Senate has advised the President to ratify the treaty of peace and terminate the war upon the terms set forth in the treaty. Being so advised. the President ratified the treaty. (30 U. S. Stats., 1754.) Since the ratification the President and all the subordinate departments of the executive branch of our Government have treated said territory as being outside of the territorial boundaries of the United States. Although these islands were outside the boundaries of the United States, they were territory appertaining to the United States, to which the sovereign people of the United States had acquired sovereign title, and in which said sovereign had secured many proprietary rights to property. It was therefore the duty of the President to use the means at his disposal to maintain the one and preserve the other. This duty is equally imperative should the emergency arise upon the high seas, or in territory recognized to be within the jurisdiction of another sovereignty. Therefore the discharge of such duty can not be interpreted as an assent to the extension of the territorial boundaries. Apparently the position of the President is that the initial step in making known the will of the sovereign in regard to the extension of our boundaries to include this territory is to be taken by the legislative department, and the assent of the executive department to be evidenced by the approval of the acts of the legislative department by the President. This course is in harmony with the theory and established practices of our Government. In the special message to Congress transmitting the Louisiana purchase treaty President Jefferson said: With the wisdom of Congress it will rest to take those ulterior measures which may be necessary for the immediate occupation and temporary government of the country; for its incorporation into our Union; for rendering the change of government a blessing to our newly adopted brethren; for securing to them the rights of conscience and property, * and establishing friendly relations with them. (Messages of the Presidents, Richardson's Comp., Vol. I, p. 358.) In that message Jefferson also said: * * * * * The property and sovereignty of all Louisiana have on certain conditions been transferred to the United States by instruments bearing date the 30th of April last. When these shall have received the constitutional sanction of the Senate they will without delay be communicated to the Representatives also for the exercise of their functions as to those conditions which are within the powers vested by the Constitution in Congress. (Ibid.) After the Louisiana purchase treaty had been ratified by the Senate and ratifications exchanged, Jefferson again sent the treaty to Congress, accompanied by a message wherein he said: * These conventions * * are communicated to you for consideration in your legislative capacity. You will observe that some important conditions can not be carried into execution but with the aid of the Legislature. (Richardson's Comp., Vol. I, p. 362.) 13635-02- -4 See also debate in House of Representatives, beginning October 24, 1803, on the motion for carrying into effect the Louisiana purchase treaty. (Annals of Congress, 1803-4, p. 471.) These islands have been affected by the war rather than the treaty. War wrought the changes, the treaty only confirms them. The result of the war with Spain upon these islands was to destroy the jurisdiction of Spain therein and compel a withdrawal of Spanish sovereignty therefrom, leaving the islands in the possession of the United States. Thereupon they became land appertaining to the United States and in the possession of the United States, but not within the territorial boundaries of the United States. There may be some question as to whether or not all the country within the territorial boundaries of the United States is bound and privileged by the provisions of the Constitution, but there can be no question that territory without the boundaries of the United States is not bound and privileged by our Constitution. The United States Supreme Court say: The Constitution can have no operation in another country. (In re Ross, 140 U. S., 453, 464, citing; Cook v. United States, 138 U. S., 157, 181.) This brings us to the question: Has the Congress authority to legislate for territory appertaining to and in the possession of the United States, but outside of the territorial boundaries? This exact question was presented to the Supreme Court of the United States in three cases decided in 1890-Jones v. United States, Smith . United States, and Key v. United States (137 U. S., 202). The territory involved was the Navassa Island, in the Caribbean Sea. The island is a small one, and wittily designated by a recent magazine writer on this subject as "an abandoned manure heap." But the cases presented to the Supreme Court involved the infliction of the death penalty on American citizens, than which no question the courts are called upon to decide is more solemn. The court held: The guano islands act of August 18, 1856, c. 164, reenacted in Revised Statutes, sections 5570-5578, is constitutional and valid. The provisions of that law directly involved were as follows: SEC. 5570. Whenever any citizen of the United States discovers a deposit of guano on any island, rock, or key, not within the lawful jurisdiction of any other government, and not occupied by the citizens of any other government, and takes peaceable possession thereof, and occupies the same, such island, rock, or key may, at the discretion of the President, be considered as appertaining to the United States. SEC. 5576. All acts done and offenses or crimes committed on any such island, rock, or key, by persons who may land thereon, or in the waters adjacent thereto, shall be deemed committed on the high seas, on board a merchant ship or vessel belonging to the United States, and shall be punished according to the laws of the United States relating to such ships or vessels and offenses on the high seas, which laws, for the purpose aforesaid, are extended over such islands, rocks, or keys. The indictment charged that Henry Jones, at Navassa Island, a place which then and there was under