The St. Louis Republic., 1901-05-28

or which shall be made. under the authority Of
The the United States. shall be the supreme law Of
1t will be observed that distinction is made
an, as to the question Of supremacy between laws
both houses OF Congress. and. except in certain
aen, treaty , is M Mnesoiated and made by the Pres-
preme law OF the land
,bo Ono Of the ordinary incidents of treaty is
say it is the rule rather than NO. the ' exception % ~
say Ct Of I2oas To The
n,rs party The territory thus acquired is az
made as in the case of Texas and Hawaii. by
an act Of Congress:
EcATi6N Of THB % treaty # i6Rf OF rARrs ne F4His HE
ISLAND IsIANR BEGAME TERRITORY OF THB
ANIZEp TfRRiTopY IN TIE .ar ';n TEcaNIcai as al
SENSE OF THE WORD.
Applies to New Territory.
=, 1t is true Mr.. Chief Justice Taney held in
Scott VS. Sanford that the territorial clause OF
the Constitution was confined. and intended to be
ionsed to or was claimsd by the United States
,l and was was within @ their boundaries. settled by
tended tended to o. apply to territory subsequently, ac-
f e dsT In whn hs n
OF FLORIDA before 1t became n State remarked
ates soHereS hy 70 the ss OF lathe, the on,sa
constitution.
But whatever he the source of this power Its
uninterrupted exercise by Congress for a century
and the repeated declarations OF this court have
rtory involves the right to govern and dispose
81 IL Indeed. 1t Is scarcely 200 much 10 say
since ,he territory OF Louisiana was purchased,
that that body has not enacted legislation based
troll the It IS an n sfn suthon,y a wsh
arises, not necessarily from the territorial clause
the case. and from the inability Of the States
to act upon the subject. Under this power. Con-
sreaty: may administer its Government as it does
that of the District. Of Columbia; it may or
States: it may sell is public lands to individual
actual settlers. In short. when acquired
by treaty is belongs to the United States. and is
Territory thus ACQUIRED can remain foreign
country under the taIin laws only upon one Of two
7: such countries rs were foreign 4. the time me
ae change ia their esno or ha AMY ey
main foreign under the tariff laws until Congress
union Of the States The first theory is obviously
untenahle While statute Is presumed TO speak
such persons or things as subsequently fall with
in its scope and ceases to apply to such as there
bidding t the sale Of liquors to minors applies not
only to minors in existence at the time the statute
rsae she msiort wben the
49, hat the shs ne DO certain
this declaration operates not only upon the thr-
anentiy become such And when Congress places
certain restrictions upon the powers Of terri ri
crate the moment such Territory is admitted as a
state: Ry parity Of reasoning a country ceases to
So; too. 4 Consress sees fit to ce,le one Of its
newly acquired territories teven assuming that It
could be no doubt that from the day OF such
lesion and the delivery Of PossessioI such d ter r.
ren.tated as such under the tariff laws. Ger
,any no act Of would be ,5s
United States had ceased to apply to It,
Relation of Tariff Laws.
respect to the tariff laws until Congress has
acted by embracing it within the customs union
os opean he Il
s5dG,nbtediy become Necessary for the adequate
s' s SSa hans n
!sss sFs:ss Ss5 s sH
As TO WHETHEK GoMeRE;ss IS BOUND 70
1T. This has been much discussed by writer's
,pon senstitutional law but 1t Is not necessary
Ircmpt appropriation of the money stipulated in
be held indefinitely by The United States: that It
may me treated In every particular. except for
may be enacted and enforced by Officers Of the
United States sent there for that purpose: that
instructions may be suppressed. wars carried
on. revenues collected. taxes imposed: in short.
that everything may be done which a Government
can do within its own boundaries. and yet that
the territory may still remain foreign country:
for century even. but that until Congress en-
acts otherwise It still remains foreign country.
law We deem to be pure judicial legislation. We
find no warrant for II in the Constitution or in
the powers conferred upon this court. II Is true
the nonaction Of Congress may occasion tenn
porary Inconvenience: but II does not follow that
inverting the ordinary meaning Of words.
II an act Of Congress be necessary to convert
foreign country into domestic territory the ques-
tion at once suggests itself. What is the charac-
ter Of the legislation demanded for this purpose?
VIII an act appropriating money for its purchase
be sufficient? Apparently not. Will an act ap-