[338] Art. iii.; Art. iv. § 10; Amendments VI., X., XI., XIII., XIV., XV., XVII., and doubtless also in the matter of federal elections (election of members of the House of Representatives, and of United States Senators) as by Wiley _v._ Sinkler, 179 U. S., 58; _Ex parte_ Yarbrough, 110 U. S., 651, and in all other Federal relations. [339] Sands _v._ Manistee Improvement Company, 123 U. S., 288 (1887). [340] If admitted by Proclamation of the President (and so Congress may provide) conformity to conditions imposed is duly announced by him. The enabling acts since 1789 vary in content. They are reprinted in _The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and other Organic Laws of the States, Territories and Colonies Forming the United States of America_. 7 vols. Washington, Government Printing Office 1909. [341] The provision of the Ohio constitution of 1912 limiting the right to vote to “white male citizens of the United States” (Ohio, Art. v., § 1) citizens with the Fifteenth Amendment of the national Constitution. The power of the Judiciary of the United States to declare constitutions and laws that are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States unconstitutional, null, and void is discussed in the preceding chapter. [342] Art. iv., 3: 2. [343] American Insurance Company _v._ Canter, 1 Peters, 551 (1828). National Bank _v._ County of Yankton, 101 U. S., 129 (1879). [344] National Bank _v._ County of Yankton, _supra_. But all rights commonly known as _fundamental_ do not work as limitations of the power of Congress to govern Territories or “outlying possessions”; see Downes _v._ Bidwell, 182 U. S., 244 (1901). Until this decision these _fundamental_ rights were construed as _limitations_ of the power of Congress in its government of Territories; see Callan _v._ Wilson, 127 U. S., 540 (1888). Thompson _v._ Utah, 170 U. S., 343 (1898). [345] Downes _v._ Bidwell, _supra_, and supporting cases. [346] Barron _v._ Baltimore, 7 Peters, 243 (1833). [347] Downes _v._ Bidwell, _supra_. [348] _Idem._ In Brown _v._ Walker, 161 U. S., 591 (1896), (_i. e._, five years before the decision in Downes _v._ Bidwell), the Court declared: “The object of the first eight amendments to the Constitution was to incorporate into the fundamental law of the land certain principles of natural justice which had become permanently fixed in the jurisprudence of the mother country, etc.” [349] The dissenting opinions in Downes _v._ Bidwell should be read; powerful as they are, they are _not_ the opinion of the Court and _do not declare what the law is_. [350] Cohens _v._ Virginia, 6 Wheaton, 414 (1821).