Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1899-11-10
CITIZEN OR SUBJECT.
VITAL PROBLEM OF IMPERIAL
ISTIC POLICY.
How Can an Inhabitant of the Philip
pines Demand Justice In Our Courts
Has No Standing as Subject and Can't
Be n Citizen.

The time Is not so far away when
an American citizen will be compelled
to go into court of law to ascertain
whether he is a citizen of a nation
based upon popular sovereignty, or the
subject of some imperial administra-
tion of the affairs of the country, that
will not brook opposition to its policy
unless compelled by writ of mandate.
The fact is, the principles and griev-
ances set forth in the declaration OF
independence have become mere bum
combe, and the constitution of the
United States an effete instrument.
If the men who founded this nation
were in error regarding the principles
they attempted to establish as the
cornerstone of a great nation, or II
those principles are susceptible or De-
ing construed into something entirely
different, it becomes a question OF
grave Importance to determine what
kind of a government should be sub
stituted, and who, or what political
party shall be vested with the power
and duty of remodeling it. 1t goes
deeper than party platforms, which,
after all, are mere sentiments to at
tract voters who have no minds OF
their own, and must be goaded into
political frenzy In the same manner as
sinners find their way to the anxious
seat during a religious revival.
Nobody ever heard or knew of po-
litical platform benefiting the people
Of the nation. If it ever has been OF
any benefit, how did it happen that the
country waited until the campaign OF
1896 to discover that the nation was on
the verge of destruction, and that Will
lam Mckinley and the gold standard
alone could save 1t?
II this nation should repudiate the
principle of popular sovereignty, over
throw the constitution, declare the
grievances specified in the declaration
of independence as clap-trap, how
would it affect the people? BY whom
could such a radical reversal of COM
plete system of government be effect
ed? How could 1t be accomplished?
To admit the necessity of a change Is
to question the wisdom of our revolu-
tionary fathers; to admit the posi-
Ibility Of a change is to suggest one OF
the strangest revolutions that ever
occurred on earth. 1t would be the re-
lbellion of a government against Its
own people, curious spectacle that
history does not anywhere record
There have been monarchs who be-
came tired of reigning and withdrew
TO converts, like Charles w.; and some
have deliberately run away from their
lsubjects-one, indeed, having plunged
into the fires Of an active volcano
rather than remain with his people
and see to the execution of the laws;
but for a whole government to de-
signedly cut loose from the people, who
alone can give 1t existence, Is some
thing so extraordinary as to be in
conceivable, yet 1t is possible.
The civil war settled the question OF
secession. No one state, or several
states, can separate from the irrevoca-
BILE contract expressed in the constitu-
ton: that much of the effete constitu-
ton is regarded as in full force and
yigor. But 1t has never been decided,
except in the obiter dicta Of courts,
which are nothing but personal opin-
ions, that all of the sovereign states
may not cut loose from, or abolish.
the federal government. If they should
act simultaneously in that direction,
there is nothing to prevent the ac-
complishment of 1t. OF course, 1t new
er will be done. but that is not the
question-it can be done-and If the
whole number of states may sever
their relations with the federal gov
eminent, a portion Of their number
may also do so II they are strong
enough. It is not question Of legali-
ty, but of strength. Legality is never
considered in governmental affairs; II
Is always expediency. interest and
main strength. 1t Is always might
that makes right, and constitutions