IMMIGRATION, BUREAU OF-IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION

1907), Select List of References on Chinese mission, with the exception of one member, Immigration (1904); A. B. Hart, Manual believed could best be carried out through re. (1908), § 225. John R. COMMONS. quiring that all immigrants admitted should

be able to read and write in some language. IMMIGRATION, BUREAU OF. The Bureau The safe-guarding of immigrants against ex. of Immigration is one of the bureaus of the ploitation and their distribution where they Department of Labor (see LABOR, DEPARTMENT are needed, were other problems the CommisOF) and is directed by the Commissioner Gen. sion considered of most vital importance. It eral of Immigration. The duties of the bureau recognized, however, that federal legislation are to administer the alien immigration, con- can do but little toward their solution. Finaltract labor, Chinese exclusion, and naturaliza- ly, the Commission recommended detailed tion laws, and to aid in distributing immi-changes in the administration of existing regrants according to the demand for immigrant strictions upon immigration, to render them labor. The work of the bureau is performed by more effective. two divisions under the Commissioner General, Based upon these recommendations, an elabwho takes immediate charge of the enforce-orate statute passed both houses of Congress ment of the immigration laws, and the chief in 1913, but the measure was vetoed by Presi. of the Division of Information. The most dent Taft. important immigration station is located at See EXPULSION FROM UNITED STATES; ImEllis Island, New York, but stations are main- MIGRANTS, HEAD TAX ON; IMMIGRATION; Imtained at all the chief sea ports, where the MIGRATION, BUREAU OF. physical, mental, and moral defectives, as well References: U. S. Immigration Commission, as persons likely to become public charges or | Report (1909-12); Symposium upon the Re. afflicted with contagious diseases, polygamists, port of the Immigration Commission in Survey, anarchists, contract laborers, and Chinese are XXV, 1911, 517-9, 524-31, 571-604. eliminated. The bureau also enforces the law

JOHN R. COMMONS. concerning the deportation of aliens. The Division of Information aims especially to IMMUNITY. Exemption from serving in assist immigrants to settle on the land and is, public office, or from performing other duties in practice, of more assistance to farm laborers which citizens generally are required to perand domestics than to other classes of immi- form. Thus, most public officers and members grants. For the year ending June 30, 1912, of some professions are exempt from jury the bureau reported the admission of 1,017,155 service, that their duties may not be interfered immigrant aliens, and the departure of with. In a less technical sense the term is 615,292 emigrant aliens, while 16,057 aliens applied to many of the political and civil were debarred, and 2,456 were deported. See guaranties in the United States and the variALIEN; CITIZENSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES; ous state constitutions. These are chiefly DECLARATION OF INTENTION TO BE NATURAL- stated in the first ten amendments to the IZED; FOREIGN ELEMENTS IN UNITED STATES; Constitution of the United States. See IMMIGRATON. References: Dept. of Commerce Bills Rights; CONSTITUTION and Labor, Annual Reports; Commissioner UNITED STATES, AMENDMENTS TO; PRIVILEGES General of Immigration and Naturalization, AND IMMUNITIES.

H. M. B. Annual Reports.

A. N. H.

IMMUNITY BATH. A term probably first IMMIGRATION COMMISSION. The Immi- used in 1906 applying to the sixteen individual gration Commission was established under a defendants in the beef trust case discharged statute of Feb. 20, 1907, § 39. It was created by Judge Humphreys of the United States Disto secure more accurate data than had been trict Court at Chicago, on the ground that they available, as to the cause, and, more especially had secured personal immunity by furnishing as to the effects, of immigration. This work the evidence upon which the indictments were has been done thoroughly by special investi- based-hence the term, immunity bath, denotes gators and experts employed by the Commis- immunity from prosecution secured through sion. The investigations made in this country the giving of testimony, and has been applied were concerned with above 3,000,000 persons, especially to officers of corporations testifying and much work was done abroad. The reports before the Bureau of Corporations or before a of the Commission were planned to cover forty federal grand jury. See EvIDENCE; LAW, CRIMvolumes.

