Again, "We have the right to acquire territory and we have the right to govern all territory acquired, but we must govern it under the Constitution, and in the exercise of those powers, and those only, which have been conferred upon Congress by the Constitution. Any attempt further is a criminal usurpation." In the first quotation I make the charge that President McKinley, in his attempt to govern the Philippine Islands as though the Constitution did not apply to them, was exercising powers not granted to him by virtue of his office. The President is the creature of the Constitution, and his jurisdiction is measured and limited by the jurisdiction of the Constitution. When the President asserts that the Philippine Islands are not under the Constitution, he admits that the Philippine Islands are not within his jurisdiction. If, on the other hand, the islands are within his jurisdiction, it follows that his right of jurisdiction over them must have come from the presence of the Constitution itself. Let there be no misunderstanding upon one point. I claim that the Philippine Islands are under the Constitution and that the President may exercise in and over the islands whatever powers the Constitution and the laws may have placed in his hands. I claim further that as a right on the part of the Filipinos, and as a policy of justice and wisdom on our part, we should relinquish our title, whatever it may be, and allow the Filipinos to enter upon the work of governing themselves. The President sets up the doctrine that the islands are not under the Constitution and that they may be governed by him outside of all constitutional restraints. This is the usurpation that I have charged upon him, but not upon the Republican Party of former days. Upon the basis specified the charge remains. It is not an epithet. Let the charge be answered, or otherwise, let the President and the supporters of his policy abandon the doctrine that we can seize, hold and govern communities and peoples who are not within the jurisdiction of our Constitution and, who, consequently, are not subject to our laws. I have said that the President and his supporters are imperialists. If the word is descriptive of a policy then the word is not an epithet. In the passage that I have quoted from the speech of Mr. Moody he charges me in fact, if not in form of words, with a violation of my obligations to the Republican Party, and upon the ground that the party "has showered upon me every honor in its gift except the Presidency." The consideration that I have received from the Republican Party merits acknowledgment, and that I accord without reserve, but it cannot exact subserviency from me.