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

| question OF international law, q cues.
tion OF justice and righteousness or q
question OF public eXpedency. This
can be stated clearly and sharply in
the abstract, and it can be put clearly
ana sharply by an illustration growing
out Of existing facts"
| lie then proceeds to roast the ribs of
the jingOcs in this artistic fashion:
III hold that this acquisition, holding
and governing can be only n means for
Il constitutional end-the creation of
new states or some other Of the con.
stitutional purposes to which l have
adverted. And l maintain that YOU
can no more hold and govern territory
than you can hold and manage cannon
or fleets for any other than q constitu.
tional 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
5ects and confers certain specific DOW.
ers upon the government 1t creates.
All powers necessary or reasonab bly,
convenient to accomplishing these spe-
ctdc objects o%d exercising these spe.
cihc powers are granted by implica-
tion. In my Judgment the constitu-
tion should be literally construed in
determining the extent of such powers.
In that 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 saws
that congress may make rules and reg.
ulations 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.
ike other property, can only be acquir-
cd Tor constitutional purposes and can.
not be acquired and governed for un-
constitutional purposes. Now, one con-
stitutional purpose is to admit new
states to the Union. That is one of
the objects for 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 constitutional end.
On the contrary, 1t Is an end which
the generation which framed the con.
stitution and the Declaration of Inde-
pendence declared was unrighteous
anu abhorrent. So, in my opinion, we
have no constitutional power to &C..
quire territory for the purpose of hold.
Ing 1t In subjugation, in q state of
vassalage or serfdom, against the will
OF it's people.
Can't Buy Allegiance.
In the present case we have not, /
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
neids-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 it in
proper case Il right to the allegiance
OF the occupant Of the soil we own.
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 IN allegiance which
this people have shaken off, which
Spain could not deliver, which does
not exist In justice or in right, we can
~~ASN oO OAA Ghu cuy IuoI tuc COuStltu-
ton OF the United States does not ap-
ply to territory and that We will pro-
coed 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 Ameri.
can republic, and whether it's great
bulwark and fortress, the American
constitution. impregnable from with.
out. Is to be betrayed frOm within. Is
our question now.
"Wtll any gentleman affirm tLat the
trainers Of the constitution or the peo.
pie who adopted 1t considered as an
object and end Of their government Of
limited powers which the Declaration
OF Independence had declared beyond