Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    July 24, 1901

    “Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. Abandonment of the Constitution.—Concluded” The Signs of the Times 27, 30, p. 11.

    WE have seen the republic of Rome deny to the peoples of her new and foreign possessions the privileges of her constitution, and make of them tributary subjects governed entirely without the constitution. We have seen that it was the thought of the responsible governmental party, that this should be done while retaining intact the constitution at home; but that the first step involved other issues which forced yet other steps in which those in power remodeled the constitution—“changing not the letter, but merely the practise of the existing constitution.”SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.1

    And still “punishment followed in the steps of wrong. The new provincial system NECESSITATED the appointment of governors whose position was absolutely incompatible ... with the Roman constitution.”—Mommsen.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.2

    The principle of the Roman constitution was that of self-government—government from the people themselves, by themselves; that men were capable of governing themselves, without any such thing as kingships. The theory upon which Rome’s new foreign possessions were held under Roman sovereignty, and their peoples held as tributary subjects of Rome, was that those peoples were not capable of self-government. Therefore when Roman governors were appointed to those peoples, it was upon the assumption that the people could not govern themselves, and must be governed. Accordingly, was the Roman communities in the provinces took the place of the former rulers of the land, so the governor appeared there in the position of a king.”—Mommsen.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.3

    Nor was it only in the theory that the Roman governors “appeared there in the position of a king.”SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.4

    Those peoples had been ruled by kings. Their immediate governors had been the official representatives of kings. These governors had dwelt in kingly palaces and maintained the state of kings. And now, since the whole theory of this Roman governorship was that those peoples were incapable of self-government, in order for the Roman governor to maintain the theory it become essential that he should actually hold toward the new subject peoples exactly the attitude, as well as the position, of a king. And this is why it was that “the new provincial system necessitated the appointment of governors, whose position was absolutely incompatible, not only with the welfare of the provinces, but with the Roman constitution.”—Mommsen.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.5

    And up to this point followed the course of the republic of Rome has been followed by the republic of the United States. To the new possessions of the republic of the United States, governors have been appointed precisely upon the theory, and under precisely the local conditions, that the republic of Rome appointed her new governors. And how certainly the position of these new governors is not only absolutely incompatible, but is also recognized by the government to be absolutely incompatible with the United States Constitution, is made plain by the legislation of Congress respecting the government of the Philippine Islands.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.6

    February 27, 1901, there was before the Senate of the republic of the United States, for consideration and enactment, the following provision for the governing of the Philippine Islands:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.7

    All military, civil, and judicial powers necessary to govern the Philippine Islands acquired from Spain by the treaties concluded at Paris on the tenth day of December, 1898, and at Washington on the seventh day of November, 1900, shall, until otherwise provided by Congress, be vested in such person and persons, and shall be exercised in such manner, as the President of the United States shall direct for the establishment of civil government and for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of such islands in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and toleration: Provided, That all franchises granted under the authority hereof shall contain a reservation of the right to alter, amend, or repeal the same.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.8

    This provision at once merges in one “person” all governmental powers in the Philippine Islands. A fundamental principle not only of the United States Constitution but of the genius of Anglo-Saxon government is that all governmental powers shall not be vested in one person, but shall be distributed—the legislative, the judicial, and the executive powers—in departments. This principle is that absolutism in government—all governmental power lodged in one man or one set of men—is not good; and that therefore not more than one portion of governmental power shall ever be exercised by one person or set of persons, so that each department shall be a check upon the others, in the interests of liberty and the protection of the people.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.9

    Upon this principle the government of the United States consists of three co-ordinate branches—the legislative, the judicial, and the executive; and Section I of Article I of the Constitution declares:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.10

    All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.11

    And Section I of Article III of the Constitution says:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.12

    The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.13

    It is therefore easily seen that the proposal respecting the government of the Philippine Islands is “absolutely incompatible with the” United States Constitution. For to make effective the new order of government for the new possessions, it was found necessary for the responsible power in the governments of the United States, while retaining the letter, to change the practise, of the existing Constitution. For when the Constitution definitely confines to Congress “all legislative powers” granted, and to a supreme court, and such inferior courts as may from time to time be provided, all judicial powers; and then Congress passes over to, and vests in, “such person and persons ... as the President of the United States shall direct,” all civil and judicial powers necessary to govern territory of the United States, that is nothing less than for Congress so far to abdicate its own power, and so far to take away from the courts their powers. It is also a clear abandonment of the Constitution of the United States, so far as the Philippine Islands are concerned, and, in principle, so far as any place is concerned.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.14

