Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1900-12-20

gressional branches of the govern
ment for a hundred years has, with
one impartial exception, been uniform
in regarding acquired territory as
neither bound nor privileged by that
instrument until brought within its
operation either by express COM
pact in the treaty or by act of
congress until brought within its oper-
alton, either by express compact in
the treaty or by act of congress; and
that acts of congress do not apply to
after-acquired territory until extended
to it by subsequent legislative enact
ment."
Continuing. he said it was not con-
tended that congress had absolute
power over the lives and property of
citizens: There is here" he went on,
mo proposition to confiscate or de-
stroy the possible quality of the plain
tiff's merchandise. 1t is mere demand
of right to tax it at the custom
house. The right to tax at our own
ports merchandise coming from out
lying territory of the United States is
not a strange or unusual exercise of
power. There is nothing essentially
unjust in such practice. It may be
made unjust by the severity of the
tax or the rigor of the prohibition,
but SO may any one kind of custom
house imposition. Such a practice has
long been followed by every civilized
power. England today levies duties
on the merchandise of all her colonies
when brought into the United States.
She did the same in ante-revolution-
airy days, and we will not find among
the complaints of the American colon
lists any protest on this score"
Mr.. Griggs then entered upon the
presentation of his subject in detail.
He contended that the right of the
United States to acquire territory had
been asserted in the declaration of in
dependence, and said that such acquis-
ition could be made either by con-
quest, by treaty, by annexation or by
discovery. He quoted number of SUI
preme court decisions in support of
this contention.
A great deal of attention was given
to the right to govern territory when
once acquired, and innumerable au-
thorities were adduced in support of
this position, among others the deci-
sion of the supreme court in the Nor
mon church case, in which the court
said that "it would be absurd to hold
that the United States has power to
acquire territory and no power to gov
ern it when acquired"
In this case, the court said further
on that the United States having &C.
quired the territory of Louisiana and
the territories west of the Rocky
mountains, "the United States govern
ment was the only one which could
impose laws upon them and its sover-
eighty over them was complete" In
+ the course of his argument in this
connection, Mr.. Griggs asserted that
| international law declares that the
new sovereign may deal with the in
habitants of conquered or coded terri
tory and give them such laws as it
sees fit
I & Mr.. Griggs gave considerable atten-
ton to the views of Thomas jefferson
fon the power of the United States to
acquire territory. He quoted the let
ter of Mr.. Jefferson to Senator Breck-
inridge in 1903, in which Mr.. Jefferson
said:
THE constitution makes no provi-
sion for holding foreign territory"
Commenting upon this expression
the attorney general said:
If this language stood by itself and
were the only utterance Of Jefferson
on the subject, it would justify that
belief as to his opinion on the consti-
tutional question which has been COM
monty attributed to him. An exam
ination, however, of his writings and
of his whole course of action with ref
terence to the Louisiana purchase.
especially with reference to
the constitutional question, shows
conclusively that Mr.. Jeffer-
sons doubt was not without reference
to the power of the United States to
acquire foreign territory, but rather
as to the right to annex it to and make
lit part of the United States"
He asserted that 'the treaty-making
power of the government has exercis-
ed the right to deal with the status of
the Inhabitants of coded territory in
every treaty of cession from 1903 to
1898"
The status fixed, he said, has not
been uniform, but exceedingly vary
ing. He then proceeded to argue that
this practice is entirely at variance
with the doctrine that "the constitu-
ton follows the flag" and that when
territory is ceded to the United States
the inhabitants become immediate
proprio Vigore citizens of the United
States. IF that doctrine be true" he
said, every treaty that has brought
us new lands and new inhabitants has
violated in this respect the principles
of the constitution. II .convicts of err
ror and usurpation Thomas Jefferson,
James Madison, James Monroe, James
K. Polk, Franklin Pierce, Andrew John
son, their cabinets a,ad the senates
that ratified their treaties"
Arguing this point he asked:
IF congress may properly define the