no restrictions on this power except such as are imposed by the constitution.89 "It may legislate directly in respect to the local affairs of a territory or transfer the power of such legislation to a legislature Snow v. United States, 18 Wall. (U. S.) 317, 21 L. Ed. 784; Franklin v. United States, 1 Colo. 35. The power is given by Const. art. IV, § 3, and is implied in the right to acquire territory. Dorr v. United States, 195 U. S. 138, 49 L. Ed. 128, 24 Sup. Ct. 808, 1 Ann. Cas. 697. The power of Congress to organize territorial governments and to make laws for their inhabitants arises not so much from the clause in the constitution in regard to disposing of and making rules and regulations concerning the territory and other property of the United States as from the right to acquire territory and the ownership of the country in which the territories are. United States v. Kagama, 118 U. S. 375, 30 L. Ed. 228, 6 Sup. Ct. 1109; Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U. S. 15, 29 L. Ed. 47, 5 Sup. Ct. 747; American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Pet. (U. S.) 516, 7 L. Ed. 244. And see Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U. S. 244, 45 L. Ed. 1088, 21 Sup. Ct. 770; De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U. S. 1, 45 L. Ed. 1041, 21 Sup. Ct. 743; Morman Church v. United States, 136 U. S. 1, 34 L. Ed. 481, 10 Sup. Ct. 792; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. (U. S.) 393, 15 L. Ed. 691. The power given by the constitution to Congress to make war and to make treaties implies the power to acquire territory by treaty or conquest, and the power to legislate for a territory results necessarily from the power to acquire the same. The same power is included in the power to admit new states into the Union. Nelson v. United States, 30 Fed. 112, aff'g 29 Fed. 202. try not included within the limits of any state, and not yet admitted as a state into the Union, but organized under the laws of congress, with a separate legislature, under a territorial governor and other officers appointed by the president and senate of the United States." Ex parte Morgan, 20 Fed. 298. Alaska is a territory within this rule. Binns v. United States, 194 U. S. 486, 48 L. Ed. 1087, 24 Sup. Ct. 816. But the Indian tribes are not territories. Ex parte Morgan, 20 Fed. 298. 89 Oklahoma v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 220 U. S. 277, 55 L. Ed. 465, 31 Sup. Ct. 434; Binns v. United States, 194 U. S. 486, 48 L. Ed. 1087, 24 Sup. Ct. 816; United States v. McMillan, 165 U. S. 504, 41 L. Ed. 805, 17 Sup. Ct. 395; United States v. Kagama, 118 U. S. 375, 30 L. Ed. 228, 6 Sup. Ct. 1109; First Nat. Bank of Brunswick, Maine v. County of Yankton, 101 U. S. 129, 25 L. Ed. 1046; United States v. Gratiot, 14 Pet. (U. S.) 526, 10 L. Ed. 573; McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 316, 4 L. Ed. 579; Endleman v. United States, 86 Fed. 456; Nelson v. United States, 30 Fed. 112, aff'g 29 Fed. 202. As to the extent to which constitutional limitations apply to legislation respecting territories, see Dorr v. United States, 195 U. S. 138, 49 L. Ed. 128, 24 Sup. Ct. 808, 1 Ann. Cas. 697; Kepner v. United States, 195 U. S. 100, 49 L. Ed. 114, 24 Sup. Ct. 797, 1 Ann. Cas. 655; Hawaii v. Mankichi, 190 U. S. 197, 47 L. Ed. 1016, 23 Sup. Ct. 787; Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U. S. 244, 45 L. Ed. 1088, 21 Sup. Ct. 770; Morman Church 91 elected by the citizens of the territory, "90 or to a commission, as in the case of the Philippine Islands, or may extend the laws of the United States 92 or of a state 93 over it in any respect that it sees fit. And "it may legislate in accordance with the special needs of each locality, and vary its regulations to meet the conditions and circumstances of the people." Under this authority Congress may