The times., 1901-05-28

/
Of these different clauses and their ar
rangement and he there comes to the
conclusion (p. l05) that although the pro-
vision as to preference between ports ana
that riding uniformity of duties, i'm
| posts, and excuses were one in purpose,
one in their adoption they were original
| ~ placed together, and became separate
only in arranging the Constitution Tor
! the purpose of style Thus construed
together, the purpose is irresistible that
the words throughout the United states
are indistinguishable from the words
| among or between the several states,
and that these prohibitions were intended
to apply only TO commerce between ports
| Of the several States as they then exist
ed or should thereafter be admitted to the
| Union.
Indeed, the practical Interpretation
has been long continued and uniform to
the effect that the Constitution is applica-
| BILE to territories acquired by purchase
| or conquest only when and so far as Con-
| Sress shall so direct
RIGHT TO PRESCRIBE TERMS.
In conclusion, the opinion read:
I'VE are also of opinion that the power
to acquire territory by treaty implies not
only the power to govern such territory,
but to prescribe upon what terms the Uni
ted States viii receive its inhabitants. and
what their status shall be in what Chief
Justice Marshall termed the American
| Empire There seems to be no middle
ground between this position and the doc
Urine that if their Inhabitants do not be-
come. Immediately upon annexation, clti-
| ZenS of the United States, their chliurell
thereafter born, whether savages or civil
lizcd are such. and entitled TO all the
rights, privileges. and immunitieS OF citl-
| zenS. If such be their status, the conSe-
quences will be extremely serious. Indeed,
I it is doubtful if Congress would ever as
sent to the annexation of territory upon
the condition that its inha bitantS, now
traditions. and modes of life, shall become
at once citizens of the United states, IN
all its treaties hitherto the treaty-maklng
power has made special provision tor TINS
subject: there is an implied denial
of the right of the inhabitants to Ameri-
can citizenship until Congress- by further
action shall signify its assent thereto.
Grave appTgnenSUns of danger are felt
by many eminent men-a fear lest an un-
| restrained possession of power on the part
OF Congress may lead to unjust ana OPP
pressiYe legislation in which the natural
1 rights of Territories. or their inhabitants,
may be engulfed in a centralized despot-
| ism. These fears, however find no Jusu-
| fication in the action of Congress in the
past century, nor in the conduct OF the
! British Parliament toward its outlying
possessions since the American Revolu-
ton. Indeed in the only instance in which
this court has declared an act of Congress
unconstitutional as trespassing upon the
| right of Territories (the Missouri com
promiseD. such action was dictated by mo-
tives of humanity and justice, and so far
commanded popular approval as to be en-
bodied in the Thirteenth Amendment to
the Constitution There are certain prln-
ciples of natural justice inherent IN the
Anglo-SaXon character which need no ex-
preston in constitutions or statutes to
give them effect or to secure depenuen-
ciss against legislation manifestly hostile
to their real interests. Even IN the For
aI5er act itself. the constitutionality of
/ was given to the Legislative Assembly of
Porto Rico to repeal the very tar1H IN
question in this case, a power II mas not
seen lit to exercise The words OF Cniet
@ Wheat. j. with respect to the power
Of Congress to regulate commerce, are
pertinent in this connection: This power.
I said he, like an others vested IN Con-
! ErsSs is completE in itself. may be eXer-
cised to it's utmost extent, and acknowl-
edges no limitations other than are pre-
/ scribed in the Constitution. The
wisdom and discretion of Congress, their
| identity with the people, and the lniiu-
1 ence which their constituents possess at
elections are in this. as in many other IN
! stances, as that,Afor example, of decldT-
ing war the sole restraints on which they
have relied to seclre them from its abuse
They are the restraints on which the peo-
pie must often rely on solely IN al repre-
sentative governments.
/ 1T is obvious that in the annexation of
I outlying and distant possessions grave
( OF race, habUs, laws, and customs Of the
/ people, and from differences Of soil, ell
mate and production, which may require
action on the part of Congress that would
/ be .IIite unnecessary in the annexation of
1 contiguous territory inhabited only by
/ DeoDle of the same race or by scattered
bodies of native Indians.
ARTIFICIAL RIGHTS SUGGESTED.
I'VE suggest. without intending to de-
eide, that there may be distinction be-
tween certain natural rights, enforced In
the Constitution by prohibitions against
| Interference with them, and what
NAV be termed artificial or remedial
rights. which are peculiar to our own sys-
tenn of jurisprudence. OF the former class
are the rights to ones own religious opin-
ion and to a public expression of them, or.
as sometimes said, to worship God ac-
! cording 10 the dictates of ones own con-
! science; the right to personal liberty and
I individual property; 10 freedom of speech
and of the press: 10 free access to courts
| Of justice, to due process Of law and to
an equal protection of the laws: TO inn
munities from unreasonable searches and
| seizures, as well as cruel and unusual
. punishments; and to such other immuni-
I ties as are indispensable to a free gov
! ernment. OF the latter class are the
! rights to citizenship. to suffrage tMinor
! Y. Happersett. q Wall. l62), and to the
/ particular methods Of procedure pointed
I out in the Constitution, which are pecu-
( liar to Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence. and
| the States to be unnecessary to the proper
| protection of individuals.
! whatever may be finally decided by
I the American people as to the status of
/ these islands and their inhabitants-
/ whether they shall be introduced into the
| sisterhood of States OF be permitted TO
I form independent EOvernTnents-it does
| not follow that, in the meantime, await
! ing that decision, the people are in the
matter of personal rights unprotected by
I the provisions of our Constitution, and
/ subject to the merely arbitrary control OF
/ Congress. Even if regarded as aliens.
I they are entitled under the principles of
/ the Constitution to be protected in life,
! liberty and property. This has been fire.
/ quently held by this court In respect TO
| scssed Of the political rights of citizens
( of the United States. tTick Wo vs.. Hop
/ kins, llS L. s. 356; Foug Yue Ting VS..
] United States. liJ L. 5. I30; Wong Wing
/ VS. United States, l63 L. 5. 22S.) We do not
| desire, however, to anticipate the difficult
| ties which would naturally arise in this
connection, but merely to disclaim any
/ intention to hold that the inhabitants of
these Territories are subject to an unre-
| strained power on the part of Congress to
| deal with them upon the theory that they
! have no rights which it is bound to re
! spect.
! GREAT SCOPE NECESSARY.
Large powers must necessarily be en-
trusted to Congress in dealing with these
problems, and we are bound to assume
that they viii be judiciously exercised
| That these powers may be abused is pos
sible. Bat the same may be said of it's
powers under the Constitution as well as
/ outside Of it. Human wisdom has never
/ devised form Of government so perfect