The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-12-22
R OF TERRITORY.
Eleven Kinds Found to Exist Under
the United States Government.

Modern culture.
are in a state of nature, sir" said
Patrick Henry. at the beginning of the first
continental Congress; "all America is
thrown into one mass" Like many of the
declarations of that famous orator, and
imperfect reasoner, this assertion has more
sound than ~solidity; for the colonists were
then, and for some years remained, di-
vided from top to bottom on the question
of the revolution. Nevertheless, the idea
that there is only one sort of territorial
system within the dominion of the United
States of America is still deeply rooted;
it appears constantly in letters and po-
litical writings. and apparently finds favor
from an imposing minority of the Supreme
Court. 1t As, of course, a fair contention
that the welfare of mankind requires the
United States to observe a simple and
single territorial system. 1t would SIM
plify our government and save a lot of
printers ink If we could settle down TO
the Fundamental idea that the Constitu-
ton and the Union knows only States and
inchoate States; that it has within it no
expectation of and no provision for other
communities, which are never to become
an integral part of the union of States:
that the Constitution knows no such thing
as colonies or dependencies or empire.
So far from such a comfortable and COM
prehenSive state of things, the Constitution
adopted in 1877 distinctly contemplated at
least five kinds of territory within the ma
tional boundarieS-States, Territories, the
District of Columbia, forts, lighthouses
and public buildings; Indian reservations.
In practice, seven other kinds of juriSdic-
ton have arisen under the Constitutions: as
inclosed bays and parts of the great lakes;
the decks of public and private American
SHIPS on the high seas: the decks of pub
lie vessels in foreign ports; the residences
of ambassadors in foreign countries; guano
islands; territory occupied in war previous
to a treaty of peace; and territory acquired
by purchase or cOnqueSt, but not yet or
ganized by act of Congress. Perhaps it
may be worth while briefly TO consider
each of these eleven different kinds of ter
ritory TO see what light experience throws
on the present controversy over Porto
Rico and the Philippine islands.
These two important questions lave both
been reviewed in the recent decisions of
the Supreme Court, which, with a variety
of dissenting opinions, were handed down
MAY q, 1901. The two decisions taken to-
gether do not seem contradictory. They
simply set forth ID that when territory is
annexed il ceases 10 be a foreign country,
and is therefore not subject TO duties laid
on importations from foreign countries. but
CD that IL is within the province OF Con-
gress to determine what duties shall be
laid on trade TO such a territory from for
eign countries, and TO and from the United
States.
1t is. of course, significant that in each
of these decisions the Judges stood five to
four. Even though none of these cases
involve the important issue of the collec-
ton of duties In Porto Rico or goods ex-
ported from the United States, the general
purport of the decisions Is hat IL Is for
Congress TO determine when annexed ter
ritory becomes entitled 10 all the privileges
of the Constitution. and IL is for Congress
TO determine whether the territories shall
or shall not have the same revenue system
as the organized States. Although Con-
gress tries TO reason away the natural re-
suit of the decision. the principle undoubt-