    Not only is this true in principle, but in the Senate, and by the Senate, it was seen to be true; and action was taken accordingly. First, an amendment was proposed to the Philippine section as follows:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.15

    SEC.—That the Constitution of the United States is hereby extended over, and declared to be in force in, the Philippine Islands, so far as the same or any provision thereof may be applicable.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.16

    This was rejected by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-six.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.17

    Afterward there was offered the following amendment:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.18

    And provided further, That no judgment, order, nor act by any of said officials so appointed shall conflict with the Constitution and laws of the United States.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.19

    This was rejected by a vote of forty-five to twenty-five; not voting, eighteen.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.20

    After this an amendment was offered requiring that—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.21

    Every person in whom authority is vested under this grant of power shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.22

    This also was rejected, by a vote of forty-one to twenty-five; not voting, twenty-two.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.23

    When the Constitution itself had been thus definitely excluded and abandoned in the government of the Philippine Islands, there was offered an amendment embodying, and extending to the people of the islands, the substance of the Bill of Rights contained in the first few amendments to the Constitution, as follows:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.24

    All persons shall be bailable unless for capital offenses where the proof shall be evident or the presumption great. All fines shall be moderate, and no cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted. No man shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property, but by the judgment of his peers and the law of the land. If the public exigencies make it necessary for the common preservation, to take the property of any person, or to demand his particular services, full compensation shall be made for the same. No ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made. No law shall be made which shall lay any person under restraint, burden, or ability on account of his religious opinions, provisions, or mode of worship, in all of which he to be free to maintain his own, and not burdened to those of another.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.25

    This, too, was rejected, by a vote of forty-one to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-four.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.26

    When, thus, it had been voted, over and over again, to bestow unlimited power upon such persons as the President shall name to govern the Philippine Islands, then attempt was made to limit the time and the exercise of this power. Accordingly, an amendment was offered limiting this time to March 4, 1903. But this was rejected by a vote of forty-three to twenty-six; not voting, nineteen.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.27

    When it had been so positively decided that no limited power should be given to these men,—for unlimited time,—an attempt was made to give the Filipinos a part in the government of themselves. Accordingly, an amendment was offered, as follows:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.28

    And secure to them such participation in the affairs of the civil government so to be established as shall be consistent with the safety of the government.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.29

    But this was rejected by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-six.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.30

    When it had thus been explicitly and confirmedly settled that the powers of such men as the President shall appoint to govern the Philippines, shall be so limited for all time, and shall be absolute over all people of the islands, attempt was made to save at least a vestige of constitutional liberty, as follows:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.31

    Mr. Hoar: Mr. President there is one principle of constitutional liberty not yet slain, and I desire to give it a little chance for its life. I move the amendment which I send to the desk, to be inserted at the end of the bill.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.32

    The Presiding Officer: The Senator from Massachusetts submits an amendment, which will be stated.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.33

    The Secretary: It is proposed to add as a new section the following:—SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.34

    “In the government of the Philippine Islands the person vested with legislative power shall even exercise the executive or judicial powers, or either of them; no person vested with executive powers shall ever exercise the legislative or judicial power, nor either of them; no person vested with judicial powers shall ever exercise the legislative or executive powers, or either of them; to the end there may be a government of laws and not of men.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.35

    The Presiding Officer: The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] to the amendment of the committee.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.36

    Mr. Jones, of Arkansas, and Mr. Pettus called for the yeas and nays.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.37

    The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.38

    And even this last principle of constitutional liberty was slain. It was rejected by a vote of forty-three to twenty-six; not voting, nineteen.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.39

    See the whole account in Congressional Record, dated Wednesday, Feb. 27, 1901.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.40

    As already stated, the next day but one—Friday, March 1—the House of Representatives passed the legislation as it came from the Senate, without any change whatever. And since it was all done at the demand of the executive, of course it was all proved by him when it came before him to be signed. And Monday, May 27, 1901, the Supreme Court of the United States rendered a decision likewise abandoning the Constitution and recognizing “an unrestrained possession of power on the part of Congress” with respect to the new possession.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.41

    Thus, and up to date, the republic of the United States has repeated the course of the republic of Rome, step by step and item by item, in the apostasy from government of the people to government by few or by one; from Constitutional government of absolutism; from the principle of a republic to one of monarchy.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.42

    The republic of Rome did not stop at that point. Will the republic of the United States stop at this point? Can she stop at this point?SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.43

    Further consideration next week.SITI July 24, 1901, page 11.44

    ALONZO T. JONES.

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents