The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1900-05-02

| question OF lHlefL:llioi!;il INV. QuSo
ton OF Justice and righteousness or &
question OF puh!ic eXpediency. This
can be stated clearly and sharply in
the abstract. and it c;:n be pat clearly
and sharply by an Illustration growing
out of existing facts.
lie then proceeds to roast the ribs OF
the iinsoes in this artistic fashion:
II hold that this acquisition. holding
and governing can be only 4 means for
:, constitutional eCd-the creation Of
new states or some other CT the con
stitutional purposes to which l have
aGyered And l maintain that you
can 10 more hold and govern territory
than YOU can hold and manage cannon
or fleets for any other than 4 constitu-
tioual end, and l maintain that the
holding in subjection an alien people,
governing them against their will for
any fancied advantage to them, is
not only not an end provided for by the
constitution, but is an end prohibited
therein.
Congress and the Constitution.
..The constitution of the United
States sets forth certain specific OBJ
iects and confers certain specific pow
ers upon the government it creates.
All powers necessary or reasonably
convenient to accomplishing these spe-
cifc objects and exercising these spe-
cific powers are granted by jmpllca-
ton. In my judgment, the constitu-
ton should be literally construed in
determining the extent Of such powers.
In that l agree With Webster and Ham
ilton and Lincoln and Washington and
Marshall and not with Calhoun or the
Democrats of the time Of the war of
the rebellion and since. But the most
liberal statesman or jurist never went
further than the rule have stated in
claiming constitutional powers for our
government The constitution says
that congress may make rules and reg
uIations for the government Of the ter
ritory and other property OF the United
States. That implies that we may
acquire and regulate territory as We
may acquire and use other property.
such as our ships Of war, our cannon
or forts or arsenals. But territory,
like other property. can only be acquir-
ed for constitutional purposes and can
not be acquired and governed for IN
constitutional purposes. Now, one con-
stitutional purpose is to admit new
states to the Union. That is one OF
the objects Tor which the constitution
was framed SO we may acquire and
hold and govern territory with that
object in view. But governing sub
ject peoples and holding them for that
purpose is not q constitutional end.
On the contrary, it is an end which
the generation which framed the con-
stitution and the Declaration of lnde-
pendence declared was unrighteous
and abhorrent. SO, in my opinion, we
have no constitutional power to ac-
quire territory for the purpose OF hold
ing it in subjugation, in state of
vassalage or serfdom, against the will
of it's people.
Can't Buy Allegiance.
':In the present case we have not, l
repeat, bought any property. We have
undertaken to buy mere sovereignty.
There were no public lands in the Phil
ippine Islands, the property Of Spain,
which we have bought and paid for.
The mountains of iron and the mug
gets of gold and the hemp bearing
felds-do you purpose to strip the own
ers of their rightful title: We have
undertaken to buy allegiance, pure and
simple. And allegiance is just what
the law of nations declares you cannot
buy. The power Of congress to dis
pose of the territory or other property
of the United States, invoked IN this
debate, as the foundation Of your con-
stitutional right, may carry With 1t III
q proper case u right to the allegiance
of tie occupant OF the soil we cWn.
But we have not bought any property
there The mountains Of iron, the mug
gets of gold, the hemp bearing fields,
the tobacco and sugar and coffee, are
not ours unless, holding first that we
can buy Of Spain an allegiance Which
this people have shaken off, which
Spain could not deliver, which does
not exist in justice or in right, we can
then so on and say that the constitu-
ton of the United States does not ap-
ply to territory and that we will pro-
ceed to take the private property OF
this people for public use without their
consent.
Whether the inestimable and imper-
ishable principles of human liberty
are to be trampled down by the Amer!-
can republic. and whether its great
bulwark and fortress, the American
constitution, impregnable from With
out. is to be betrayed from within. is
our question now.
will any gentleman affirm that the
trainers of the constitution or the peo-
ple who adopted it considered as an
object and end of their government OF
limited powers which the Declaration
of independence had declared beyond
the just powers Of any government