasure spent ;r,