The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-02-22

did not therefore receive that deliberate
consideration which at this time would
have given to it the eminent men who
presided here when that question was de-
cided'
''Chief Justice Fuller, in Pollock VS..
Farmers Loan and Trust company Q57
U. s., 57G, In discussing the same oues-
ton. said:
'Manifestly, as this court is clothed
with power and entrusted with the duty,
to maintain the fundamental law of the
constitution, the discharge of that duty
requires it not to extend any decision
upon a constitutional question If it IS
convinced that error in principle might
suDerYene'
In the light of the above statement
made by three great chief justices of the
court, We believe that if this question is
presented it Will be decided on its merits
| without regard to the general expression
found in opinions of the court when this
question was not under consideration.
THE ACQUISITION OF LOUISIANA.
1.-THE constitutional questions presented
are not new, but were discussed in all
| their phases following the acquisition Of
| Louisiana in 1905 The opponents of ex-
pansion in those days took, however, an
entirely different position from the anti
expansionists Of today. The constitution
was then that the United States had no
| power to admit states carved out of ter
ritories that had been acquired after the
| adoption of the constitution. The con-
! tention today is that we have no power
| to acquire territory except for the Gre
| alton Of new states.
''Ir Jefferson believed that it would
require a constitutional amendment in
| order to admit Louisiana as state. In
a letter to Mr. Breckenridge, he said with
| reference to the treaty with France:
:" This treaty must, OF course, be laid
before both houses, because they have
important functions to exercise respect
ing it. They, 1 presume, viii Sc their
duty to their country in ratifying and
| paying for it, so as to secure good
which would otherwise probably be never
again in their power. But I suppose they
must then appeal to the nation for an
additional article to the constitution APP
proving and confirming an act which the
The constitution has made no provision
for our holding foreign territory, still
less for Incorporating foreign nations in
to our union. The executive in Selling
the fugitive occurrence which $50 much
advanced the good of their country, have
done an act beyond the constitution
'Mr. Jefferson prepared two amend
ments to be proposed to the constitution
covering the ground of acquisition and
incorporation, and submitted them to his
friends, but he did not urgA congress to
adopt them, and no further attention was
given to the subject. In the discussion
in the senate and house of representa-
tives, the doctrine of the iRehrent right
Of the nation to acquire territory was
maintained by the party to which the
president belonged, and the oppos tloa
was NOT upon the ground that the Uniel
States had no right to acquire, but was
upon the ground that there was no con-
stitutienal right to acquire territory to
incorporate into states.
about the time that the treaty with /
France was ratified, Governor Morris, who !
was the generally accepted author of the /
third section of the fourth article Of the |
constitution, which gives congress the |
power to dispose Of and make all needful 1
rules and regulations respecting territory !
anu OlAiCL pAOpCiIys hLOLc d IcllEI III }
which he stated his views as to the con- /
struction to be placed on that part of Ike I
constitution. The letter is as follows:
" fMorrisaria, December 4 1903.
Dear Sir: A circumstance which
turned up in conversation yesterday a
led me TO read over your letter of he
3rd Of November, and my answer of the
18th. I perceive now that I mistook the
drift Of your inquiry, which is substan-
TALLY whether congress can admit as a
new state territory which did ont belong
to the United States when the constitu-
ton was made. In my opinion they can
not.
81 always thought that when we
should acquire Canada and Louisiana it
1t would be proper to govern themAas
provinces and allow them no voice in
our councils. In wording the third sec
ton of the fourth article I went as far
as circumstances would permit to estab-
hsh the exclusion. Canada obliges me to
add my belief that had it been more
pointedly expressed, a strong opposition
would have been made. I am, etc,
Governors Moryis.'
John Quincy Adams, then a senator
from Massachusetts, said of the treaty
with France:
9 For my own part I am free to con-
fess that the third article, and more es-
pecially the seventh. contain engagements
placing Us in a dilemma from which 1
see no possible mode of, extracting our
selves but by an amendment, or rather an
addition to the constitution
THE constitution was not amended.
Thirteen states nave been admitted from
the Louisiana purchase, and sixty-seven
representatives speak for the people o.
those states on this floor. The legisla-
tors Of a century ago assumed RESPONSE
bilities, and We see the results today OF
thei7 wisdom and courage.
At the first centennial of the acqui-
sition Of Louisiana to be held in the me-
tropolis of the purchase, these states viii
show to the world TIE progress and al
vancement that they have made in hun
dved years.
Our experience as nation has thrown
much light upon this question Of the ac-
QUESTION OF territory. No one now ques-
tions the right OF the United States %
acquire territory out OF WI c. 20 form
states TO he incorporated into the union.
To deny this right IS TO say that al the
states n the Louisiana purchase. and al
the states in the territory acquired from
Mexico. are not legally OF c7nst tuition
ally members Of the United States f
America. and have no right = repres nta-