New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-07
COLONIES AND THE DRIED SCOTT CASE

COLONIES AND THE DRIED SCOTT CASE.
We are glad to notice that the anti-expan-
sionists are basng their views Of the Constitu-
ton on the solid ground Of the bred Scott
decision. 1t must be confessed that 1t proves
just what they want to prove so far as 1t is the
final authority on the subject. According to its
doctrine Congress Is undoubtedly powerless to
govern Puerto Rico or the Philippines as sep
arate estates, legislating for each according to
It's needs, unhampered by laws enacted to meet
conditions here at home. The trouble about that
doctrine is that it proves too much 1t proves
that the Constitution of the United States has
been piece of waste paper, SO far as supposed
checks on Congressional power in the Terri
tories are concerned ever since the author of
the Declaration Of Independence went into the
imperial business In the year 1903 In fact,
some OF the men who concurred with the Chief
Justice In keeping bred Scott slave understood
thls Justice Campbell, the finest flower of the
Caihouh philosophy in the court, was not content
with CLOSING over this difficulty, for he proved
the courage Of his own convictions by follow
ing his logic to the bitter end His opinion de-
clared that at the beginning of the century "a
consolidated Power had been inauourated
whose subject comprehended an empire and
(which had no restriction but the discretion of
Congress" He said that the Constitution had
been plainly and repeatedly violated, and that
In reference TO the violations of 1904 the Court
could not undertake to conquer their scruples
as the President and Congress had done And
then this strict constructionist driven to adj
Vanced ground in his belated attempt to impose
restrictions on the Government which the nrac-
uce of half a century had not imposed. made
this sneering reference TO an old remark of
Jefferson: They acknowledge that our peculiar
security is in the possession of a written Con
''stitution, and they cannot make it blank paper
"by construction"
Is Ii not a little late to go back to the bred
Scott decision for the exposition of the nature
of the Federal Government? The doctrine stated
by Chief Justice fancy and carried to its OK.
IRENE by Justice Campbell was DEVELOPED as
bulwark of slavery. 1t was desired TO find a
way TO restrict a majority of the Nation from
dealing with slavery in the Territories ruled by
the general Government. The only way to do II
was TO establish the principle that in governing
Territories Congress was bound to regard them
as prospective States entitled to all the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution to the people of
the States. Thus, as slavery in the States was
protected from Federal interference, II was like
wise adJudged TO be sacred In the Territories
held by the general Government in trust for
Statehood and for nothing else. The logic Of
the bred Scott opinion led up to this, and that
was It's only purpose. The great body Of the
people rejected such reasoning. Our history for
half century previous was incompatible with
II, as those who declared the doctrine admitted
Our history Tor nearly half century since has
discredned It The Supreme Court itself has to