The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-12-19

possessed by other nations in this respect? Why
should the trainers OF the Constitution have
wished to put shackles on the national limbs or
to strip the nation of powers necessary to the
preservation Of its dignity and the maintenance
of its material interests on an equality with the
nations of the earth. The full exercise of these
ordinary powers tends to the exaltation OF the
dignity, influence and welfare of the Union.
These powers are inconsistent with no principle
of personal liberty. Why seek to neellcssly limit
and restrain the national functions? Why not
rather, with the same largeness of view and pur-
pOsc that characterized such statesmen as ,efcr-
son and Marshall, seek by liberal Interpretation,
TO give broad and ample scope TO the spirit OF
national development. looking forward, as Mar,
shall expressed it, ''to the ages to come when
new work. grander and more potential opportuni-
tics for national growth and influence should lave
come to us than our fathers ever dreamed of?
Ports Regarded as Foreign.
Mr.. Griggs laid down as fact that
administrative construction. congress
sional action and judicial Nrecedent.
all affirm that under our revenue
laws every port in a ceded country Is
to be regarded as a foreign one until
such laws are expressly extended by
congress to the new possessions" and
he gave very complete citations of
proceedings under these heads In sup
port of his contention. In this econ
nection he quoted the clause in the
thirteenth amendment saying that
slavery shall not exist in the United
States. ''or any place subject to their
jurisdiction" and commenting upon it,
said: 1.-The clear significance of this
language Is that there may be terri
tory pertaining to and under the jur
isdcton of the United States which
is not part of the United States and
to which the constitution of the Uni
ted Safes does not apply unless it be
expressly made to apply thereto, as In
the case of the slavery"
Mr.. Griggs then went at length into
the claim that the constitutional clause
which provides that duties. imposts
out the United States" prohibits i'm
position of duties in the cases before
the court.
The last feature of the argument was
contention that the constitution does
not extend of its own force over ac-
quired territory, and in this connection
the attorney general sought to refute
the doctrines as laid down by Chief
Justice Taney in the Dred Scott case
that the United States could not ac-
quire territory for any other purpose
than to convert it into states of the
Union.
Among those who came in to hear
the attorney general was Representa-
tive Littlefeld. of Maine, whose speech
in the Porto Rico debate, was one of
the most notable expressions on the
status of the new insular possessions
Arizona and New Mexico.
Justice Brewer inquired of the al
torney general soon after he began II
he maintained that Arizona and New
Mexico came in the same category with
the new possessions in the limitations
which could be placed upon them. Mr.
Griggs said he would later consider
how far the territories in this country
and those beyond the sea rested on the
same basis.
AS the attorney general proceeded
he warmed up to his subject, at times
speaking with great emphasis and
pounding home his points with re-
sounding blows on the table before
him. Secretary Gage came in during
the latter part of the day.
Mr.. Griggs' argument was not con-
cluded when court adjourned until to-
morrow. Mr.. Griggs will conclude to-
morrow and Mr., Aldrch will close the
cases for the plaintiffs.