the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States, the same being, at the time of the committing of the an island situated in the Caribbean Sea and named Navassa and which was then and there recognized and considered by the United States as appertaining to the United States, and which was then and there in the possession of the United States, offenses, Island, * * * * murdered one Thomas N. Foster. * * * The defendant filed a general demurrer, which was overruled, and he then pleaded not guilty. Trial was had, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. Thereupon the defendant moved in arrest of judgment— Because the act of August 18, 1856, c. 164, now codified with amendments as title 72 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and the court was without jurisdiction to try the defendant under the indictment found against him. The motion was overruled and the defendant sentenced to death. In affirming this sentence the court say (137 U. S., 212): By the law of nations, recognized by all civilized states, dominion of new territory may be acquired by discovery and occupation, as well as by cession or conquest; and when citizens or subjects of one nation, in its name and by its authority or with its assent, take and hold actual, continuous, and useful possession (although only for the purpose of carrying on a particular business, such as catching and curing fish or working mines) of territory unoccupied by any other government or its citizens, the nation to which they belong may exercise such jurisdiction and for such period as it sees fit over territory so acquired. This principle affords ample warrant for the legislation of Congress concerning guano islands. (Vattel, lib. 1. c. 18; Wheaton on International Law, 8th ed., §§ 161, 165, 176, note 104; Halleck on International Law, c. 6, §§ 7, 15; 1 Phillimore on International Law, 3d ed., §§ 227, 229, 230, 232, 242; 1 Calvo, Droit International, 4th ed., §§ 266, 277, 300; Whiton v. Albany Ins. Co., 109 Mass., 24, 31.) When Spain elected to go to war rather than withdraw from Cuba, she subjected the sovereignty and dominion of her entire realm to the hazard of that war, and by the laws of war and of nations she made it lawful for her adversary to invade any part of her domain and displace her sovereignty, exclude her jurisdiction, and destroy her dominion; in other words, effect a complete conquest. So much of her domain as became so situated was without the jurisdiction of Spain and within the possession of the United States. As to the United States, such territory was the same as land newly discovered and occupied by citizens of the United States, with this difference, the occupier was a military force of the United States sent there by the nation itself, instead of a private citizen and pioneer adventurer. The sovereignty and jurisdiction of the United States have attached to the territory embraced in a number of islands, under the act of August 18, 1856, as will appear from the following correspondence on file in the Treasury Department: Hon. S. WIKE, TREASURY DEPARTMENT, FIRST COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. Washington, D. C., September 16, 1893. SIR: In compliance with the request contained in your letter of the 15th instant, I have the honor to transmit herewith a list of the guano islands bonded under the act of August 18, 1856, as appears from the bonds on file in this office up to the present date. You will observe that the list is the same as that transmitted with letter from this office, dated December 22, 1885, no additional bonds having been received since that date. R. S. BOWLER, Comptroller. Respectfully, yours, List of guano islands, appertaining to the United States, bonded under the act of August 18, 1856, as appears from bonds on file in the office of the First Comptroller of the Treasury, September 16, 1893. 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888: 8888 = 00 ZOZZ LDLL Z DZ D Z L L L L D Z ZIL L L L L L L L Z L D L L L D Z D L Z LZ LLLZL 30 UN 4 41 00 S 11 05 00 S 9 33 00 160 52 00 W 173 41 00 W 161 50 00 W 170 38 00 W 3 02 4 40 00 2 53 2 03 172 46 00 W 173 20 00 W 172 00 00 W 173 26 00 W 165 30 00 W 162 20 00 W 158 07 00 W 159 20 00 W 170 52 00 W 161 38 00 W 170 12 00 W 160 53 00 W 156 07 00 W List of guano islands, appertaining to the United States, bonded under the act of August 18, 1856, etc.-Continued. CIRCULAR.-GUANO ISLANDS NOT APPERTAINING TO UNITED STATES. [1894.-Department No. 176.-Bureau of Navigation.] TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, To Collectors of Customs and others: At the request of the Secretary of State, the following-named "guano islands," specified in lists issued by this Department of guano islands appertaining to the United States, will be considered as stricken from said list and no longer included among the guano islands bonded by the United States under the act of August 18, 1856, viz, Arenas, Perez, Pajoras, Chica, Arenas Key, Western triangles. S. WIKE, Assistant Secretary. The sovereignty of the United States is not confined within territorial boundaries. Broadly speaking, it is coextensive with the world. By virtue of its sovereignty the United States acquires the right to recognition as a member of the family of nations, with all the rights and privileges appertaining to such relationship. It may wage war in foreign territory, traverse the high seas, and protect its citizens and flag wherever found. It may also acquire rights outside of the boundaries of the territory belonging to it, both peaceably and forcibly, as, for instance, the right to move its troops through foreign territory, construct ship canals, control harbors, establish coaling stations, consulates, and other agencies of commerce. Take the instance of the acquisition of land in a foreign capital by the United States upon which to erect an embassy. Such land would belong to the United States, its sovereignty would attach thereto and its flag float thereover by sovereign right; but it would not follow that said land was terri tory bound and benefited by the provisions of our Constitution, and that a person setting foot on said premises would secure the right of |