The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-05-28
Continued From First Page.

Continued From First Page.
decided in EACH the following PROPOSE
ton may be considered as established:
TERRITORY NOT 4 STATE.
81. That the District of Columbia and
the territories are not states, within the
judicial clause of the constitution giving
jurisdiction to courts of different states.
so. That territories are not states with
in the meaning Of Revised Statutes, sec
ton 7G9, permitting writs of error from
this court in case where the validity of
a states statute is drawn in question.
j. Ihat the District of Columbia ana
the territories are states as that word is
used in treaties with foreign powers with
respect to the ownership, disposition ana
Inheritance of property.
Il. That the territories are not within
the clause of the constitution provid ne
for the creation of a supreme court ana
such inferior courts as congress may see
fit to establish.
''5. That the constitution does net an
ply to foreign countries or to trials there
in conducted, and that congress NAV
lawfully provide for such trials before
consular tribunals without the interven-
ton of a. grand or petit jury.
&c. That where the constitution has
been once formally extended by cong ess
to territories, neither congress nor the
territorial legislature can enact laws in
consistent herewith
In his opinion Mr.. Justice Brown re-
ierred at length to the decision of Chief
Justice fancy in the Dred-Scott case g v
ing especial consideration to the senti-
ment expressed by him that there is
no power given by the constitution to the
federal government TO establish or main
tain colonies bordering on the United
States or at a distance, to be ruled and
governed at its own pleasure. and if a
new state is admitted it needs no fur,
ther legislation by congress, because the
constitution itself defines the relative
rights and mowers a nd dutiae Of tho CT at %
and the citizens of the state and the fed
eral government. But no power is given
to acquire a territory to be held and
governed permanently in that character"
DRIED SCOTT CASE.
Justice Brown expressed the opinion
that it was unfortunate in view of the
excited condition of the country at the
time the Scott decision was rendered
just before the Civil war-that the chief
justice felt called upon to discuss the
case on its merits.
1T is he says, sufficient to say that
the country did not acquiesce in the opin-
ion and the Civil war, which shortly
afterwards followed, produced such
changes in judicial as well as political
sentiment as to seriously impair the au-
thority of this case"
He added:
The power to prohibit slavery in
the territories is so different from
the power to impose duties upon terri
1Qaial products ana depends upon such
different provisions of the constitution
that they can scarcely be considered as
analogous unless we assume broadly that
every clause of the constitution attached
10 the territories, as well as to the
states, claim quite inconsistent with
the position Of the court in the Carter
case. The difficulty with 1.-THE bred Scott
case was that the court refused to make
q distinction between property in gen
eral and wholly exceptional class Of
property"
PRECEDENTS CITED.
Taking up the case in hand, the JUS
tice continued his opinion. saying:
THE practical impersonation put by
congress upon the constitution has been
long continued and uniform to the effect
that the constitution is applicable to ter
ritories acquired by purchase or conc est
only when and so far as cong eSS - all
so direct. Notwithstanding its duty to
guarantee to every state in this union a
republican form Of government congress
did not hesitate in the original organiZa-
lion OF the territories of Louisiana. Flor
ida, the Northwest territory and it's sub
division of Ohio, Indiana, Michigan. I'LL
nois and Wisconsin. and still more re-
Gently in the case Of Alaska, to establish
a form of government bearing a much
greater analogy to a British crown col
ony than republican state of America.
and to vest the legislative power either
in a governor and council or a goVerEor
and judges, to be appointed by the presi-
dent.
I've are also Of opinion that power to
acquire territory by treaty implies n
only the power to govern such territory
but to prescribe upon what terms the
United States will receive it's inhab tants
and what their status shall be in what
Chief Justice Marshall termed the
American empire There seems to lie
no middle ground between this position
and the doctrine that if their inhab-
1tants do not become, Immediately up n
annexation, citizens OF the United States,
their children thereafter born, whether
SaVageS or civilized, are such and en-
Titled to all the rights, privileges and i'm
munities of citizens. If such be their
status, the consequences will be extreme
~ serious. Indeed, it is doubtful if n.
gress would ever assent to the anneXa-
lion of territory upon the condition that
its inhabitants, however foreign they
may be to our habits, tradition ana
methods of life, shall become at once
citizens of the United States In all its
treaties hitherto the treaty making pow
er has made special provision for this
subject.
Grave apprehensions of danger are
felt by many eminent men-2 fear lest
an unreStrained possession of power on
the part of congress may lead to unjust
and oppressive legislation, in which the
natural rights of territories or their in
ha6itants, may be engulfed in cen
tralized despotism These facts, how
ever, find no justification in the action
of congress in the past century, nor in
the conduct of the British parliament
toward its outlying possessions since the
American Revolution"
POWERS OF CONGRESS.
Further along Justice Brown re-
marked:
whatever may be finally decided by
the American people as to the status of
these islands and their inhabitants
whether they shall enter into the sister
hood of states or be permitted to form
independent goVernments-it does not
Follow that in the meantime, awaiting
that decision. the people are in the mat
Ter of personal rights unprotected by
the provisions of our constitution and
subject to the mere arbitrary control Of
congress. Even If regarded as aliens,
they are entitled, under the principle
OF the constitution, to be protected in
life, liberty and property
Large powers must necessarily be in
trusted to congress in dealing with
these problems and we are bound to as
sumo that they will be judicially exer-
cised. That these powers may be abused
as possible. But the same may be said
OF Its powers under the constitution as
well as outside Of it. human wisdom
has never devised a form of government
70 perfect that 1t may not be perverted
10 bad purposes. 1t is not conclusive to
argue against the possession of certain
powers from possible abuses bv them
1T Is safe to say that if congress should
venture upon legislation, dictated by sell
fish interests, 1t will receive uuick re-
buke at the hands Of the people In
deed, it is scarcely possible that con-
gresS could do a greater injustice to
these islands than would be involved in
declaring that it cannot place upon the
statutes taxes and excuses without ex-
Hendlng the same to them Such require
ment would bring them at Onoe within,