New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-01-19
EXPANSION AND THE CONSTITUTION.

The address of Mr.. Charles A. Gardiner on
"Our Right to Acquire and Hold Foreign Terri
tory" delivered yesterday before the New-York
State Bar Association, was a strong exposition
of the ample powers Of the United States to
deal with the problems incident to assuming
sovereignty in the Philippines. So much has
been said lately by Senator Hoar and others
about the unconstitutonality of annexing for
eign territory. except In trust for Statehood,
that we publish Mr.. GARDENERS speech In full,
so as to place before our readers lawyers
study of authorities which proves beyond
shadow of a doubt that the United States Is
not inferior among the nations Of the earth be-
cause II Is a Republic with written Constitu-
ton.
Mr. Gardiner shows that In international re-
latlons the United States possesses absolute
powers of sovereignty. Other governments do
not question the validity Of its acts any more
than they do the acts of Russia in any part Of
its Jurisdiction. Neither do our own courts
question. They have said that the establish
ment of sovereignty was n political and not
judicial matter Then there IS nothing to re-
strain the Government from any territorial eX-
mansion which may seem expedient but scru-
ples of Congressman concerning the limit Of
mowers which 1t was meant to confer upon
them. That they need have no qualms on this
score. and that the Constitution means to give
them the broadcast field for the exercise OF their
Judgment, is made clear by numerous citations.
There has been no restriction placed on the
growth of the United States by its founders,
and no Limitation established to prevent SUI
nreme rule from Washington Of such territories
ms II may be advisable TO control In that way.
Court after court has recognized this fact and
there can be no question Of either the power
or the propre'y Of permanently holding lands
which are lot prospectively or possibly on the
road to Statehood
Interesting and instructive as Mr.. Gardiner
is concerning these subjects, on one vital point,
however. we think he tries TO prove too much
He dwells at length on this proposition:
Not only are the Constitution and laws not
lucrative but Congress In creating organizing
and supervising Territories is not bound 70 grant
the inhabitants any Of our so-caned 'inahenaole
rights" not even those enumerated in the Con-
stitution and its amendments and commonly
called the "Bill Of Rights" This principle was
distinctly zee ny the c9T brch an ea the
consensus OF all the authorities sustaining the
principle that neither the letter nor the spirit
Of the Constitution is operative In Territories
without the specific act Of Congress.
This same Mormon Church case which Mr..
that Congress is subject TO the law Of its own
being and must exercise its supreme authority.
not lawleSsly. but according to the rules and
under the restrictions laid down by its max
ers Justice Bradley, in his opinion in the
Mormon Church case, quotes Justice Matthews
with approval as follows:
The people of the United States, as sovereign
owners OF the natioral territories have supreme
power over them and their inhabitants. In the
exercise Of this sovereign dominion. they are
represented by the Government OF the United
States TO whom all powers OF government over
that subject have been delegated. subject only
TO such restrictions as are expressed i'm the
Constitution or are necessarily implied In its
terms.
Then Justice Bradley himself adds:
Doubtless Congress in legislating for the Terri
tories would he subject TO those fundamental
limitations in favor Of personal rights which are
formulated in the Constitution and its amend
ments; but these limitations would exist rather
bv Inference and the general spirit OF the Con-
stitution from which Congress derives all Its
powers than by any express and direct appli-
cation Of its provisions.
4 few of these restrictions and provisions
guaranteeing personal and property rights are
probably limited in their effect to citizens Of the
several States: others restrict Congress from
passing any law infringing on them, and thus
are coextensive territorially with the powers of
Congress. In one instance at least. that OF the
Thirteenth Amendment. the restriction on the
power of Congress Is expressly made applicable
10 "the United States" and also to "any place
subject 10 their Jurisdiction" 1t Is noticeable
that this amendment refers to places subject to
the Jurisdiction OF the United States but not
within the United States; matter TO which