The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-08-10
THE APPEAL TO THE SUPREME
COURT.

Any sincere effort TO settle the law
regarding the rights of labOrers under
the Hawaiian Masters and Seryan Is
Act" is to be commended. If there is
any reasonable ground for believing
that the Supreme Court OF the United
States will entertain Jurisdiction of the
matter, or if it does that it will hold
that the Federal Constitution covers
these Islands, the case should be
brought before that court promptly.
The probabilities are that Congress
will within a few months extend the
Constitution to these Islands, as il has
extended it by law to other Territories,
but if there is good reason for beiiev-
ing that the Supreme Court will anti
cipate the usual action of Congress in
such cases, the effort should be made
promptly to obtain it's opinion.
The probabilities are, for there is no
certainty in predicting the views of
court, that the Supreme Court will de-
cline TO take Jurisdiction Of the matter
on several grounds; that it's power to
take original jurisdiction is limited by
Article 3 of the Constitution; that it
has no means provided by law for the
execution of its processes in Hawaii
and cannot punish for contempt of its
DEGREES, as there is no Marshal of the
Federal government who is empowered
to execute process here. Still if Mr..
n vxyi, hn IF
the Supreme Court with the spiritual
body of the great Expounder of the
Constitution, Daniel Webster, it will
be a feather in the cap of the little
Territory. Perhaps Mr.. Gear will be
able to show that the great Expounder
was under the influence of liquor when
he said that Congress was under no
Constitutional restraints in making
laws for the Territories. 1t will be in
deed a dramatic scene, when the Ha-
waiian attorney, actually standing on
the same floor upon which the great
Expounder stood, when he made his
argument, involving the same princi-
pies, before that august Tribunal,
demonstrates to it, the fallacy of Mr.
Webster's arguments, although the
court sustained him.
In the case of the American Insur-
ance Co. against Canter, before the
Supreme Court, it was maintained on
one side that the Constitution extended
over the Territory of Florida. and the
courts of the Territory must be estab
lished in accordance with the Constitu-
ton. Mr.. Webster argued, on the other
hand, that while the organization of
the Florida court was Inconsistent
with the Constitution, it was a lawful
court, because Congress had the right
to recognize it, and make it lawful and
the Constitution did not reach it. And
he said What has Congress done?
She might have done anything-she
might have refused the right of trial
by jury, and refused a legislature.
Chief Justice Marshall in deciding the
case said that the Territorial courts OF
Florida were no part of the Federal
judicial system, but were created UNI
der the power of Congress to rule the
Territories. While they were not in
accordance with the Constitution, they
were valid courts made under the SOW
ereign power of Congress. So Mr..
Webster was sustained. These were
the same views he expressed while adj
dressing the Senate. The advocate and
the Senator agreed.