punish bigamy 95 or adultery 96 committed in a territory, and, prior to the V. United States, 136 U. S. 1, 34 L. Ed. 481, 10 Sup. Ct. 792. Congress is not required to extend the right of trial by jury to ceded outlying territory, such as the Philippine Islands, not made a part of the United States by congressional action, nor does the constitution of its own force and without legislation, carry such right to territory so situated. Dorr v. United States, 195 U. S. 138, 49 L. Ed. 128, 24 Sup. Ct. 808, 1 Ann. Cas. 697. The same is true of the Hawaiian Islands. Hawaii v. Mankichi, 190 U. S. 197, 47 L. Ed. 1016, 23 Sup. Ct. 787. 90 Binns v. United States, 194 U. S. 486, 48 L. Ed. 1087, 24 Sup. Ct. 816. And see, to the same effect, United States v. McMillan, 165 U. S. 504, 41 L. Ed. 805, 17 Sup. Ct. 395; First Nat. Bank of Brunswick, Maine v. County of Yankton, 101 U. S. 129, 25 L. Ed. 1046; Snow v. United States, 18 Wall. (U. S.) 317, 21 L. Ed. 784; Endleman v. United States, 86 Fed. 456; Nelson v. United States, 30 Fed. 112, aff'g 29 Fed. 202; Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179; Franklin United States, 1 Colo. 35. V. Congress has provided no legislative body for Alaska, but has itself enacted a penal and civil code for that territory. States, 194 U. S. 486, 48 L. Ed. 1087, 24 Sup. Ct. 816. Binns V. United General laws applicable to places within the jurisdiction of the federal government will be held not to apply to territories having a territorial government and legislature unless a contrary intention is clearly expressed. So a federal statute punishing murder committed in any fort, etc., "or any other place or district of country under the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the United States' does not apply to such a territory. Franklin v. United States, 1 Colo. 35. No organized territorial government was ever established in Indian Territory, but up to the time it became a part of the State of Oklahoma it was governed under the immediate direction of congress. Southern Surety Co. v. State of Oklahoma, 241 U. S. 582, 60 L. Ed. 1187, 36 Sup. Ct. 692, aff'g 34 Okla. 781, 127 Pac. 409. 91 See Dorr v. United States, 195 U. S. 138, 49 L. Ed. 128, 24 Sup. Ct. 808, 1 Ann. Cas. 697. 92 United States v. McMillan, 165 U. S. 504, 41 L. Ed. 805, 17 Sup. Ct. 395. 98 United States v. Pridgeon, 153 U. S. 48, 38 L. Ed. 631, 14 Sup. Ct. 746; Ex parte Larkin, 1 Okla. 53, 25 Pac. 745, 11 L. R. A. 418. 94 Endleman v. United States, 86 Fed. 456. Laws need not apply to all territories alike. Nelson v. United States, 30 Fed. 112, aff'g 29 Fed. 202. 95 Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145, 25 L. Ed. 244; Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179. 96 United States v. Baum, 74 Fed. 43. adoption of the Eighteenth Amendment, it could exclude intoxicating liquors from any territory or all the territories, or limit their sale therein under such regulations as it might prescribe.97 And it may, if it sees fit, confer on the federal courts exclusive jurisdiction over all offenses committed within a territory, whether on land or water.98 § 29. Power of state legislatures. Subject only to the restrictions imposed by the state and federal constitutions,99 a state legislature has power to declare what acts or omissions shall constitute crimes, to define the same, and to provide punishments therefor,1 and its 97 Endleman v. United States, 86 Fed. 456; Nelson v. United States, 30 Fed. 112, aff'g 29 Fed. 202. 98 Wynne v. United States, 217 U. S. 234, 54 L. Ed. 748, 30 Sup. Ct. 447. See also § 327 et seq. As to jurisdiction as between federal and territorial courts over offenses committed by Indians and on Indian reservations in territories, see § 25, supra. 99 See § 36 et seq., infra. 