determined for it. It is true that it is still possible for the United States to maintain the theory that such territory may ultimately attain a development that will warrant its complete incorporation into the Union. The maintenance of that theory, however, does not prevent the problems of government presented by the acquisition of this territory from differing essentially from those presented by prior acquisitions. In a word, whatever may be the theory, as a practical condition the United States, through these acquisitions, is now confronted with the problem of governing and administering dependent or colonial possessions in precisely the same way as is England or are other European nations that have deliberately embarked upon a colonial policy.

General Policy of the United States Toward Dependencies. That this new phase of the expansion of the United States is one of far-reaching significance needs scarcely to be stated Not only has it meant the enforced abandonment by the United States of its traditional policy of non-intervention in foreign affairs and its definite entrance into the wide field of world-politics, a change that was bound to come sooner or later, but, more important still, it has unavoidably exerted a profound influence upon the whole theory of government as held by the American people in the past. Such fundamental principles as those which declare that no government can be justified that does not rest upon the consent of the governed, that there should be no taxation without representation, that no true liberty can exist that is not guaranteed by the

right of trial by jury, etc., principles that were believed to lie at the very basis, and constitute the very essence, of American political philosophy, have had to be reopened for discussion; and already it is apparent how great a transformation has taken place in the minds of the people regarding these and other questions going to make up our political creed. Into these and similar lines of thought, or into the question as to whether the action of the past few years has been wise or not, and whether a return to old principles should not yet be made, interesting and vital though they are, we cannot here enter: all that falls within the scope of the present work to do is to note their existence as bearing upon the description of the action that has actually been taken.

While emphasis has been placed in the foregoing paragraphs upon the essential differences between the periods into which we have divided the history of the expansion of the United States, no less emphasis should be laid upon the fact that these differences do not extend to the actual measures that have been taken by the United States for the establishment of governments for the territories that have been acquired. This fact is of importance. The belief has been widespread that the United States, in receiving the acquisitions coming to it in consequence of the war with Spain, had suddenly thrust upon it an entirely new problem in government with little or no experience of which it might avail itself in seeking its solution. In truth, however, the problem of the government of dependent territory presented itself with the first Union of the States and occurred again and again as

determined for it. It is true that it is still possible for the United States to maintain the theory that such territory may ultimately attain a development that will warrant its complete incorporation into the Union. The maintenance of that theory, however, does not prevent the problems of government presented by the acquisition of this territory from differing essentially from those presented by prior acquisitions. In a word, whatever may be the theory, as a practical condition the United States, through these acquisitions, is now confronted with the problem of governing and administering dependent or colonial possessions in precisely the same way as is England or are other European nations that have deliberately embarked upon a colonial policy.

General Policy of the United States Toward Dependencies. That this new phase of the expansion of the United States is one of far-reaching significance needs scarcely to be stated Not only has it meant the enforced abandonment by the United States of its traditional policy of non-intervention in foreign affairs and its definite entrance into the wide field of world-politics, a change that was bound to come sooner or later, but, more important still, it has unavoidably exerted a profound influence upon the whole theory of government as held by the American people in the past. Such fundamental principles as those which declare that no government can be justified that does not rest upon the consent of the governed, that there should be no taxation without representation, that no true liberty can exist that is not guaranteed by the

right of trial by jury, etc., principles that were believed to lie at the very basis, and constitute the very essence, of American political philosophy, have had to be reopened for discussion; and already it is apparent how great a transformation has taken place. in the minds of the people regarding these and other questions going to make up our political creed. Into these and similar lines of thought, or into the question as to whether the action of the past few years has been wise or not, and whether a return to old principles should not yet be made, interesting and vital though they are, we cannot here enter: all that falls within the scope of the present work to do is to note their existence as bearing upon the description of the action that has actually been taken.

While emphasis has been placed in the foregoing paragraphs upon the essential differences between the periods into which we have divided the history of the expansion of the United States, no less emphasis should be laid upon the fact that these differences do not extend to the actual measures that have been taken by the United States for the establishment of governments for the territories that have been acquired. This fact is of importance. The belief has been widespread that the United States, in receiving the acquisitions coming to it in consequence of the war with Spain, had suddenly thrust upon it an entirely new problem in government with little or no experience of which it might avail itself in seeking its solution. In truth, however, the problem of the government of dependent territory presented itself with the first Union of the States and occurred again and again as

additional territory was acquired. Moreover, throughout this history of more than a century of expansion, and notwithstanding the great variety of conditions that have had to be met, there can be traced a remarkable homogeneity in the action taken by the United States. The same general principles have been followed; so much so, in fact, that in the latest acts for the temporary government of Porto Rico, the Philippines or the Canal Strip there can be found the same provisions, and even the same language, that was used in the acts of fifty, seventy-five or one hundred years ago. The United States thus, in fact, has not only had a wide experience in the practical work of formulating schemes of government for dependent territory, but has invariably availed itself of this experience instead of looking to the practices of other nations. This fact gives to a description of the government of dependent territory by the United States a unity and historical continuity that at once adds to its interest and facilitates its logical consideration. It is for this reason that in the next succeeding chapter the effort has been made to describe the steps taken by the United States for the government of each addition to its territory on the mainland. For it is only through a knowledge of what has been done in each case in the past that one can understand the historical basis that exists for almost all of the provisions that are to be found in the organic acts recently enacted for the government of our new insular possessions. From this account it will be seen that in framing these acts Congress did not indulge in any purely experimental legislation, but, upon the contrary, merely gave