The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1900-11-02
CONSTITUTIONAL tiW
AND EXPANSION POLICY
lCartlaaei 80 Ialrti e,

HAAN<&AAAANE8 AAEAN A4as-A %-G-s
l.eu i,la1verre--tsy altered On the COZ
tTzrT, there : 10 E-SzNeE IN The C1nS1l-
ratloa by ~hish ssag-pss san sake sfth-4
phise OF bslaek men ssas~~- Ia srganfziug
the soyeFumeu5 Of terri,nry .oesgccss :.
Ii.jfed II ssesss essrsarlafs 70 fss csa-
,'ifaiiesai o5Iscf 70 Poscsrs c1a 3, Il
,rcissS ahick src prohibited 5g "a, Goa
sfisstizE. o. acAsck orc osssr1sry 10 "a
spirit This Is the Isu1f1atiou
n al the federal powers Bat. a9ngTess
has 80 I"Eer -. regulate tie internal
cQByrr1-s u a SKATE a. " = TsrrityFy, con
Sequeniiy. IN providing feEr fise govern
neut Of a territory. TO some extent. the
comtiued powers OF tbs federal ard star
governments are nesvssariIy exercised.
II there - a right % sc4uine
Territory there Necessarily faust - an
implied power IN govern if. %
sHek eqscs 30 iispEieaflss 81 . p0tce,- cgh
eS,ss Which IL i&hibif,d-Jg The Cop1titg-
'ias. Or rehieh H.ag Be ogaiEst the theory
" ~, contraction. I would
here simply remark that the CONSTITUTIONS
WIS formed for OR t-foIc couHrrg. Is
erpsn,ioH Or c5atrGetion 81 OR TERRITORY
rcqsircd 40 e}aagc IN the Fundamental
ralr.~ lP. ISL F
Mr. Justice Curtis laid down the same
doctrine After deciding shat the seeoul
clause OF Section , OF Article " of the
Constitution conferred on congress the
power TO legislate respecting the territory
Of the United States, he asks; III. +
What are the limits OF that power7
To this answer. that. in common with
qH the other Legislature poieers Of cont
gross ii md limit, IN The trpress pro-
biJItoHs on cGaGxs.s not 70 do c.TfaiH
Hiuqs: that IN the cr,rcise Of tho lceS-
ia'irc p5,rers congress cannot pass an or
poyf fdcto lac or BW 81 Gtfaintr and 50
~ respect to each Of fhe other Of thu
prohibitions contained ia he cohsfiiR1
ton, tP. Gi4l
Again he declares
III looked only to the purposes Of
the argument. the source Of the power Of
congress asserted in the opinion of the
majority OF the court would answer those
purposes equally we'll For they admit
that congress has power to organize and
govern the territories uai5l fheB arrirc At
suitable condition for adJaissioH iHid
the union They admit also
that il is necessarily committed to the
discretion of congress TO enact such laws
for that purpose as that discretion may
dictate. aud no limit to that discretion
has been shown or ever suggested, Sarq
those posture prohibitions to IegiSiate
,rEich arc found in the Constitution. r
comics, myself waJIc 10 ..perceire anu
difference trbdtcrer bcticecn ny otr,.
opinion Of 'hc qcncrGi ertcat Of the polrcI'
Of congress and the opiaioh Of The ma
joritJ Of the court, save that l consider il
derivable from the express language Of
the Constitution, while they hold it to b..
silently implied from the power TO ac-
quire territory n. G234l
Mr. Pomeroy, in his Constitutional
Law. SAYS of the paragraph above quoted
from the opinion of Chief Justice fancy
in Scott ". Sanford;
The position assumed by the court
that congress in the exercise of its legiS-
lative function for the territories is bound
by the restrictive clauses of the Bill of
Rights cannot be successfully attacked
Indeed it can make no difference whether
that body proceeds under the express
grant of Article " or under its power
implied in the capacity TO acquire and
hold additional soil. In either case it is
equally hedged around and trammeled by
the safeguards of individual rights that
are mentioned in the first eight amend
ments.'
Mr.. Justice Cooley also approved and
adopted the views of Chief Justice fancy
upon this particular subject. and the
same doctrine has been enunciated re
peatedly in recent decisions, of the SUI
preme court. oftentimes with express ref
.sa- us