Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 12.djvu/330

310 310 HARVARD LAW REVIEW, allegiance might not be rejected, and whose children would be unquestionably citizens of the United States. Among the rights incident to citizenship is that of moving freely throughout the length and breadth of the United States. Whether Malays would be induced to come here in sufficient numbers to lower the rate of wages in any part of the country, I do not dis- cuss. But citizens have the right to compete with other citizens, and employers will go far for cheap labor. Although citizens of the United States have not as such the right to vote, they may gain a residence in any State, and cannot be refused the suffrage therein on account of " race, color, or pre- vious condition of servitude." III. May the United States assume permanent sovereignty over the PhiHppines without annexing them ; that is to say, without making them a part of the republic ? If this be lawful, our government may rule the islands unembarrassed by certain constitutional limita- tions and requirements that affect it within the United States, and inaugurate a provincial system capable of indefinite extension. Although the question suggests a federal power over territory beyond the United States, the power itself must be derived from the Constitution. The question cannot be answered by referring to the power to make treaties, for these are not extra-constitutional agreements. They are a part of the law of the land, and quite as subordinate to the Constitution as are acts of Congress, with which they rank in point of internal obligation. The " general welfare " clause, that playground of lax construc- tionists, is ineffective, for it is " the general welfare of the United States," not the Philippines or Thibet or other outlying country. Equally ineffective is the power of Congress " to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property of the United States," for whatever may be the precise meaning of this clause it contains no warrant for the ruHng of provinces. The truth is that the territorial jurisdiction of Congress cannot be ex- tended beyond the bounds of the republic for which only it is empowered to legislate and in which the Constitution is supreme. There is but one constitutional power that affords an excuse for discussing the question, and that i^ the power exerted in declaring