La correspondencia de Puerto Rico. (San Juan, P.R.) 1890-1943, 1903-04-28

1t, although they may acQu1esee In
sdeh laws &s Congress- may enact
for them, If they choose to do 80.
It 10 true that legislation is neees'
sary to enforce the provisions of the
Constitution in the States; but no
such legislation can proper y &C.
complish the same result in the Te.
rritories, 10 the laws Of the United
States do not extend and cannot be
made to extend where the Constitu. /.
tion does not, eexcept by the con-
sent Of the people who are therein
sought to be brought under them; !;
ana the same principle applies with
equal force to treaties. If follows,
therefore, according to the view
which the W tier holds, that the
Territories, not being & part Of the
United States, their Inhabitants are
not citizens Of the United States,
and for that reason Congress b "a
no Yightfal authority to legis!kts #
them.
If this be true, our Government
hiss no right to taks jusisdiction over
~ y foreign territory without the
consent of it's inhabitants; nor does
any other nation possess tha p w sr
either by treaty or othei wise to
trantfer to us its jurisdiction over
any of its colonies or dependencie
without tn cir consent also; nor can
we accept such jurisdiction under
the same circumstances.
The most common ground on
which the Power to govern the
inhabitants of territory lying out
side of the boundaries of the Unit
ed States, is sough to be justified,
is the right to acquire it, this
having been asserted in nearly all
of the decisions of the Supreme
Court relating to the question. But
it is difficult to perceive how one
nation, by ceding, to another any
part of tue soil which it owns,
can also cede to that other politi-
cal Jurisdiction over the people
who reside upon it, unless they
consent to the latter cession. Te-
rritory is property; and as such it
can be transferred from one owner
to another; but dominion over per-
sons, according to our theory of
government, is no property in any
sense of that word; and therefore
it can neither be given nor sold
by one nation to another. Our
Government has an undoubted
rihgt to purchase, or to receive as
a gift, any species of property
from any OF er government or
from any person or persons; but it
cannot buy or take from either of
them that which, according to our
Constitution, is not property; and
as that instrument now reads, no
human being can be owned by
another or by others within our
domain. and so it is impossible for
us either to purchase or to accept
as a present the inhabitants of
the ceded islands, even if Spain
had the right either to sell or to
give them to us, which she has
not. The right to acquire terrific
ry therefore, does not include
the right either to own or to 60
vern the people who occupy it; and
so we can have no righttul jurls-
diction over them without their
consent thereto.
Although one nation has the
power to transfer to another any
portion IF its owa property, it has
40 such pCwsr over that Cf its ci
tiz sns or it's subjects; and there
fore, If &ny part + the soil Of sither
Of the island above mentioned is the
privAts property ef any Of its inha.
bitant', it cannot be ceded by Spain
to the United States This assertion
is in accordance with the unanimous
decision Of the Supreme Court,
which WAS delivered by Chief J astice
M~rnnall, In ths case Ct United
States o. Perehsman, Peters, 81.
On this point the court said:
A cesion of territory is never
understood to he o ceslon Of ths
property belonging to it's inhabi'
tants. The King cedes that only
which belonged to him. Lands he
had previously granted were not his
to ceae. Neither party could 50
understand the cessior. Neither
party eonld consider itself as at
tempting q wrong to individuals
condemned by the practice IF the
whole civilized world"
Consequently, if ths treaty under
consideration attempts to convey to
this &C uutry, land or other property
owned by the people Of the ceded
Territories, it is contrary to the
above quoted opinion of the Supre'
me Court.
10 support of the writer's content.
ion that the mere acquisition of ta.
rritory does not nee cssssrily include
the power to govern it's il hAbitants,
he will quote the following rema1 k :
made by the Hon Lewis CAss of
Michigan, 10 . speech in the Senate
of the United States, on January 81,
1850. Discussing this point, Mr..
CAss said:
.The treaty me king power is
clearly competent to acquire te.
rritory; though the proposition that
acqui sition necessarily brings with
it the autority Of legislation is
another and quite . diff aren't quest.
ion.