The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1902-03-13
CONSTITUTIONAL POWER OF LEGLS.
S# LATION,

LATION.
The speech delivered by Senator Nell
son recently when the question of pro-
viding revenue for the Philippines was
UP for discussion was an able exposi-
ton of the constitutional power of leg
islation possessed by congress and the
Limitations upon such power. Senator
Nelson in his usual vigorous fashion
went at the core of the question and
brought out the fundamental princi-
pies of legislation in connection with
our acquired territory in manner
that made the question clear enough
for the most obtuse minded. He
showed the Philippine status in a very
clear manner. The speech was areply
to one that had been delivered by SEN
ator Patterson of Colorado who at
tackled the policy of the government
in the management of the Philippines.
Senator Nelson presented the consti-
tutional authority in support of the
present system of government in the
Philippines, and showed that the sys-
tenn of government was clearly within
the law. He cited the case of the ter
ritory of California that in fact never
had territorial form of government,
and remained under the control of the
war Department., the executive depart
ment of the government, from the
time we got it in 1916 until it became a
state in 1850, and the supreme court
held that that was constitutional and
valid form of government. Mr.. Nelson
showed the difference between terri
torial possession acquired by treaty
cession and the states of the United
States. In speaking of the limitations
of the power of taxation he said:
"The power to lay direct tax in the terri
tories is embraced in the general power to lay
and collect taxes, minus the rule of apportion-
ment governing the states, and also in the gen.
eral power given to congress over the terri
tories of the United States, but the form in
which this power is thus given shows that it is
discretionary and not a mandatory power.
Congress can Law direct tax in the territories
without imposing at the same time similar
| tax on the states, and it can impose such tax
on the states without including the territories.
''The rule of uniformity, prescribed as to in
direct taxes, was evidently designed to prevent
the people of one state from having prefer
ence over the people of other states in respect
| to indirect taxes. It was not to protect the
states against territories, but to protect the
states against each other and to put them, as
against each other, on footing of equality.
The rule of uniformity was invoked for the
protection Of the states against each other and
as an antidote to the evils of the confederation,
and therefore it is evident that the rule was
intended to be limited to the states.''
There is nothing in the constitution
to prevent congress from laying duty
on exports from New Mexico, Alaska
on Porto Rico, or any of the territorial
possessions of the United States.
Notwithstanding the provisions of
paragraph, 6, section 9, of article of
the federal constitution which says
mo preference shall be. given by any
regulation of commerce or revenue to
the ports of one state over those of
another, nor shall vessels bound to or
from one state be obliged to enter,
clear, or pay duties in another" this
part of the constitution contains no in
hibition as to territorial ports nor as to
vessels bound to or from a territorial
port. Senator Nelson says: "Congress
can give preference to a territorial
port and can oblige vessels to enter,
clear, or pay duty in such port with
out violating the constitution.
The other phase of the Philippine
question which Senator Nelson took
up and discussed very ably was that of
the limitations upon the power OF
congress to legislate in respect to citi-
zenship and civil and political rights.
Senator Nelson says on the question of
citizenship:
'The term Citizen found in the constitution
and in the fourteenth amendment, is used in a
general sense, implying membership of the
nation. Minors and women, as well as men.
are citizens In this sense-are members and
part and parcel of the political community.
The term citizen is used in the same sense as
the term Subject in monarchical forms of
government. Whoever owes allegiance to our
government is entitled under the constitution
to protection in such citizenship and the rights
that appertain thereto 49,.
The adoption of the constitution or
of the fourtheenth amendment did not
make suffrage co-extensive with citi-
zenship, and neither made all citizens
voters. Prior to the adoption of the
fourteenth amendment only those per-
sons were citizens of the United States