4 Conservative.
CONSTITUTION APPLIES TO POUTO
IUCO.
The following is the text of the de
cision handed down by Judge Lochren
of the United States circuit court , re
ferred to in the last issue of Tin : Cox-
SKUVATIVK. This decision was upon the
application of Rafael Ortiz , a citizen of
Porto Rico , for a writ of habeas corpus :
"Our general government was founded
by the men of the revolution , who had
rebelled against the arbitrary power assorted -
sorted by Great Britain to govern her
* ' ' . ] I outlying colonies at the will of her par-
J ' * liament. They established this govern
ment upon the asserted theory that all
just powers of government come from
the consent of the governed. They
founded , as described by President Lin
coln in language not yet forgotten , 'a
government of the people , by the people ,
for the people. ' It will be , indeed , mar
velous if it is made to appear that these
men who then founded our national gov
ernment so constructed it that it is capa
ble of ruling with unlimited power a
subject people who have neither guaran
ties to protect them nor any voice in the
government. This is foreign absolutism
the worst form of tryanny.
States Alternative Position.
"If the constitution does not extend to
Porto Rico and our other new acquisi
tions of territory , Congress has the untrammeled -
trammeled , absolute power to establish
subject governments or make laws for
such territories ; it has the power to es
tablish dependent monarchies or
satrapies , state religions and even
slavery.
"The argument of one of the senators
referred to , that the last clause of the
thirteenth amendment prevents the es
tablishment thbre of slavery , is obvious
ly lame and impotent , for if the con
stitution does not extend to those parts
of the domain of the United States , nor
limits Congress in its powers of legisla-
lation over them , by what process will
this single clause of an amendment of
that instrument detach itself from the
skin of the parchment and alone fasten
itself upon these new territories ? If it
be considered that this clause of the
thirteenth amendment ex-propria vigore
extends to these new territories , or limits
the powers of Congress respecting them ,
every clause of that instrument , for the
like reason , is equally potent. To say
that a clause in the constitution does
not extend to a territory but does limit
the power of Congress in legislating for
that territory , is to draw a distinction
too fine to be practical.
Argument Proves Nothing.
"The argument much repeated that
if the national government of the United
States has not the power to deal with
these new territories untrammeled by
the constitution its power is less
than that possessed by other govern
ments of the civilized world is
admitted. It proves nothing. The
national government of the United
States is one of limited powers. In re
spect to its own people , in its entire do
main , and , generally , except in respect
to its power to deal with foreign nations ,
and concerning matters expressly com
mitted to it by the constitution , its
powers are much loss than that possessed
by other governments. No one will dis
pute this.
"The national government of the Uni
ted States was created and its powers and
jurisdiction granted and limited by the
federal constitution. Its powers can
only be increased by amendment of that
instrument.
Power to Govern Territories.
"The power of the general govern
ment to acquire additional territory rests
upon its constitutional power to make
war , which may result in conquest , and
its like power to make treaties , which
may bring territory by cession. The
power to govern such acquired
territories results from the power to ad
mit new states and to make all needful
rules and regulations respecting the
territory or other property belonging to
the United States.
"This clause authorizes congress to
legislate in respect to a territory in local
as well as national matters before its ad
mission to statehood in the Union.
Contrary to Precedents.
"The novel doctrine that the power of
Congress to govern territory coded to the
United States may be conferred by a
foreign sovereign , by and through the
terms of the treaty of cession , and that
the general government can exercise pow
ers thus granted by a foreign sovereign
independent of and in disregard of the
constitution , until Congress , mayhap in
the future , shall by its enactment see fit
to extend the constitution over the ter
ritory , is contrary to the holding of the
Supreme Court of the United States , to
the effect that the general government
is one of enumerated powers and can
claim and exercise no power not granted
to itby the constitution , either expressly
or by necessary implication.
1 'It is clear that the general govern
ment cannot legislate over territory
where the constitution from which every
power is derived does not extend. The
constitution must be in force over a ter
ritory before the general government
can have any authority to legislate re
specting it. No foreign sovereign can
invest the general government with vny
legislative power.
Ih Part of the United States.
"It must be held that upon the cession
by Spain to the United States of the
island of Porto Rico that island became
a part of the dominion of the United
States , as much so as is Arizona or Min
nesota , and that the constitution of the
United States , ex propria vigore , at once
extended over that island , and that this
extension of the constitution gave Con
gress , whose every power must come
from that instrument , the authority to
legislate in respect to that island as a
part of the United States territory. It
follows that all the provisions of the
constitution in respect to personal and
property rights , including the right to
trial by jury in criminal prosecutions ,
became at once , when the cession was
completed , a part of the supreme law
of the land. "
Mr. O. P Hunt-
THKNICAKAGUA .
CANAL. mgton , in his ad
dress before the
Chamber of Commerce of Galveston ,
discussed the investment feature of the
Nicaragua canal. Canals , he says ,
are a primitive and not a modern
method of transportation. As they re
placed the pack animals and rude
vehicles of the early part of this century
so the railroads are now taking the
place of canals. Railroads are cheaper ,
qxiicker , and more satisfactory in every
way.
way.Mr.
Mr. Huntington also opposes the Nic
aragua canal because of the impractica
bility of its construction. The climatic
conditions of the proposed location are
such that it would moan an enormous
sacrifice of life on the part of those en
gaged in the work.
Fifty years ago the government of the
United States and the British govern
ment , by the Clay ton-Bui wer treaty ,
guaranteed to protect private individuals
in the construction of the canal. As
fifty years have elapsed and no canal
has been constructed it is quite evident
that the proposition did not appeal to
financiers as a judicious investment.
In 1860 the Suez canal was begun by
private capital with little or no govern
ment protection. It shortened the route
to Asia and Australia by from 4,000 to
6,0000 miles. It was this fact that
tempted capitalists to make the invest
ment.
Conditions in the western hemisphere
are quite different. The year the Suez
canal was completed (1869) ( ) , the laat rail
was laid for the first transcontinental
railway in this country. "We now have
six. With these facilities for transporta
tion across the continent it is evident
that an isthmian canal would be un
profitable as a financial investment.
"It is assumed by those in favor of
the canal , " says Mr. Huntington , "that
4,000,000 tons will pass through it
annually at a toll of $1.55 per ton ,
which is about the rate now charged on
the Suez canal , and that therefore , the
income of the canal would be $6,000-
000. Taking the low estimate of these
friends of the measure , that the canal
would cost $140,000,000 , simple interest Ji
on which at 4 per cent , would be $5,600- *
000 ; adding to this the cost of maintain
ing and repairing the canal and its two
harbors , and of operating it , which could