The keynote struck in the preliminary recommendations of the Commission made in De- IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION. Excember, 1910, was the necessity of reducing the emption from prosecution for treason, crime number of immigrants, to prevent a further or other offenses against the state, obtained by oversupply of unskilled labor. The immi- general amnesty acts, pardon or statutes of grants to be excluded, the Commission recom- limitation. In effect it may also be obtained mended, ought to be those who are least likely by confessing to complicity in a joint crime. to be readily assimilated. This policy, the Com- See STATE's EVIDENCE,

OF

OF

THE

INAL.

0. C. H.

H. M. B.

IMPEACHMENT

IMPEACHMENT.

History. Impeachment is the act of bring- in Delaware in June, 1800, and an inflammaing formal charges or accusations against a tory political harangue to a grand jury at public officer before a public tribunal qualified Baltimore in May, 1803, with intent to excite to pass upon the charges. The charges writ- the people of Maryland against their state ten out in detailed form are called articles of government and against the United States. impeachment. Familiar in England for several The last constituted the real offense in this pocenturies, impeachment as a form of trial was litical trial. On three articles he was found adopted by several colonies and, afterward, by guilty by small majorities. On the other five seven states, so that the convention of 1787 he was found not guilty, but as a two-thirds created nothing new when it provided for vote was not given in any case, he was deimpeachment in the Constitution (Art. II, Sec.clared not guilty on all, March 1, 1805. iv). There have been nine impeachments in our national history.

III. On November 30, 1804, Samuel Chase, associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, was impeached under eight articles. These covered arbitrary and unjust conduct in the treason trial of John Fries in April, VII. March 2, 1876, the House voted unani1800, and in the sedition trial of J. T. Callender mously to impeach William W. Belknap, Secrein May 1800, improper urging of a grand jurytary of War, for receiving nearly $25,000 for

IMPEACHMENT

the appointment and retention in office of the unanimous vote, and, by a vote of 39 to 35. post-trader at Fort Sill, Indian Territory. A disqualified to hold any office of honor, trust few hours before this action, the Secretary or profit under the United States. resigned and the President accepted his resig- In general it is to be noted, that there were nation. When, on April 4, 1876, five articles but three convictions out of the nine cases, and of impeachment were presented to the Senate, that, in a number of them, there was a marked Belknap claimed that, as a private citizen of political bias to the trials. Iowa and no longer a civil oflicer of the United Constitutional Provisions. The Constitution States, he could not be impeached. After near- furnishes the foundation of the law of imly a month's debate, the Senate voted 37 to peachment. It vests in the House the sole 29 that the impeachment might proceed. On power of impeachment (Art. I, Sec. ii, 1 5). August 1, 1876, he was declared guilty on It gives the Senate the sole power to try imthree articles by 36 to 25 and on the other peachments (Art. I, Sec. iii, 11 6, 7), provides two by 35 to 25, but the vote for conviction that Senators shall be on oath or affirmation not being two-thirds, a verdict of acquittal when sitting for that purpose, declares that no was entered.

one shall be convicted without the concur. VIII. Twelve articles of impeachment were rence of two-thirds of those present. If the brought against Charles Swayne, United States President is impeached, the Chief Justice of district judge for the northern district of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. The Florida, January 24, 1905. Three charged him President, the Vice-President, and all civil with taking excessive fees for service outside officers of the United States may be impeached his district. Two related to the use of a and removed from office on conviction of trea. private car furnished by the receiver of a son, bribery or other high crimes and misderailroad alleged to have been appointed by him. meanors. The President's

power

of pardon Two charged him with living outside his dis does not cover those convicted by impeach. trict, and the other five were concerned with ment (Art. II, Sec. ii, f1). Judgment in improper fining and imprisoning of attorneys. cases of impeachment shall not extend further On February 27, 1905, he was acquitted, being than to removal from office and disqualificaadjudged not guilty on each of the counts. tion to hold and enjoy any office of honor,

