The daily morning journal and courier., 1900-03-31

or lncluulIlB IueflO RlCO within Oul
 customs boundary has the support of
 every authority who has studied the
 question:
 "The great industrial need of Puerto
 Rico arises from lack of capital. Any
 policy by which we expect to solve the
 Puerto Rican question must provide
 for the introduction of capital, and the
 resulting commercial development,
 "To place Puerto Rico within our
 customs boundary is the very policy
 which meets this requirement. It is
 the only measure which guarantees
 permanent economic conditions without
 which the capitalists will never invest.
 Secondly, it provides that the capital,
 attracted to the island, shall be Amer
 ican, and that Puerto Rico shall be de-
 veloped along American lines
 Finally, we must not forget that
 the island of Puerto Rico is to be Amer
 icanized or its possession will prove a
 source of weakness It we place 1t
 within our customs boundary, the capi-
 tai which will flow there is sure to be
 American and every commercial influ- ence will make for assimilation. Not until this policy is carried out shall we see an AIHtllCdlilZcu utl lo lNiSO'
 Lrnvitt, Ynle's second speaker.
 Ashley D. Leavitt, Yale's second
 speaker said in part: In legisating for Puerto Rico congress is not limited by
 constitutional provision for uniformity
 of duties, etc. This we maintain on the ground that Puerto Rico is not a part
 of the United States as regards the
 constitution, and that congress has the power to legislate for in this condition. In the first place, Puerto Rico Is not
 part of the United States. That con- | quest did not make it so is clear from
 the decision of the court in Fleming vs. Page @ Howard). The court said in regard to the Tampico, conquest of the United States: "It was undoubtedly un- der the sovereign dominion of the United States?" But yet 1t was not a part of the union. That the treaty of cession did not bring Puerto Rico with in our boundaries is clear from the wording of the treaty itself, and sec ondly from the uniform construction put upon such treaties by congress, and l thirdly, from the decision of the court | in the case of Cross vs. Harrison Q6 l Howard) referring to California which had been ceded to the United States, as | has been Puerto Rico. From this deci- sion 1t is clear that California had not l in consequence of the treaty become | part of the United States, to which the statutes applied. This case is parallel l to Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is not then a part of the United States to which the constitution applies.
 l Congress has power to. legislate out side our boundaries where the constitu- tional limitations do not apply. Mere legislation then will not make Puerto Rico a part of the United States. The main question is how long may we leg islate for Puerto Rico in its present po- l litical statue? This is similar to the | question which is asked in regard to how long we may hold New Mexico and 1 Alaska as territoriess and must, be like | wise settled on the question of pure l legislative eXpediency. Considering the best interest of Puerto Rico 1t is mex pedient to make the island part of the United States
 Harvnrd,s Lnst Speaker. The third speaker for the affirmative was Wilbur Morse, Harvard 1900 Af- ter summing up the case as presented by the previous speakers he proceeded to say that the question involves a ] moral obligation incumbent on the United States. "Just before our occu- patton of Puerto Rico" he said ''the Spanish government granted the island more beneflcent privileges than any other Spanish colony enjoyed. Yet the people accepted American occupation willingly, and openly aided 1t. They elied on the promise of General Miles that they should enjoy the same privi- leges and immunities as the people of the United States. One of those privi- leges was equal trade rights with every part of the United States.
 'The United States faces to-day a question of vital importance That | question is not whether we shall adopt | q policy of expansion, for we have been | expanding constantly since our birth as | a nation The question is, whether in | enlarging our territory, we shall give | up the Fundamental principles upon which our government rests, and adopt | a policy of imperialism.
 "The policy of a territorial govern ment with equal treatment for all has met the varying conditions in Louisiana, Florida and Hawaii. Now we are ask ed to break faith with the Puerto Ri- cans and abandon these principles We cannot believe the American people has so far departed from their traditions as td accept such a policy.
 "To include Puerto Rico within our customs boundary is economically ad- vantageous to the island; it fulfills our national moral obligations, and it is po- ltically wise in that it upholds the highest spirit of American institutions, of American civilization and of Ameri- can governmental ideas"
 Yale's Last Speaker F. Q, Blanchard, the third and last speaker for Yale, said in brief: "The | power to hold ond govern territory with out making it a part of the United States is given by necessary implication in the treaty and war-making power | In the constitution the states delegated to the national government the power | Lo make war and treaties. Did they at { the same time delegate the right to hold without bringing it under the i organic laws? They do not possess this i right to-day. Yet it could not have f oerished. Clearly, the right to hold ter ritory without bringing it within the of the republic is given to | |, jhe feleral government with the treaty \