1 Kentucky. Com. v. Hodges, 137 Ky. 233, 125 S. W. 689. Massachusetts. Com. v. Bearse, 132 Mass. 542, 42 Am. Rep. 450; Com. v. Evans, 132 Mass. 11; Com. v. Waite, 11 Allen 264, 87 Am. Dec. 711. Missouri. Fleming v. Wengler, 269 Mo. 366, 190 S. W. 875; State v. Merchants' Exchange of St. Louis, 269 Mo. 346, 190 S. W. 903, Ann. Cas. 1917 E 871, judgment aff'd 248 U. S. 365, 63 L. Ed. 300, 39 Sup. Ct. 114; Ex parte Berger, 193 Mo. 16, 90 S. W. 759, 3 L. R. A. (N. S.) 530, 112 Am. St. Rep. 472, 5 Ann. Cas. 383; State v. Addington, 77 Mo. 110. New York. Lawton v. Steele, 119 N. Y. 226, 23 N. E. 878, 7 L. R. A. 134, 16 Am. St. Rep. 813; aff'd 152 U. S. 133, 38 L. Ed. 384, 14 Sup. Ct. 499; People v. West, 106 N. Y. 293, 12 N. E. 610, 60 Am. Rep. 452; Barker v. People, 3 Cow. 686, 15 Am. Dec. 322. Ohio. Morgan v. Nolte, 37 Ohio St. 23, 41 Am. Rep. 485. Pennsylvania. Powell V. Com., 114 Pa. St. 265, 7 Atl. 913, 60 Am. Rep. 350, aff'd 127 U. S. 678, 32 L. Ed. 253, 8 Sup. Ct. 992. Rhode Island. State v. Smyth, 14 R. I. 100, 51 Am. Rep. 344. South Carolina. State v. Stephenson, 2 Bailey 334. Tennessee. Motlow v. State, 125 Tenn. 547, 145 S. W. 177, L. R. A. 1916 F 177, appeal dismissed 239 U. S. 653, 60 L. Ed. 487, 36 Sup. Ct. 161 (mem. dec.). West Virginia. State v. Woodward, 68 W. Va. 66, 69 S. E. 385, 30 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1004. Except as restrained by its own or the federal constitution, a state possesses all legislative power consistent with a republican form of government. Halter v. State of Nebraska, 205 U. S. 34, 51 L. Ed. 696, 27 Sup. Ct. 419, 10 Ann. Cas. 525, aff'g 74 Neb. 757, 105 N. W. 298, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1079, 121 Am. St. Rep. 754. A state may exercise all such governmental authority as is consistent with its own constitution and not in conflict with the federal constitution. House v. Mayes, 219 U. S. 270, 55 L. Ed. 213, 31 Sup. Ct. 234, aff'g 227 Mo. 617, 127 S. W. 305. power in this respect is exclusive. It may create new offenses not before known,3 may make acts criminal which before were innocent, and ordain punishment in future cases where before none could have been inflicted, and may extend common-law definitions of particular offenses so as to include acts not punishable under the common law and not embraced within the common-law definition of the offense.5 And the courts cannot review the discretion of the legislature, or pass upon the expediency, wisdom, or propriety of legislative action in matters within its powers.6 § 30. Power of territorial legislatures. The territorial legislatures are created by Congress, and have such powers only as are conferred upon them by Congress in the organic act by which they are created, and by acts of Congress supplemental thereto." The federal statutes provide that, subject to certain specified restrictions, the legislative power of every territory shall extend to all rightful subjects of legislation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and similar provisions are found in many of the organic acts.8 2 Indiana. Hedderich v. State, 101 Ind. 564, 1 N. E. 47, 51 Am. Rep. 768. Louisiana. State v. Comeaux, 131 La. 930, 60 So. 620. Minnesota. State v. Moilen, 140 Minn. 112, 167 N. W. 345, 1 A. L. R. 331; State v. Shevlin-Carpenter Co., 102 Minn. 470, 113 N. W. 634, 114 N. W. 738, aff'd 218 U. S. 57, 54 L. Ed. 930, 30 Sup. Ct. 663; s. c., 99 Minn. 158, 108 N. W. 935, 9 Ann. Cas. 634. Nebraska. Davis v. State, 51 Neb. 301, 70 N. W. 984. Oklahoma. Stewart V. State, 4 Okla. Cr. 564, 109 Pac. 243, 32 L. R. (N. S.) 505. 3 People v. Most, 128 N. Y. 108, 27 N. E. 970, 26 Am. St. Rep. 458. 4 State v. Lanyon, 83 Conn. 449, 76 Atl. 1095; Com. v. Hodges, 137 Ky. 233, 125 S. W. 689; Ex parte Berger, 193 Mo. 16, 90 S. W. 759, 3 L. R. A. (N. S.) 530, 112 Am. St. Rep. 472, 5 Ann. Cas. 383; Lawton v. Steele, 119 N. Y. 226, 23 N. E. 878, 7 L. R. A. 134, 16 Am. St. Rep. 813, aff'd 152 U. S. 133, 38 L. Ed. 384, 14 Sup. Ct. 499; People v. West, 106 N. Y. 293, 12 N. E. 610, 60 Am. Rep. 452. 