Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-07-12
status of the Colonies.

To the Editor of The Evening Star:
1t seems to me that exhaustive opinion
of the 'insular commission referred to in
your issue of last evening, which holds
that the islands in possession of the United
States as result of the war with Spain
are not part Of the territory of the United
States will not hold water as the say
ing is.
You say the commission holds that there
is a radical difference between territory a
part of the United States and territory in
possession Of the United States" l see
nothing but that old difference between
''tweedle and tweedle-dee. What the
commission probably meant to say was that
the Constitution and laws of the United
States do not of their own force extend
over the conquered islands, for it could
hardly hold that tho sovereignty of the
United States does not exist over them.
If this is not SO we are mere intruders and
trespassers The United States is in pos
session by property rights eeded by Spain,
and title is just as good as to any por-
ton of the territory1of the United States.
Sovereign or supreme rights that existed in
Spain are either in the United States or
they do not exist at all, for nobody will
contend that they belong to the inhabitants
of these islands. The allegiance they owed
to Spain has been transferred to the United
States: but l never agreed with that great
lawyer, Judge Edmunds, that by virtue of
the acquisition of the islands their inhab-
itants become citizens of the United States.
They are species ofosubjects. Citizenship
is a thing conferred by the Constitution,
and its provisions have no application to
the people of Porto. Rico Cuba and the
Philippines, because they were not born in
the United States, nor ever been natural
lied ''F' . -. II .ii,us
1t does not follow that because we can do
as We please with the islands obtained from
Spain-sel them, give them away or turn
them over to the inhabitants who live upon
them for the establishment of Independent
governments-the islands cannot be a
part Of theaterritory of the. United States.
1t is not true that no part of our territory
sent of the Senate, could have made a
treaty with any foreign power for the sale
of the Louisiana purchase the next day
after he bought it: We could have sold all
the territory acquired from Mexico in 1876
We can today sell Alaska. There is nothing
in the Constitution to prevent it. True, no
state can separate itself by secession or by
treaty with foreign power, but this prin-
cple has no application to the territories
under the supreme sovereignty of the
United States.
1t is a mistake to say, as the commission
does, that the Supreme Court has decided
that military occupation after cession does
not extend the boundaries of the United
States. The Supreme Court has decided no
such thing. 1t simply held that during the
military government in California and New
Mexico the acts of the constituted authori-
ties were lawful from the necessities of the
case until Congress should provide civil
the theory that the laws of the United
States under the Constitution do not ex-
tend over territory until they are made to
extend by an act Of Congress 1t is on this
ground that the President is now govern
ing Cuba, Porto Rico and the Philippines
He can apply the old Spanish laws modi-
fly them substitute the laws of the
United States. He can exact tariff duties
or apply free trade. But he cannot make
the inhabitants citizens of the United
States. That will require some act of natu-
ralization by Congress.
This commission seems to have discovered
a difference between the treaties by which
We acquired Louisiana and Florida and that
by which we acquired the islands from
Spain. AS affects the sovereignty of the
United States, there was not the least diff
ference. To be sure, there was a provision
in the treaties in regard to Louisiana and
Florida that the inhabitants of those terri
tories should have all the rights and privi-
legeS of citizens of the United States But
it cannot be said that this inchoate right
of the inhabitants was paramount to the
sovereign right of the United States to dis
pose Of them-both land and people-as 1t
might have seen fit. 1t was no part of the
agreement that ,-.e territories should never
be alienated.
This commission is only right about one
thing, namely, whatever mode Of govern
ment be adopted for the islands, either
during the military occupation or by acts of
Congress, these will be regarded as political
questions with which the Supreme Court
will decline to interfere.
July II, 1899. r. HUTCHINSON.