The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-10-25
No Doubt Of Power Of Congress to
Govern Islands.
VIEWED FROM PAST DECISIONS.
Question Has Been Determined by
highest Court OF the Country I'm
various Phases-The Constitution
Does. Not Provide Minute specin-
eafions Of Its Powers or Limits
Deals I'm General Language.

ne question as 10 the exact legal stat
" OF the Philippine Islands and other
NV possessions now before the Amerf.
san people has not been settled by the
supreme court OF the United states, nor
VIII u be settled until after November
u. "a. WIEN q case involving the constitu-
Puerto Rico viii come before the court
Tor adjudication
Much argument has arisen on the qnes-
tion OF whether or not the constitution
Of the United States extends In lis en-
tirety to these new lands a careful
search of the decisions OF the courts in
p pnss eases involving similar points con-
red TO know. the facts are practically
skreeu that the congress Of the United
states !, Is not exceeding its authority when
rnerfo Rico and the Philippines. and that
tne constitution does not extend OF its
own force TO new territory, This aues-
ton has been before the courts OF this
country In various phases at several pe-
Rods since the formation OF the Union
and some OF the more important cases
In 1916 the case OF Martin against Hun
Yer was taken to the supreme court OF
me United States. Justice Story, in his
'p 'arhs c on .nas case wrote az foiSws;
was ordained and established not BY the
states IN their sovereign capacities. but
eIss;,,i.,y az the preamble Of the
the United States There can be no
doubt that II WINS competent to the peo-
pie 70 invest the general government with
propsr and necessary: 10 extend or re-
strain these powers according to their
own good pleasure. ana to give them a
little doubt can there be, that the people
had right to prohibit to the states
the exercise of any powers which were.
IN their Judgment Incompatible with the
objects OF the general compact: TO make
the powers OF the state government. in
given cases. subordinate to those OF the
nation narnn; or 60 ress,ys to shsm.eives those
not choose to delegate to either The
constitution was not. therefore. necessar-
ily carved out of existing state sover-
eighties. nor surrender OF powers al
ready existing in state institutions, for
the powers OF the state depend upon
their own constitutions; and the people
OF every state had tho right to modify
and restrain them. according TO their own
views Of policy or principle. On the
other hand, II II perfectly clear that the
ernments by their respective constitn-
tons remained unaltered and unimpaired.
except 40 far a. they were granted to the
deductions do not rest upon general reas-
oning plain and obvious as they seem to
be. They have been positively recog-
nired BY one Of the articles In smsnd-
that the powers not delegated 10 the
United states by the constitution. nor
prohibited TO II by the states. are re-
served 20 the states respectively. or to
the people"
.'The constitution uuavoidsbly deals in
general language. IL did not suit tho
purpose OF the people in framing this
great charter of our liberties to provide
for minute specifications OF its powers. or
10 declare the means by which those
powers should be carried into execution.
II was forsseen that this would be a
perilous and difficult. II not an imprac-
ticabie task. The instrument was not in
tended 10 provide merely for the ext
Eencies OF few years. but was TO en-
dure through long lapse OF ages, tina
events OF which were locked UP in the In
could not be foraseen what new changes
and notifications OF power might be In
dispensabls TO effectuate tho general OBJ
jects OF the charter; and restrictions and
specifications. which at the present might
seem saiutary, might. In the end. prove
the overthrow OF the system itself. Hence
its powers are expressed In general terms.
leaving TO the legislature. from time TO
time. 10 adopt it's own means to efectuate
legitimate objects, and to mold and model
the exerciee of It's power as us own wis
dom and the public interests should re-
Quire"
chief Justice wntte's opinion.
No mistake Is possible as 10 the mean
ing OF this decision OF Judge story, oHe of
the ablsst iarists the United States has
meaning ~ Chief Justice Waite, who. IN
1879 delivered an opinion ia the case Of
National Bank against the County 81
Yankton. This was an appeal from the
state OF Dakota then 9 territory. In his
opinion Justice Waite said;
we do not consider II necessary TO de-
eide whether the governor of Dakota had
authority to call an extra session Of the
Legislative assembly. nor whether law
passsd at such n session or after the Him.
tied term Of forty days had expired, would
he valid because. as we think, the act OF
MAY H. 1919. is equivalent 10 direct grant
ISSUE tho bonds IN dispute. 1T IL CIR
TATNf.y NOW TOO LATE TO DOUBT
THE POWER OF CONGRESS TO GOV
rRN THE TERRITORIES There have
been soma fsrersxcss OF opinion as 10 the
particular clause 81 the constitution from
whlch tho power Ia derived. but thai Il