IX. On July 11, 1912, the House of Repre- trust or profit under the United States; but sentatives, by a vote of 220 to 1, resolved on the party convicted shall, nevertheless, be liathe impeachment, on thirteen charges, of Rob- ble and subject to indietment, trial, judgment ert W. Archbald, appointed a United States and punishment according to law. The right district judge for the middle district of Penn- of trial by jury for all crimes is expressly sylvania, March 29, 1901, and elevated to the limited in cases of impeachment. United States circuit court bench, January 31, For its own government in cases of impeach1911, when he was designated as one of the ment the Senate has adopted a set of rules. judges of the United States Commerce Court. But interesting questions have arisen in conThe articles of impeachment were laid before nection with trial by impeachment, which have the Senate July 15, and the trial was begun led to much discussion and wide divergence December 2. Five of the articles charged of view. What offences are impeachable? The Judge Archbald with improper use of his in- Constitution does not give a clear decision. It fluence to induce litigants in his court or mentions "treason, bribery, and other high before the Interstate Commerce Commission crimes and misdemeanors” (Art. II, Sec. iv). tu enter into commercial agreements advantage. It defines treason in specific terms, but it is ous to himself or other parties; five alleged silent on the others (Art. III, Sec. iii, 91). the acceptance by Judge Archbald of financial Bribery is well understood, but high crimes favors from litigants in his court, railroad of- and misdemeanors are vague words. Two con ficials, and attorneys practicing before him; flicting theories have developed, one, that imof the remaining three articles, one referred peachment covers only indictable offences, thus to the appointment of the general counsel for materially limiting its scope; the other, which a railroad company as jury commissioner for seems to have the better support both in the the middle district of Pennsylvania, another argument and in illustrations from the nine charged the private solicitation of additional federal cases, that officials are impeachable arguments from an attorney practicing in the when no offence against positive law has been Commerce Court to sustain an opinion favor committed, the words “high crimes and misdeable to his client, and the third was a blanket meanors” having purposely been left uncertain indictment covering practically all the other in their meaning. “A

cause for remoral charges. On January 13, 1913, by votes range from office," says Curtis, “may exist where no ing from 68 to 5 to 42 to 20, the Senate found offence against positive law has been commitJudge Archbald guilty on five charges, the last ted, as where the individual has, from immoral two mentioned above and three of the articles ity, or imbecility, or maladministration, becharging the use of influence to obtain con- come unfit to exercise the office.” cessions from persons interested in suits in Who may be impeached? The Constitution his court. He was removed from office by a mentions "the President, the Vice-President

IMPERIALISM

and all other civil officers." Are Senators and | ment" in Am. Pol. Sci. Rev., II, May, 1908, Representatives impeachable? In the Blount 378-395; T. W. Dwight, “Trial by Impeaccase the question seems to have been answered hment" in Am. Law Register, VI (N. S.), in the negative, although there is opposition Mar., 1867, 257-283; W. Lawrence, "Law to this theory. Closely connected with this of Impeachment" in Am. Law Register, VI is the question whether a person no longer in (N. S.), Sep., 1867, 641-680; H. Taylor, office can be impeached, and whether one who "Am. Law of Impeachment" in No. Am. Rev., is charged may escape impeachment by resign- CLXXX, Apr., 1905, 502-512; for the ing. It was not determined in the Blount Blount trial, Trial of William Blount (1799); case, but in the Belknap case the Senate decid- F. Wharton, State Trials (1849), 200-321; ed by 37 to 29 that the impeachment should | F. J. Turner, "Docs. on the Blount Conspiracy" proceed despite the resignation of the accused, in Am. Hist. Rev., X (1905), 574-606; for the the ablest lawyers in the body favoring this view. The trial went forward, even though Belknap claimed that the failure of a twothirds vote on the question showed lack of jurisdiction. That ex-officials are impeachable has been advocated strongly on several occasions, a statement of John Quincy Adams being quoted that such a person is "just as liable twenty years after his office has expired as while in office."

Must the crime be committed in discharge of official duty? The Senate did not decide this point in the Blount case, but eminent authorities contend that impeachment is not limited to official acts. In the cases of Humphreys and Swayne, charges were included covering matters not connected with official duties.

May the accused be arrested, sequestered or removed from office pending judgment on impeachment? Blount was arrested and put under heavy bond. This power appears unnecessary, since removal and disqualification are the only penalties, and since attendance of the accused at an impeachment trial is not required. Moreover Blount was expelled while awaiting trial. In the Constitutional Convention a motion providing for the temporary suspension of an officer under impeachment charges was lost. Johnson was not suspended during trial, although Senator Sumner contended that the Chief Justice was chosen to preside over the impeachment trial of the President, because the usual presiding officer, the Vice-President, was assumed to be performing the duties of the President for the time being. The commonly accepted notion, however, is that the Vice-President's personal interest in the decision makes him an undesirable chairman. The right to suspend is a doubtful one.