5 Rachels v. State, 51 Ga. 374; State v. Katz, 266 Mo. 493, 181 S. W. 425; State v. Sattley, 131 Mo. 464, 33 S. W. 41; People v. Most, 128 N. Y. 108, 27 N. E. 970, 26 Am. St. Rep. 458. 6 See § 36, infra. 7 Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179; Franklin v. United States, 1 Colo. 35; Territory v. Lee, 2 Mont. 124; Territory v. Yarberry, 2 N. M. 391. Usually all restrictions upon the power of a territorial government are found in the organic act, but this rule has not always been followed. Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179; Franklin v. United States, 1 Colo. 35. As to the power of Congress to enact laws defining and punishing offenses committed in the territories, see $28, supra. 8 Rev. St. § 1851. Walker v. New Mexico & S. P. R. Co., 165 U. S. 593, Acts of a territorial legislature are void if in conflict with the organic act or with acts of Congress. 10 And Congress may abrogate laws enacted by a territorial legislature, and may itself enact laws for the territory notwithstanding the existence of such a legislature.11 B. Delegation of Legislative Power § 31. In general. The power to declare what shall constitute a crime and how that crime shall be punished is inherent in the legislative department of the government, and, unless authorized by the constitution, this power cannot be delegated by that department to any other body or agency, 12 such as an executive officer or department 41 L. Ed. 837, 17 Sup. Ct. 421; Territory v. Guyott, 9 Mont. 46, 22 Pac. 134; Baldridge v. Morgan, 15 N. M. 249, 106 Pac. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912 C 337; Territory v. Long Bell Lumber Co., 22 Okla. 890, 99 Pac. 911. Oklahoma territory had the authority and power to enact laws defining the crimes of murder and manslaughter, and to prescribe punishment therefor. Ex parte Graves, 8 Okla. Cr. 716, 130 Pac. 307. 9 People v. Clayton, 4 Utah 421, 11 Pac. 206. 10 Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179. The legislation of Congress will supersede the legislation of a territory without specific provision to that ef fect in those cases, and only in those cases, in which the same matter is the subject of legislation by both. Davis v. Beason, 133 U. S. 333, 33 L. Ed. 637, 10 Sup. Ct. 299. 11 United States v. McMillan, 165 U. S. 504, 41 L. Ed. 805, 17 Sup. Ct. 395; First Nat. Bank of Brunswick, Maine v. County of Yankton, 101 U. S. 129, 25 L. Ed. 1046; Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179; Territory v. Lee, 2 Mont. 124. 12 United States. Union Bridge Co. v. United States, 204 U. S. 364, 51 L. Ed. 523, 27 Sup. Ct. 367, aff'g 143 Fed. 377; United States v. Casey, 247 Fed. 362; St. Louis Merchants' Bridge Terminal Ry. Co. v. United States, 188 Fed. 191; United States v. Lamson, 165 Fed. 80; United States v. Maid, 116 Fed. 650; United States v. Ormsbee, 74 Fed. 207; United States v. Ford, 50 Fed. 467. Alabama. State V. McCarty, 5 Ala. App. 212, 59 So. 543. Arizona. Thalheimer V. Board Sup'rs Maricopa County, 11 Ariz. 430, 94 Pac. 1129. California. Board of Harbor Com'rs Port of Eureka v. Excelsior Redwood Co., 88 Cal. 491, 26 Pac. 375, 22 Am. St. Rep. 321; Ex parte McNulty, 77 Cal. 164, 19 Pac. 237, 11 Am. St. Rep. 257; Ex parte Cox, 63 Cal. 21. Connecticut. State v. Wilcox, 42 Conn. 364, 19 Am. Rep. 536. District of Columbia. Prather v. United States, 9 App. Cas. 82, writ of error dismissed 164 U. S. 452, 41 L. Ed. 510, 17 Sup. Ct. 997. Louisiana. State v. Gaster, 45 La. Ann. 636, 12 So. 739. Maryland. Fell v. State, 42 Md. 71, 20 Am. Rep. 83. Michigan. People v. Hanrahan, 75 Mich. 611, 42 N. W. 1124, 4 L. R. A. 751. Minnesota. State v. Brothers, 144 Minn. 337, 175 N. W. 685. Pennsylvania. In re Locke's Appeal, 72 Pa. St. 491, 13 Am. Rep. 716. |