The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-01-22

To she Fdftor,--Tn addition 20 tbe
gloomy view taken By souse OF tns states
nskn rewsparsss, bparxs o. trade and ot5-
o. Ike associations In the eastern states. os
the proposed annexation o. the Philippine
1ssands. II IL urged that the Inhabitants
OF these Islands are incapable u sef-xov-
ernsnenf, and therefore unfit for statehood.
or eyen 20 carry On limited form OF terri
torfas government that the United States
cannot govern them without giving them
some voice I'm the manner Of their govern
snent. except By violating the spirit Of the
constitution. I. In curious. but II b never
thssess . fact. that the people Of our cosn-
try too frequently ny In the face OF the
lessons OF the past. Il has BEEN said
ssthoy nzslst be educated In Gnancs at least
once ia tea years" and the history o. CUR
political campaigns goes Tar TO ssfaSa4za
tire fact.
No accession Of territory has ever been
made stree the formation OF osr govern
ment, without mourning ire mos; vioisnt
opposition. Even tie father Of his cs'sirs-
try manifested most decided sprTenen-
sion. iest the orsgfnai thirteen states saouio
become ambitious and seek 10 extend TIE
boundaries Of the United states By snaiud-
Ing territory lying 20 the vest and south
Of them. AZ knowledge OF this territory
Increased, the better informed and more
determined that n should BE- acquired and
nssdo part Of the public domain
The QueafIon Of Government.
TIE question OF the government: OF such
territory. early became the subject ~ con-
alteration and adjudication by the Federal
courts. TIE first case arose on arrount Of
the collection OF duties In n portion Of the
4srritory acquired By the cession OF Flor
ida, and is reported In Peters. 542. II was
eontsrded by the PLAINTIFF:
1. That the people ia the territories Of
The United States. are catixens Of the
United States. entitled 10 al the benefits
derived from the laws ard constitution OF
provisions OF the constitution and laws
passed under It.
= T-ha, In principle there can be no diff
ference bsfwecn a territory formed out OF
n country within shs old limits OF the
United States. and q territory In a newly
acquired country.
3. And that. therefore. the people Of
Florida Immediately upon Its cessson. or
IT any rate upon the passing Of the act
5nstituting the territorial government. be-
came citizens Of tho United States. 20
wnom the laws and constitution extended
The opinion Of the court was written By
that distinguished constitutional lawyer
and tirist. Chief Justice Marshall, who
said: THE constitution eonfers absolutely
on the government OF the Union. the pow
ers Of making war ard OF making treaties:
consequently that government pcssessses
tho power Of acquiring territory either by
conquest or by treaty.
THE usage OF the world IL. II a nation
be not entirely subdsird. TO consider the
holding Of conquered territory AZ n mere
military ccruTnticn. nnti' sts fate shall
ne determined ~ the treaty Of peace. IL
g b cedsd by the treaty. the acquisition
b confirmed. and the coded territory be-
comes 4 part Of the nation TO which Il Is
ANNEXED. either on the terms stipulated
In tho treaty Of cession. or on such az It's
nav master shall impore.''
san FrancIsco Taken ny Arms.
The next case Of similar nature parsed
upon by the supreme court of the United
States, was that OF Cross vs. Harrison. re-
ported In Is or Howard.
In the war with Mexico, the port OF San
Francisco was conquered hy arms OF the
United States In 1876. wheTeupon the United
States exercised heiliaerer. rights over =,
~ conQueror. While In military control
our government collected tonnage and
duties on imports. and exercised all the
other functions of government. THIS case
was brought hv Cross 10 recover from
Harrison who was collector Of the port,
tonnage ana duties he had been compelled
TO pay during the exercise OF such befiger-
snt rights. but more especially between
the treaty az peace and the time the seve-
MIRO sySsem Of the United states was put
into practical operation in California under
acts of congress passed for that purpose
The court IN passing upon the questions
presented said. among other things. Ter
sitory acquired by the United States by
conqtsest treaty. does not ny force az
cur constitution, become entitled TO self
government, nor can n be subject 10 the
Jurisdiction az any state II would ts
not under the dominion and jurisdiction
81 the United States trsrsng military oc-
cupafian II s. governed nv military law:
but when cssfes ny treaty - Is under ties
civil, government az the United States.
and terms OF the treaty. or statutes ~ the
United states are the Gfllv law that can
bind II. The rights AMI relations ~ per-
scfs inter remain. but the aiiegiaree
IL transferred. although the people 40 rot
share IN the powsrs 81 general govern
n1ens until they hsrause "A state ana are
admitted a. such With she transfer OF
the domain. the inhabitants cease 80 he
Inhabitants ~ the state ar country that
eessez she land IN question. The power ~
the United States lodged IN congress Ia
etpTefne over ali ceasiens. even frcra the
eevcrai states and no state can limit. de-
feat or ntpsiifv the action % the Juitef
States OVER such cassiens. both ga co the
property and as 90 the igthaissants: ard
the domain and ~. sovereignty are 6,s-
finef aai NAV ~ one ~ fusth syrrcisesf
or NOT: hence congress may isy csreet FAX
on lands IN ts~ gx-ssf territories Congress
may omit to extend q direct tax 80 the ter
'rt.os-cs or districts ewu%si by her when
ever a direct tax ~ iai3 unon tae states"
:. - -
Power af Congress.
TIE question ~ 10 power ~ congress
over ths scs'TftsTfes ars4sc again III she s-aS.>
81 Rank vs. yanktnn county IN the course
az the decision ~ waicsi the sssr,rssvas court
sssNstfs--sssss sssssxs