The sun., 1900-09-07
CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED
ONE OF BRYAk'S 0FT.HEPBATED
STATEMENTS EXPLODED.

Assistant Attorney General Beck shows That
| Bryan's statement That There Can he No
variety Of Govern nsnt In q Rspubiio Is at
Variance with the Decisions OF the su-
preme Court aad Contrsdieted By the
History Of the United states From Its
Very Bssinnins TO the Present Time.
WASHINGTON, Sept. o-The attention OF
Assistant Attorney General Beck was yester-
day called by The Sun reporter TO the follow
ing statement in q recent speech OF Mr. Bryan
! IF this Government enters upon colonial
| career IL must repudiste the doctrine that gov
ernmAnts derive their Just powers from the
consent Of the governed. The people OF Eu-
rope can be ruled In one way. the people OF
| Canada in another the people OF Ireland IN
another, while the people Of India con be gov
erned according TO still different forms. but
there can be no variety In republic.
| When questioned by a representative of
| The Sun a. 20 the accuracy OF this statement
| Mr.. Beck said:
| Mr.. Bryan's statement Is not only at vari-
| anoe with the Constitution as Interpreted py
the Supreme Court. but II Is contradlcted ny
the history Of the Government from its COM
mencement 10 the present hour. There has
always been variety" in the measure OF self
government in this country. The equality
/
by the Territories The Indian tribes have
| from the beginning been governed with some
| exosptions without any seh-government
! whatever. while TO citizens Of the Territories
| have been given a measure OF sef-goVern-
ment which, while inferior TO that enjoyed
| nv the States. 10 yet analogous to citizens OF
| the seh-governing colonies OF England For
| n century the permanent residents oi
the District OF Columbia, OF whom 'here
| are now nearly 25O0OO. have been governed
| without any participation whatever In then
municipal government The District oi Oo-
lunbia is governed by Congress, acting through
commissioners who are selected by the Presi-
dent No municipal assembly exists ana no
citizen OF the district has any power by vote
or other wise to determine what shall Do done
for the good Of the community From tns
time that the Confederation passed the 10"
for the government OF the Northwest IorrE
tory until the time when Congress passed a
law for the oivil government OF Porto hioo'
the Republic. acting through Congress mas
repeatedly passed laws for the organization
and government OF Territories in which vary
ing degrees Of home rule have been given 70
the citizens thereof in accordance with their
capacites. and in which all participation In
government has been denied to the Indians
IL
lead to error. Many speak Of = colonial policy,
or OF colonies, a. though other the policy OF
having colonial dependenoies. or the method
OF governing them, were new questions III
American politics. Nothing can be more
untrue. But this misunderstanding has been
due 70 the use Of the word territory instead
Of COLONY II the fathers Of the Republic,
when they acquired the Northwest Territory.
comprising the unsettled wilderness from the
Ohio TO the Lakes, and when they provided
form OF government for this vast region mad
called Il the Northwest Colony and II Mr..
Jefferson, when he purchased the so-called
Territory Of Louisiana, comprising the region
between the Gulf Of Mexico and Puget Sound.
had called IL the Colony Of louisiana leSs peo-
ple to-day would regard the acquisition OF new
colonies as a radical departure In the policy
of the American people Colony would have
been an apter word a. territory refers TO land
and ignore, ia inhabitants while colony
includes land and people. There Is no substan-
tial distinction between the government
OF Alaska, for instance and the Colony Of Aus
tralia CT cept that the Commonwealth Of Aus
tralia enjoys a far greater measure Of self
government than does Alaska
so far as the power OF the Government
10 acquire territory and hold II at pleasure
and govern IL in Its discretion Is concerned,
excepting always fundamental personal rights.
there can no longer be any legal question what
ever II is true that in the famous Dred Scott
decision, which did much 10 precipitate the Civil
War, some OF the opinions OF the different mem
bers OF the court contained certain dicta which
might indicate a contrary opinion, but these
dlcta we're the expressions Of but one or two
judges, and we're not essential to the decision
in that case, and are contradoted by the later
decisions OF the court. Even those dicta went
no further than asserting that while the Re
public could not acquire territory without
the intention OF ultimately creating States.
yet, a. ChiefJustice Taney said. the question
siop az 20 for M sstehood was For the political depart
mept OF the Government and not the judicial,
and whatever the political department q the
Of the nted States the judicial department is
also hound to recoSnlze The present doc
ents, that colonial policy is impossible for this
country unless We are prepared TO admit the
inhsbitante Of the Philippines TO all the priv
il curious revival OF doctrine " hch was irst
suggested by Mr.. Calhoun for the purpose Of
carrying slavery into the Territories by means
Toned toned until the great advocate Of slavery. IN
doctrine doc % that the Constitution. with It's recoS %
pltion Of slavery. became immediately sppn,
cable 10 the IerrltOrlt~ Wnen acquired, and
Congress therefore could not, without Violating
the Constitution. prohibit slavery In the Terri
tWhatever sanction the Supreme Court may
seam 10 have given to this docrine in the Dred
scott decision, the Civil War was fought to
destroy IT, and with ii slavery, and the later de-
cisions Of the Supreme Court leave no room
for doubt as 10 the penary powers Of Congress
in tho Territories and the right OF the American
people acting through their Congress, to hold
Territories OF colonial dependencies without
conierring the political rights Of Statehood
when and as long as Il shall please the Republic
Thus In one case Murphy vs.. Ramsey, liz
u s. tSl Mr.. Justice Mathews said 1t rests
with Congress 10 say whether In a given case
any OF the people resident ip a Territory shall
participate In the election Of It's officers or the
making Of its laws. This case Ia Instructive as
the validity Of an act Of Congress-
which took away q political right already ex-
isting wns called In question. The Territory
Of Utah had been given a Territorial Govern
ment In which its citizens voted without re-
gard 10 their connection with the Mormon
Church In 1882, Congress. which did not be-
licve in matrimony al the ratio of 10 10 l. paSsed
a law which provided that no poly eami.t
shall bs entitled 10 vote at any election held in
any such Territory or be eligible for election
or appointment IN any ONCE or plaoe of public
trust This operated to disfranchiee a consia-
cradle number OF electors In the Territory Of
Utah and II was urged that II was unconstitu-
tional The Supreme Court unanimously af-