We are frequently asked whether the objections urged by the Argonaut against Hawaiian annexation as being unconstitutional would not apply with justice to the annexation of other islands. Further, whether the stand taken by the Argunaut nov, concerning the Philippines and other Spanish possessions, is not inconsistent with the stand taken by us last year concerning the Hawaiian Islands.
To this we reply "No" to both questions. The Argonaut opposed the anuexation of Hawaii because it then carried with it the implication of annexation cither as a State or as a Territory to be erected into a State or States, and carrying the further implication of granting the electoral franchise to the citizens of Hawaii. These dangers have now disappeared for reason which we shall proceed to make clear. As to Spain's colonies, if they fall into our hands, it will be as the result of acts of war, exactly as we won the territory ous of which were carved the South-Western and the Pacific States and Territories where uow dwell millions of American citizens.
As to the question of the expediency of the present war, that has passed out of the domain of discussion. The American people have decided that they had grave cause for war with Spain. They have concluded that the treacherous destruction of the Maine and the foul murder of her men was an act of war, and they are now engaged in punishing Spain for that treacherous act, and incidentally depriving possessions will become the property of the her of her colonial possessions. These
Inited States asa result of war. There is no longer any question as to the desirability or expediency of holding them when they are conquered. The po questions to be considered are as to the way in which they shall be governed.
'The complex questions concerning the government of these and other territorial orage including the Hawaiian Is-nds, have had a vivid light thrown upon them' bya recent decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals for this circuit. Although this decision has attracted but little attention from the Press of San Francisco, we consider it one of the most important decisions coming from a Federal Court for many years. It is the case of Badleman {et al. against the United States, and was handed down on the 28th of February, 1898, in the Court of Appeals, ninth circuit, Judges Gilbert, Ross, and Morrow sitting, the opinion being written by Mr. Justice Morrow.
Itis an open secret that Judge Morrow's opinion caused some hesitation on the bench of the Court. of Appeals. Judges Gilbert and Ross were disposed at first to doubt the soundness of such a revolutionary decision. But, after discussion and deliberation, they came to agree with Judge Morrew,' and it is the unanimous opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals. It i it were merely a circuit court is now the law of the land,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.