The age-herald., 1899-01-10

the framers of the constitution intended should be accomplished. But he denied | that it possessed .the astonishing and "extravagant' powers under the constitu- | tion which the senator from Connecticut | tMr. PlatO attributed~to it. Mr Hoar | then quoted MT. Platt as saying: "As to l every matter the United States as a nation | possesses sovereign power, except only | where sovere gnty has been reserved to the | states and people," and again: "As I nation it possesses every sovereign power l not reserved in it's constitution to the states l or to the people, The right to acquire ter l ritory was not reserved and is therefore l an inherent, sovereign right. In the right l to acquire terr tory is found the right to 1 govern it and as the right to acquire Is a | sovereign, inherent right, the right to gov l ern is a sovereign right not admitted in | the constitution
 Denied Piatt's Propositions These propositions of Mr. Platt, MT. Hoar expressly denied. He affirmed every con- stitutional power is limitetd to the one | supreme aid in controlling power declared | in the constitution itself. "In order to | perform a perfect union establish justice, | insure domestic tranquility, provide for the | common defense, promite the general well | fare and secure the blessings of liberty to l ourselves and to our posterity." "When the senator from Connecticut un- | dertakes to declare" said MT Hoar, that we may do such things not for the per 1 feet union, the common defense, the gen. l eral welfare of the people of the United l States; or the securing of liberty to our l selves and our children, but for any fancied
 or real obligation to take care of distant | peoples beyond our boundaries, not people | of the United States, then deny his propo- | sltion and tell him he can find nothing | either in the text of the constitution or the | exposition of the fathers, or the judgments | of courts from that day to this, to war 1 rant or support his doctrine.
 1 'We have heard of limited monarchies, constitutional monarchies, despotism tenn 1 pered by assassination, but the logic of the 1 senator from Connecticut makes a pure, 1 unlimited untempered despotism without l any relief from assassins.
 MT. Hoar maintained that the propositions l advanced by MT. Platt were not sustained
 by single one of his authorities. He held l in the course of his Arguments, that the 1 .'powers of the United States must be af- 1 hrmatiVely delegated or they do not exist; l In other words the implied powcr,' re- 1 ferred to by MT. Platt-the power to govern l territory acquired through war-did not eX-
 ist. The power which Mir Platt maintained
 this government possessed was one, Mr l Hoar said "that our fathers and descend-
 ants have ever loathed and abhorred, and 1 they believed that no sovereign on earth 1 could rightly exercise it.' He said while l MT. Platt had admitted that governments l derived their just powers from the consent l of "some of the governed,' he did not un-
 derstand that in subiugating and governing
 the Filipinos MT. Platt proposed to get the
 consent of any of them.
 Ridicu!ed the Expansionists | Mir Hoar was inclined to ridicule those l who favor expansion and the ratification of | the treaty of Paris without amendment. | Their arguments, he said were "three l chers for the flag-who will dare to haul it l down? Hold onto everything you can get. l America has outgrown Americanism.' Tn general, the friends of what is called | imperialism or expansion, content them l selves with declaring that the flag which is taken down every night and put up again l every morning over the roof of this senate chamber, where it is in it's rightful place, l must never be taken down where it has
 once floated whether that be it's rightful I place or not-a doctrine which is not only
 without justification in International law, 1 but if it were implanted there would make
 of every war between civilized and powerful
 nations war of extermination a war of dishonor to one party or the other." MT Ioar then entered upon a critical
 analysis of Mr. Platt's speech. After sum- marking the'argument, he said: "The con- 1 stitutional argument for slavery was ten times as strong as the argument of the
 senator from Connecticut. The slave mas terS contended that they owned men for their good. The senator from Connecticut proposes to own nations for their good" lie set forth his own constitutional doc- Urine, which he desired to oppose that of
 Mir Platt. He declared that the people of this country had not deposited all sover- | eighty anywhere and had not authorized any agent of theirs to exercise all sover- | eighty, unlimited and uncontrolled 'The powers not delegated to the United l States by the constitution nor prohibited l by it to the states are reserved to the states fx~salxr article 10.
 "The sovereignty which can be exercised by the nation unit is only that which
 is necessary for accomplishing the purposes of the constitution, and must be either ex- pressly granted therein or necessary or convenient, in the judgment of congress, to accomplish the purpose expressly de- clared therein.
 Sovereignty Reserved to the People
 "Al other sovereignty is reserved to the
 states or to the epople.
 "The power to conquer alien peoples and hold them in subjection is not here express ly granted.
 '"rhe power to conquer alien peoples and hold them in subjection is not herein im- piled as merely for the accomplishment of the purposes declared by the constitution
 "It is clearly shown to be one that ought
 not to be exercised by anybody--one that the framers of the constitution thought should not be exercised by anybody. "Flrst-Because it is immoral and wicked in itself.
 "Second-Because it is expressly denied in the declaration of independence, the great interpreter and expounder of the meaning of the constitution, which owes its origin to the same generation and largely to the same men.
 "Third--k is affirmed that it Is immoral and unfit to be exercised by anybody-in EContinued on Second Page.l