New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-10-25


CHARLES A GARDINER.
organic law; but are the creations exclusively Of
{ Tsd9 snd co3troi e How 2 Chief Justice
de eroTv whn n the eli o he United
States not included in any State must necessarily
/ . - 1t has ful and complete legislative authority
over the people OF the Territories and an ne e, De
S. 1887 In later case the Court decided that, in
all the discretion which belongs to legislative power
is vested in Congress- GA T. s. az Lne power 1
! pienary,' said Mr. Justice Bradley Q36 L. S, 40.
| nounced this opinion through Mr.. Justice Brewer
"A errtoTy is political community nra5 s6 pT 5 9
gress and all whose a acts are Subject to Congress
! The Republican contentious are. therefore, cor
! rect. and it follows that wherever American soy
hold and govern extends also. The location of the
! remote, on the American continent or in foreign
lands. Our abstract right to acquire, and hence to
| Philippines in Alaska Arizona
FORM OF GOVERNMENT DISCRETIONARY.
Under this full and comprehensive authority the
Republican party claims that the form of civil
government to be established in the Philippines is
absolutely In Congressional discretion We can es-
tablish no form whatever says Colonel Bryan,
without the consent of the governed.
etsted from 1874 "a ISL on the form Of ov
Nicholson of Delaware, said: 1T is in the
nature of colony whose commerce may be regu-
lated without any reference to the Constitution"
Concerning the statute organizing the Territory
Benton remarks: 1T a startling bill. continu-
Presdent in the place Of the King Of spain Putting
all Territorial officers in the place of the Kings OH
GERS in the President alone" Yet the form of the
the courts Ruling generally on this question the
Court held; "Al the discretion which belongs to
extends to determining by law from time to
time the form of the local government. in par
tiCuiar s. -
question, said Judge Dawson, also. ''of the au-
toTai government within the Territories as it may
choose or deem best.' GO Fed Rep 2O5)
DIRECT RULE FROM WASHINGTON
All the functions of government being within Con-
Ct sms that Congress may exercise them directly
from Washington Colonel Bryan announced at
indianapolis that this was a violent abuse of the
Alaska was ceded to us in 1867 without any treaty
Constitution and Federal statutes have never been
been extended over it as circumstance gradually
aeauredc tor thirtyathTee years new judicial and
ment have been conferred upon the Inhabitants.
Of self-government; 1t merely an act of Con-
gress, more specifically regulating the direct gov
ernment Of the Territory. Alaska is still an unor
e8T ned DIRECTLY rec from Isas Wash
Territory, was purchased from France For nearly
one hundred years 1t has remained 'unorgan-
like Alaska. is ruled directly from Washington A
spee1c decision authorizing such direct rule was
abrogate laws of Territorial Legislatures" said
recy for the ocs M o o T. egSsse
Hence Congress may If it chooses, enact at Wash
does now for Alaska and Indian Territory. Demo-
for eight years since If the Republican policy is
so Illegal why did not the Democrats when in pow
Arizona and New-Mexco?
BRYAN AND THE DRED SCOTT CASE.
The Republican party further maintains that the
ri or
Eently is also in the discretion of Congress The
Of soil acquired by this Nation is impressed With 6G
trust or franchise of Statehood and that the Con-
stitution prohibits its acquisition except for such
Colonel Bryan challenges Republicans to refute
this doctrine If Republicans have authority for
their views he says, let them state and defend
it" on what does the Democracy base its conten-
ton? Solely the bred Scott case Chief Justice
Taney's words are now historic: There is GER
Federal Government" he said ITO establish or
maintain colonies bordering on the United States or
at distance. to be ruled and governed at its own
pleasure, to enlarge it's territorial limits in any
way except by the admission of new States" G9
al am of the opinion that this declaration is
not dictum, as often contended, but a vital part
of the decision; an essential step in elaborate
argument a point necessarily involved in deciding
and bred Scott slave and not citizen
ciaIIv reiterated No court ever concurred in -
precipitated the Civil War; it is stamped with the
title is odious, and sends shudder through a re-
united people. Such is the only decision against
(c)-The decision is either law or not law. 1t
cannot be valid to colonies a secondary consid-
Grafton. and invalid as to slavery, primary issue.
It must stand or fall as whole. Hence we have
this dilemma: If to-day the bred Scott decision is
law then the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth
Amendments are not law; the results of the Rebel
lion nuliied the Missouri COMPROMISE VylS nm
constitutional slavery be maintained in all
Territories, and the negro has rights when the
white man is bound to respect" 90 How 1917 The
Democrats have overlooked this dilemma.
/ (d)-The major premises of Judge Taney's arrll-
ment against colonies is that sole authority to
acquire territory is derived from the power to adj
States. That proposition has been accept
ed by any other judge or court On the contrary. il
has been specifically overruled three times Q6 Wall
434 1876 L. S. 70; 1877 u. S 212) The Supreme Ccurt
having held 1t utterly fallacious, all his arguments
fall with it, His conclusion, therefore that we
dead the American people the stamp act or
I statutes against wtchcraft.
observed. 1t is without practical value. What right
had the Court to make IL? What Jurisdiction had
it the subject? Can an injunction restrain the
Senate? Can the President be enjoined? How will
The Supreme Court prohibit this sovereign Nation
from extending It's sovereignty conquered ter
ritory? The error Is fundamental Judge Tanev's
political power of the Government. He had no an
thority to do His decision pro tano. judged even
cases was not law when uttered. and is not law to-
day
pute the inaccuracy of Judge Taney's assertion
that 1t intended to impress trust or franchise
of Statehood upon all newly acquired territory
Edmund Randolph submitted TO the Federal Con-
and Territories. Madison offered amendments. and
then the present language introduced into the
During the controversy over the Louisiana session
In 1903 he was appealed to for information In re-
gard TO the meaning of the third section of the
fourth article. lie answered: II very certain
/ had IL not In contemplation 10 insert a decree de
coercendo imperio in the Constitution. / knew
/ then we'll I do now that all North America
n rs VT