The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-12-19

1.-THE conceded power to acquire territory
by treaty OF by conquest includes the right
to prescribe what terms the United States
Will agree TO I'm fixing the future statute
OF its inhabitants" and I'm support OF this
contention said. among other things: The
political status of native Indian tribes with
In territory acquired by the United States
by treaty has been uniformly regarded as
unaffected by the cession. a long line or
special treaties with such tribes and num-
erous acts of legislation by Congress on
the subject of Indians and Indian rights
show that these people have always been
regarded as ouasi foreign"
AN EXERCISED POWER
He asserted that 1.-The treaty making
power of the government has exercised the
right to deal with the status of the inhab
tants of ceded territory in every treaty OF
cession from 1885 to 1885,"
The status fixed. he said. has not been
uniform, but exceedingly varied. He then
proceeded to argue that this practice is en-
tirely at variance with the doctrine that
1.-THE Constitution follows the flag and that
when territory is ceded TO the United States
the inhabitants become Immediately ex-
poprio vicore citizens of the United States.
IF that doctrine be true" he said, "every
treaty that has brought us new lands and
new inhabitants has collided in this respect
with the principles of the Constitution. 1t
convicts of error and usurpation Thomas
Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe,
James *. Polk, Franklin Pierce, Andrew
Johnson, their Cabinets and the Senates
that ratified their treaties"
Arguing this point he asked: eff Congress
may properly define the classes of immi-
grants or aboriginal inhabitants who may
become citizens and the proper period OF
probation and the terms and conditions OF
admission, why is il unreasonable or unjust
TO leave TO their Judgment and discretion
the time, the terms, and the conditions on
which inhabitants of lately foreign islands
may be admitted to the same high status?
Us the United States so bound and tied
by this Constitution of ours that il can
never acquire an island of the sea, a belt
across the isthmus a station for a naval
base, unless IL be at the cost OF admitting
those who may happen to inhabit the soil
at the time of the purchase to full rights
as citizens of the Union, no matter how
incongruous or Unfit they may be, while
the foreign born inhabitants or the aboriSi-
nal red man must depend on the grace OF
Congress. though he dwell half a century
among US?
What reason can be suggested for deny
ing tc this Nation such full power and dis
erection as are 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 ofNits dignity and the main
tenance of its material interests on an
equality with the nations of the earth?
"The full exercise of these ordinary pow
ers 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 needless
ly limit and restrain the national func-
tons? Why not, rather, with the same
largeness of view and purpose that char
acterized such statesmen as Jefferson and
Marshall, seek, by liberal Interpretation,
to give broad and ample scope TO the spirit
o. national development. looking forward.
as Marshall expressed 1t, to the ages to
come when newer, grander and more po-
tential opportunities for national growth
and influence should nave come TO US than
our fathers ever dreamed off,"
THE PORTS ARE FOREIGN.
Mr.. Griggs laid it down as a fact that
administrative construction, congression-
al action and judicial precedent all affirm
that under our revenue laws every port in a
ceded country is to be regarded as a for
eign one until such laws are expressly
extended by Congress to the new posses
sions," and he gave a very complete cita-
ton of proceedings under these heads in
support of his contention. In this connec-
ton 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 COM
menting upon il said: The clear signih-
canoe CT this language is that there may
be territory pertaining to and under the
Jurisdiction of the United States, which Is
not a part of the United States, and TO
which the Constitution of the United States
does not apply. unless it be expressly made
to apply thereto, as in the case of slavery"
Mr.. Griggs then went at length into the
claim that the constitutional clause which
provides that duties. imports and excuses
shall be uniform throughout the United
e 80 A1tI f-A- g - H.
the cases before the court. THAT clause"
he said, does not apply to nor govern
these cases, because the term United
States as there used, means only the ter
ritory comprised within the several States
of the Union, and was intended only for
their benefit and protection, and not for the
benefit or protection of outside territory
belonging to the Nation; in the latter sense
duties on imports from these islands were
| uniform throughout the United States, be-
| cause they are uniformly imposed at every
port in the United States, so that there Is
no preference given to the ports of one
| State over those of another, nor is any
inequality between the several States Gre
ated."
He gave three definitions to the term
United States, as follows: First. the
corporate name of the Nation or govern
mental entity, the same as was provided In
the Articles of Confederation, which de-
clared the style of this confederacy shall
be the United States of America second,
the States united, referring to the several
States composing the Union-in this Sense.
of course, il excludes Territories; third,
the international sense, designating the
extent of our domain as q sovereign ma
tion-in this sense it includes all territory
under our dominion wherein no other ma
ton has sovereignty, even such as may
be under our control by temporary con-
| quest, as Tampico, Mex. during the Mex
lean war lFleming VS.. Pagel, while in a
domestic sense ii includes geographically
the States of the Union and such territory
as the President and Senate have, by trea-
ties, expressly annexed to and made part
OF the United States. and such as Con-
gress and the President, by act or reso-
luton, have expressly annexed to and
| made part of the United States, as the
Hawaiian islands"
DELINEATION OF RIGHTS.
The attorney general argued for a sharp
delineation between the rights of the people
of the States and those of our immediate
Territories, saying hat all the authority
of the United States is derived from the
people of the States, and not from those oil
the Territories; that the people of the Ter
ritories cannot share or contribute to tha
authority, as they are deprived of the
of the constitutional provision for uniform.
ity was that of insuring equally fair treat
ment TO all the States by Congress-, and II
was known to have been one of the guar.
antees held out to the States TO accept tho
Constitution. 1T was not a personal, but Z
local, guaranty, operating not as a privi'
leye to individuals, but TO States consid-
cred as organized constituents to the
Union. Hence. he argued, reasons for ap'