The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-07-26

J Federal government can exercise no powe
> over his person or property, beyond via
! that instrument confers no. lawfully den,
any right which It has reserved Thii
decision, in Its relation 20 the African
race, has been much assallce, but III,
above doctrines as to territorial acouisi.
, ton have never been questioned In an,
. later ruling so far rs can be diseoyerei
nor were they at the tipo the subioct
OF opposing views. Mr.. d itice Mclean
speaking In his dissenting crinion of The
authority OF con gross relative to Terri
tory not in statehood. sayl that mo pew.
ers can be exercised whlcn are prohibited
by the constitution o. which are contrary
TO It's spirit" and that mo duplication
OF a power can arise whicn is inhlSltt
by the constitution or when may be
against the theory Of It's construcucu
Mr. Justice Curtis, speaking in bis dls-
sent OF the legislative power en- lie sub
ject, states that 'in cammol with all
the other legislative powers OF congress-,
1t finds limits In the express prohibitions
on congress not to do ~ssaain thinZJ; that,
in the exercise OF the legislative l1weri
congress can not pass an rx-Iost Il ct,
law or bill OF attaindec; and so IN iest ct
Of the other prohibitions contsined in he
constitution" In fact, ~ claim sce,nn TO
have been then made. even polittta,ly
that the constitution did not ,llly to
! the territories The decision YVES rendered
March 6, 1857 The platform OF the re-
publicans In 1860. lie ~ ilcing the calm
/ that the constitution carried slavery ito
! the territories, vowed that the claim was
! to use it's own words, "at ;arlauce with
I the explicit provisions OF that instru-
( ment itself" The principle for which we
are contending unde- this decision mas
been, in effect, renuncia'ed in a number
OF later cases. In First National Bank
| of Brunswick VS.. Yaakton lui T., g. /
ed. 1916, which involved the validity OF
an act OF congress giving effect TO GER
tain territorial bonds, the court, discus
sing the power of congress in upholding
the act, declared through Chief Justice
Waite. that the territories were but "po-
litical subdivisions of the outlying domin-
ion of the United States" bearing much
the relations OF counties to the States,
and that, In iegislating for them, con
gress had plenary powers, except such
ms have been expressly or by implication
reserved in the prohibitions OF the cen
stitution." In Murphy We Ramsay. III
U. S., "A, which upheld as constitutional
an act of congress depriving hlEamists and
polygamists OF suffrage IN The 'eTitory
OF Utah. the court, through Mr.. Justice
Matthews reafhrme& The sup emacy OF
the sovereign power of the Unltel S,ates
over the territorial possessions, Subject
only to such restrictions as are expressed
In the constitution, or are necessarily i'm
piled in its terms, or In the url cses and
objects of the power Itself" Uniting
that lin respect to this. as to every othe
power OF society over its members, that
Il is not absolute and unlimited Ths
court then, diiserentiI;ing mere political
rights or franchises, says Tho PEI
sonsl and civil rights OF the Inhabitants
OF the territories ara scored to them
SIS to other citizens. by the principles
OF constitutional liberty which restrain
all the agencies OF government Stale AID
National. Their political rights are fran
chises which they aold as privileges az
the discretion OF the congress OF tie
United States" IN Late Corporation of
Latter Day Saints vs. United States. l36
U. S., l, ! ed. A91, alter approv,ngly quot
ing from the last cited ease. the pfipciple
was reaffrmed, Mr. Justice Bradley cb
serving:
"poubtless congress. in leglsating for
the Territories, would be subject to those
fundamental limitations in favor of per-
nonal rights which are formulated in
the constitution and tits amendments, but
these limitations would exist rllAer BY
inference and the general spirit of the
constitution from which congress derives
all its powers. than by any express srd
direct application of its provisions y
In Thompson VS.. Utah, 10 u. S., 343. I,
ed. 1861 the question was whether the
constitutional prohibition relating 10 jury
tIlai was applicable TO the Territory Of
Utah. and the court held, speaking
through Mr.. Justice Harlan:
That the provisions Of the constitu- I
lion OF the United States relating to The
tight OF trial by Jury in suits at common
aw apply TO the Territories of the United
States is no longer an open question.
Webster VS.. Reid. So U. s., IL How. 49,
100 (13. 761, 770); American Publishing
Company VS.. Fisher, 1865 U. S.. 46I, 4GS
Al, 1919. l0SD; Sprlngyllle VS.. Thomas
66 Y. s.. 707 al, 1172) Il is
equally beyond question that the proyi-
ions OF the National constitution relat-
ng to trials by jury for crimes and 10 !
rlminal prosecutions apply to the Terri
cries of the United Staies6' The opin- .
on reviews other cases to the same effect
Iotably Callan VS.. Wilson, 127 U. s.. $50,
nd Reynolds VS.. United States. 9S q. s.,
40, but we deem it unnecessary to further
ursue this limo of authorities,
More opposite 10 the particular legls-
alton IN question are two early cases to
'hch we shall now direct attention. In
he justly famous case of LoughhaI ocGh
S. Blake. 5 Wheat, U. S., 3l7, he point |
( decision was upon the right of congress
o impose direct tax upon the District
t Columbia. The court, speaking through c
hief Justice Marshall. thus held
"The eighth section of the first article !
ollect taxes, duties, imposts aud cA-
ises for the purposes hereinafter laeu- s
oned. This giant is general, without s
as to place 1t consequently q
Stends to all places over which the gov :
rnment extends, II this could be doubt
d the doubt is removed by the subse- :
uent words which modify the grant !,
hese words are. but all duties, impo5ts
I'd excuses shall be uniform throughout !,
ne United States, 1t will not be con- d
,nded that the modihca lon of the power :
Stends TO places 10 which the power !;9elf q
pes not extend The power. then. 20 lay q
nd collect duties, imposts and excuses ID
ay be exercised and must be exercised n
lroughout the United States. Dnss this e
rm designate the whole or any particu- Il
r portion of the American empire? Ger
llnly this question can admit OF nut Il
ne answer. /, is the name given 20 orr
'eat Republic, which is composed of "
ates and Territories. The District OF Il
olumbla, or the Territory west Of /the b
issouri, Is not less within the I'm led
.ates than Maryland or Pennsylvania, h
Id il is not less necessary. on The prin- q
pies OF our constitution, that uniformi- el
in the imposition OF imposts, dunes 81
Id excuses should be observed n the pi
le than in the other. Since, then, the N
,wer to lay and collect taxes, Sl'1l in VI
Iudes dirapt taxes is obviously CO. OF