Arizona republican., 1920-10-24
Where tho Constitution Gives Way


 In what slight regard the constitution of the United States held by the administration is illus trated by Che ruling of Secretary Colby of the state department against search of baggage of diplo- mats 10 prevent the importation of liquor into the United states The ruling if based on no stated grounds might appear be justified by international comity. That is we might consent to wink at the introduction of liquor into this country in the baggage of diplomatic representatives But when the secretary tells us that he his ruling international law which is folder than constitution of the United states" we feel some alarm for the constitution
 We do not recall that whether in the framing of the prohibition amendment and that of the Volstead law giving effect the admendment the rights and privileges foreign diplomats were considered But certainly no exception made In their favor. The amendment and the law plainly prohibit the intro ducing of alcoholic liquors into this country Tor any purpose And we think that no one with proper regard for constitution and our laws enacted under the constitution find justification for the ,nfacton of tho law under the sanction of interna- tional law.
 That international law is older than the constitu- tion is not to be denied but submit that the virtue of laws unlike winc is dependent upon age. Nor Is regulation of domestic affairs to be restricted by any international understanding short of actual treaty.
 This incident points to the danger which would threaten under such nelict ual ihtelli@uOA"i law should take precedence constitution If our international relations were made closer and more numerous than they at present We will suppose that under Mir Wilson's covenant of league of nations which in general and vague terms only allows us to retain control of domestic affairs similar question should raised to rights and privileges which arc guaranteed citizens of league members: whether sr. Colby other executive officer of similar mind would not hold the interna- tiona understanding be superior to any law impos- ing restrictions on rights and privileges of foreigners similar to those which imposed upon those of our own citizens.
 We win suppose something else that is. that 1T at the time of tho adoption of the amendment pro hibiting human slavery there had been in the dipo- rnatic corps one or more representatives from for eirn countries which slavery was recognized. Might these representatives have brought into the country and slaves. retinues of household ser vantsg Would VIC have not only permitted that but in addition would we have been compelled under international law to guard the property of dplo- ratc visitors against loss by fight2 Would we have been required assist in keeping those servants in a state of scrvitudc in spite of constitution?
 The bold declaration of Mir Colby is another evil dence of that spirit of internationaiism which per vades the present administration and whicf if it could have it's way would throw domestic af fairs into a common pool with those of the whole world.
 We have understood that constitution is su preme within the territory of the United States Blu Mr. Colby has shown where it must yield