Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-12-05
THE GENERAL TOPIC
Congressman Discussing the
Japanese Question.
VIEWS AT THE CAPITOL
Opposition to Interference With San
Francisco.
CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES
Representative Jenkins Analyses the
Obligations Of Treaties-Senator
Rayner's Argument.
VIEWS AT THE CAPITOL
CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES

Republicans and democrats. northerners
| and southerners, radicals and conserva-
| tives, in the House of representatives.
seem to be generally of the opinion that
| San Francisco should be permitted to man.
| age her own schools. 1t has been a long
| time since the once whlte-hot question of
states rights has been discussed so gen.
orally under the dome. Today that portion
| of the Presidents message dealing with
the japanese situation on the San Fran
| cisco school problem has been discussed all
| over the House side of the Capitol in COM
| mittee rooms, in corridors, and, in quiet
way, on the floor itself
Save for a few, among them Representa-
1 tive Mccall OF Massachusetts, IL seems to
| be the consensus of opinion that the ma
| tional government has but little reason
| to even consider the question of interfer-
| ence In connection with the San Francisco
Japanese controversy.
View Of Representative Jenkins.
Representative Jenkins Of Wisconsin.
chairman of the judiciary committee of the
House. a conservative, a good lawyer and
a man well thought of on both sides of the
chamber. has given considerable thought tc
the subject and today he made the follow
ing statement of the case to Star
porter:
Primarily" said Judge Jenkins, lit
might be said that the entire school ques-
ton is under the absolute control of the
state by virtue of the police power unless
interfered with by the treaty-making
power. Unquestionably a treaty can DO
made covering and including the question,
but it Is not for me TO say whether the
treaty does or does not cover and include it.
That is for the administration to determine
until the courts decide There is no sense
or justification in talking war. 1t is worse
than silly.
1t is cruel and unamerican. We do not
know enough about 1t to even express an
opinion. All the facts are not before the
have carefully considered the law. The
people can implicitly trust President
Roosevelt He Is big enough to defend
the honor and dignity of the nation and
at the same time Will do all in his power
to avert war and will be fully equal to
the occasion.
Il am not a states-right man in the
sense in which it is ordinarily under
stood, but there is no man in the coun-
try more tenacious about the rights Of
the state under the Constitution than 1
am. Unquestionably the rights of the
state under the Constitution will be care
fully looked after. So far this nation as
understand it. has not any cause for
complaint and should wait for some overt
l.
BILE arises it will be from our dual system
of government.
IF the question is not covered by treaty
Japan has no couse for complaint, for in a
case of this kind, If not covered by treaty,
the nation cannot be held responsible for
the action of the state, acting within its
sovereign powers. If the question is COW
cred by treaty, this nation must abide by
treaty stipulation or violate them at the
risk of war.
Constitutional Provision.
1.-THE Constitution provides that the Pres
ident shall have power by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate to make
treaties, providing two-thirds of the sena-
tors present concur.
THE power to make treaties is con-
ferred in general terms. There is no limi-
tation in the words creating the power.
And the Constitution has paced no lirni-
taton on this general power. The Constitu-
ton strengthens the power Dy providing
that all treaties made or which shall be
made under the authority of the United
States shall be the supreme law of the land
and the judges In every state shall be bound
thereby, anything in the Constitution of any
laws of any state to the contrary notwith-
standing.
"Unquestionaby the treaty may contain
anything known to international law If the
subject has not been considered elsewhere
by the Constitution"
That Is practically statement of the law
on the subject Representative Jenkins
views it. but from some of tie talk around
the Capitol il is apparent that good many
members believe that there simply isn't any
question about the violation of treaty OBJ
legations and that in their judgment the
President had no reason to make, one
representative pat it, "a yelled threat"
against California.
States rights are sitting up and taking
notice today
Senator Rayner's Argument.
1t is expected that Senator Rayner will
speak in the Senate in a few days, the
text of his remarks to be that part of tho
Presidents message referring to the Jap
anese. Mr.. Rayners resolution, published
in yesterdays Star, sets forth the ground
that he will take. which is. in the first
place, that the Japanese treaty does not
cover the point at all and that there is
nothing in 1t, by any construction or in
depreciation, that can be made to apply
to the right of Japanese TO any educa-
tional privileges in California or any other
place
article OF the Constitution provides that
laws can be made in pursuance OF the Con-
stitution treaties can be made under the
authority of the United States. His con-
tention will be that there Is no difference
whatever between these two clauses and
that the authority of the United States" Is
equivalent to saying under the Constitu-
ton of the United States"
The third section of the resolution calls
for the opinion Of the Senate upon the prop
osition to instruct the President to notify
the government of Japan and any other
foreign government with whom the question
may arise that we have no federal juris-
diction over the school systems of the
United States.
The contention here will evidently be that
the tenth article of the Constitution, which
reserves to the states all powers not dele
gated to the federal government, carries
NTH 1t the systems of education that are
in vogue In the different states. and that
a treaty that would invade this province OF
the state would violate the Constitution.
Although 1t has been held that one need =
not look to the Constitution for authority
to make a treaty. he will contend that it
~. cgutap hal hot