Philippine Annexation Justified by Our History, Constitution, and Laws [pp. 310-318]

Overland Monthly
Now, if the acquisition of the Philip pine and other islands is unconstitutional,
then certainly was the acquisition of each
and every tract of territory by the United
States, from the Louisiana tract to that
of Alaska, unconstitutional.
But had such acquisitions been uncon stitutional, without doubt they would
have been so determined long ago, and
the Constitution would have been amended
so as to meet the requirements. Indeed,
if it be unconstitutional for the United
States to acquire the Philippines and
other islands, why do not those so holding
take legal measures to rectify the wrong
instead of incessantly crying: "Unconstitutional!" "Imperialism!" "Militarism? "
It is reported that Thomas Jefferson
said that the acquisition of foreign territory by the United States "would makc
waste paper of the Constitution." But in
1803 President Jefferson found the Constibution no bar to the purchase from
France of the Louisiana tract of 1,235,450 square miles, and asked Congress for
$15,000,000 with which to secure it, and
Congress readily granted the sum asked
for, and the purchase was effected. President Monroe, a distinguished statesman
and sound constitutional lawyer, having
for advisers Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison, found the Constitution no bar to the
acquisition from Spain of Florida in
]821, a tract embracing an area of 58,680
square miles. So with respect to each and
every tract of foreign territory acquired
by the United States, our ablest statesmen have found the Constitution no bar.
Further, Thomas Jefferson said:
Do we wish to acquire any one or more of
Spanish provinces? I candidly confess that
I have ever looked on Cuba as the most interesting addition which ever could be made
to our system of States.
John Quincy Adams, one of America's
greatest statesmen, looked forward to the
time when Cuba would be acquired by
the United States, saying: The North American Union cannot cast
her [Cuba] off from its bosom.
The United States, as the records show,
has sought to acquire Cuba from Spain.
From a commercial and strategic con.1deration, the Philippine Islands are now
deemed by those conversant with the sub ject, fully as necessary to the United
States as is or ever was Cuba.
The Constitution, Article I, Sections
8-1, reads:
Congress shall have power to provide for
the common defense and general welfare of
the United States.
There seems to be no doubt that a fair
construction of this provision fully empowers Congress to acquire foreign territory, whether it be situated on this continent or on another, or whether it be an
island or islands, near or remote, whenever Congress shall deem such territory
as subserving "the defense and general
welfare of the United States." Chancellor Kent, expounding the Constitution,
says: A grant of general power for great and
national objects ought to be liberally coInstrued to be made adequate to all future exigencies within the scope of the power.
Further on he says: There does not appear to be any just
ground for construing the power strictly and
within straight and narrow limits.
It would be slandering the founders of
the Republic to say that they intentionally or recklessly put forth a Constitution
restricting Congress from doing any act
not in conflict with vested rights of
others that would be for "the defense
and general welfare of the United
States." They did no such thing. Further,. the Constitution, Article I, Sections
8-11, 12, 13, confers upon Congress
power "To declare war, grant letters of
marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water; to
raise and support armies; to provide and
maintain a navy." Now, it is the height
of absurdity to assume, in view of these
provisions, that it would be unconstitutional for the United States, in case of
being victorious in war, to enjoy the fruits
of its victory, whether consisting of an
indemnity in money or in territory, Congress deeming such territory conducive
to the defense and general welfare of the
country. The Constitution presents no
bar against our owning, holding, and enjoying, anywhere upon the face of the
31 2