The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-03-30

| and that therefore we must so construe
| the constitution as to forbid such a pow
| er? I answer that we could not, even
if another section Of the constitution did
not interms. forbid it. Why not? Be
| cause our constitution, in terms, forbids.
Yes. But also because our institutions
forbid. Institutional law is older, deeper,
and more vital than. constitutional law.
Our constitution is only one of the con-
/ crete manifestations of our institutions;
our statutes are another; decisions of our
courts are another. Our institutional law
is like the atmosphere, impalpable, i'm
percephble, but alI-pervading and the
source of life itself. There is scarcely
] decision of our courts of last resort
| in all the republic involving great consti-
| tutiona1 questions, which does not refer
| to the spirit Of our institutions as inter
preting our constitution 1t is our insu-
tutional law which, flowing, like our vital
blood through the weaker constitution,
gives that instrument vitality and power
of development. Our institutions were not
established by the constitution. Institu-
tional law existed before the constitution
The constitution did not give us free
free institutions gave US our constittl-
ton. All our progress toward liberty and
popular government, made since the
adoption of the constitution, has been
achieved not by virtue of that constitu-
ton, but sometimes in spite of and over
it. Jefferson wrote a bitter denunciation
of human slavery in the Declaration Of
Independence, and called it an 'execrable
commerce. it was stricken out by Geor-
gia and South Carolina, and slavery was
recognized in our constitution But slav-
cry was opposed to the spirit of our instr
tutions, and while legahzed by our con-
stituhon and defended by armies as
brave as ever marched unflinchingly to
death, constitutional slavery went down
before institutional liberty; and Appo-
matte was the capitula ton Of the word
Of death in our constitution to the spirit
Of life in our institutions. The constitu-
ton contemplated and provided for the
election Of presidents by electors who
should be above favoritism or caprice.
and who should select the best man to
preside over the republic, utterly ire
spective Of the peoples choice That was
the intention of the fathers. They not
eject
the president; they did THEN, best to pre-
vent what they believed to be that dire
result But in that they did not correct
ly interpret the spirit and tendency Of
our institutions, which is toward getting
our government as close to the people,as
possible; and so, in spite Of the constitu
ton, in spite of the intention of the IA
theirs, in spite Of the fact that this plan
was pursued for several elections orr
institutions prevailed over the constitu-
ton, and no presidential elector now dare
cast his vote against the candidate the
people instruct him to vote for. Vher
ever the constitution correctly interprets
our institutions it lives; wherever il does
not correctly interpret our constitution. II
dies, and has died. Wherever our insti-
tutions have found no Interpretation in
our constitution, the omission has heen
supplied by judicial decisions, by Iegis-
lative assumption by executive action
The whole doctrine Of implied powers is
merely this: That where our constitution
IS not broad enough to give play To our
institutions, the courts will read our in
situations into our constitution. And had
it not been for this our constitution
would have long since been abandoned as
the Articles of Confederation was aban-
doned.
And so our security, the security of
our island wards, the security of liberty
is not in the written word of the consti- !
tuition; it is in our institutions which are
the spirit Of the constitution. England
has no written constitution; France has
an ideal written constitution. And vet /
England has liberty and law; France has |
but bureaucracy and military absolutims.
"And it is the spirit of our institutions |
that will prevent the abuse Of power in |
Porto Rico, Hawaii, the Philippines or |
any other spot blessed by the protection
Of our fiag-aye, and write 'accursed'
across the brow of him who, even in a |
thought, would WELD a scepter.
And so. senators, We assert our power.
but by the same word we announce our
justice. too. We do not want Justice Civ
en- for the base emergencies of political
desperation, as faction wants It. But
we want it as the high justification of
our free hand And we want it as a
measure of statecraft looking to our flu
ture as the dominant power Of earth.
Mr. President, the partisan opposition
to the government pretends to want free
trade with Porto Rico, Hawaii and the
Philippines. It is this faction. this SQUAD
ron of Obstructing partisanship. that has
been from the first opposing the govern
ment. There is no sincerity in their at
titude; for they advocate free trade with
our new possessions, they say. because
they are our possessions. and in the same
sentence advocate the abandonment Of
the possessions themselves-which is an
antagonism in premises and a non-se-
gutter in conclusion. This partisanship
to the government ask free trade with.
Porto Rico and the Philippines not be-
cause they believe in II except as they
believe in free trade with all the world,
but to brighten the timid with falsehoods
about competition with pauper labor and
50 TO prevent the nation from keeping
these priceless possessions That is the
motive of the partisan opposition to the
government in urging free trade with
Porto Rico. 1t an issue they shall not
have Reciprocity as a matter of Justice /
and duty is the position OF the govern
ment. first announced by that great con-
strucuve statesman, the president of the
United States. and afterwards by formal
bills in both senate and house. When the
necessity for money for Porto Rico be-
came urgent and instant. a bin 70 raise
it ny the method which was thought to
be least oppressive to the people at the
moment was reported in the house. The
supporters OF the government in the
house stated that the tax proposed In
that bill was temporary expeiient. and
that free trade was to follow it But af-
ter that bill had passed the hor,se and