Arizona republican., 1905-01-18
PHOENIX. ARIz., JANUARY IS, 1905
Can Congress Admit the Territories
 in Spite of the President?

Senator Morgan of Alabama made a great speech. last week, in opposition to the joint statehood bill. He dis cussed not only the equities of the question, but the law.
 He advanced an extremely novel and startling proposition, which we had ov- erlooked until our attention was di- rected to it by Chief Justice Kent. It was in brief. to the effect that the power to admit a territory rests solely with congress. and that the president is powerless to interfere. That con- gress alone can declare war, and that it's action in that regard cannot be prevented by the president or set aside by the supreme court of the United States, nearly everybody knows. But it is distinctly surprising to learn that the creation of states is likewise an exclusively congressional act, as in tended by the constitution. Most law yers, probably. will be inclined to dis agree with the senator.
 According to Senator Morgan, if the pending bill joining Arizona and New Mexico together should pass. a presi- dential veto would be of no effect; it resting with the president merely to determine afterward, at the time nam ed in the bill, whether the territories had complied with the terms of the en- abling act. Should the constitution of the proposed state be republican in form, and should it be ratified and ac- eepted by the people at the polls, it would he the duty of the president to make proclamation to that effect, and the work of creating the new state would be completed.
 Senator Morgan's speech as it ap pears in the Congressional Record / bears evidence of much care in prep aration. It occupied some two hours in delivery, and was mainly directed to discussion of the constitutional ques- tions involved. The following extract explains the senator's position:
 "Whatever absolute power congress may have to admit a state into the un- ion, or to reject it, that power is not, in any sense, the legislative power con ferred upon congress by the cOnstitu tion. The language of this special grant of power is, New states may be admitted by the congress into the un- ion (Art. iv, sec. 3.)
 ''Whatever provision congress, as a legislature, may have the right to make in the preparation of a people for statehood, that is not the power by or under which the state is admit ted into the union. The final act. de- cision, judgment, decree or pronounce ment that is requisite for the adnlis- sion of a state into the union is the ex- elusive act of the two houses of COIL gress, in which the president has no constitutional right to participate.
 If this act admits these states into the union now or in the future without any further action of congress, it would not be affected by the presi- dents veto or by his approval If he should disappruve the. bill because he objects to the provisions made for car rying it into execution, they would still stand as regulations made by congress; and if congress should admit the states notwithstanding his objections, neither the president nor the supreme court could prevent either house of congress from admitting it's representatives to seats in their respective chambers He has no power to disapprove- this act or any iCSlSldllNe BTOFlSlOl IL COHLalIlS, II the effect Of the act is to admit these states into the union without any fur ther action Of the two houses of con gress"
 We have not the space in which to reproduce the reasoning which leads Senator Morgan to this conclusion. Nor. perhaps, would it be profitable to the lay reader to examine the legal ar gument, If We had the space. The speech is a profound production, as are all of the set speeches of the venera- ble senator from Alabama.
 The point raised by Senator Morgan is new one, and so far no senator has replied to it. As a matter of fact, sen ators are not hot-foot, generally, to en- gage Senator Morgan in a constitu- tional debate, notwithstanding his eighty-one years of age. With the possible exception of Senator Spoon CT of Wisconsin, Senator Morgan is re- garded as the ablest constitutional lawyer in either house of congress.
 The discussion of the question raised by the Alabama senator is more aca- demic than practical, probably. for the reason that there is every likelihood that the joint statehood bill will be signed by the president in the event of its passage by congress. but it is easy to see what complications would arise should MT. Roosevelt interpose a veto.
 If congress has the sole power to ad- init a territory. and the president of the United States is DowerIess to Dra- vent it by a veto. the time may come