See JOHNSON, ANDREW; JUDICIARY; RECALL; RECONSTRUCTION; SENATE.

References: In general; J. Story, Commentaries on Const. of U. S. (1873), I, 494-497, 527-573; R. Foster, Commentaries on Const. of U. S. (1895), I, 505-632, (on Colonial and State Impeachments, 633-713); "Cases of Impeachment" in Extracts, Journ. of U. S. Sen. (1904); G. T. Curtis, Const. Hist. of U. S. (1889), I; Documentary Hist. Const. of U. S. (1894-1900), III; G. W. Van Nest, "Impeachable Offenses under the Constitution of the U. S." in Am. Law Rev., XVI, Nov., 1882, 798-817; D. Y. Thomas, "Law of Impeach

Pickering trial, "Cases of Impeachment of William Blount, John Pickering and Samuel Chase" in Journ. of U. S. Sen. (1805), 140; for the Chase trial, C. Evans, Trial of Judge Chase (1805); S. H. Smith and T. Lloyd, Trial of Judge Chase (1805); for the Peck trial, A. J. Stansbury, Trial of Judge Peck (1833); for the Humphreys trial, Congressional Globe, 37 Cong., 3 Sess., Pt. IV, 29422953; House Reports, 37 Cong., 2 Sess. (1862); for the Johnson trial, Impeachment of President Johnson (3 vols., pub. by Sen., 1868); D. M. DeWitt, Impeachment and Trial of President Johnson (1903); E. G. Ross, Impeachment of Andrew Johnson (1896); for the Belknap trial, Impeachment of Secretary Belknap (pub. by Sen., 1876); E. McPherson, Handbook (1876), 137, 156-170; for the Swayne trial, Sen. Doc., 58 Cong., 3 Sess., No. 11 (1905); for the Archbald trial, Am. Year Book, 1913; House Rep., 62 Cong., 2 Sess., 946; Sen. Docs., 62 Cong., 3 Sess. 1140; Cong. Record, 62 Cong., 3 Sess., XLI.

IMPERIALISM.

FRANCIS W. SHEPARDSON.

Imperialism is a word which has been used at different times to designate quite different political concepts. These various usages can be understood only as the result of the consideration of the history of European political development. Prior to the break up of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806, imperialism represented, primarily, the idea of bringing under one rule peoples of different races and tongues. The characteristics of the imperial state were great extent, great heterogeneity of population and, generally speaking, great absolutism. With the fall of this empire arose the great historical movement for the establishment of national states, the prime characteristics of which were: limited territory, homogeneity as regards race and tongue and, ultimately, increasing emphasis upon the idea of the consent of the governed. Imperialism, however, continued to live, both as a political conception and as a principle underlying the constitution of modern states. No longer did it carry with it, however, the idea of the world state such as found expression in the Roman Empire, the empire of Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire.

With the development of the policy on the part of European nations of acquiring outside

IMPLIED POWERS

:

territories and governing them as colonies and the Democratic party (see), under the leaderdependencies, the word imperalism has taken ship of Mr. Bryan, making opposition to it on a new significance. In popular usage the one of the chief planks in the Democratic term is now frequently employed to designate platform. Imperialism also figured, though to specially this policy of acquiring dependent a less extent, as one of the issues of the 1912 territory and governing it without regard to campaign. Notwithstanding the Republican the wishes of the people so brought under the victory, it is impossible to determine the control of another people and race.

extent to which the principles for which the As used in American politics, imperialism anti-imperialists contend are in theory held is employed to designate the policy upon which by the people. Many persons, though holdthe United States has embarked of acquiring ing to such principles, believe that since territory not a part of the United States prop- the nation has committed itself to the other er, nor contiguous to it, which, on account of policy there is no way, consistent with due its climate, location, character of inhabitants, regard to national prestige and fulfillment of or other conditions, cannot, within any reason obligations, by which a change can now be able time be incorporated with the Union as made. constituent states of the nation. The term With the acquisition of these dependencies came into general use in this country immedi- an accomplished fact, the efforts of the antiately after the close of the war with Spain in imperialists are now being directed mainly 1898, which resulted in the acquisition by the towards having the United States definitely United States of the Philippines, Porto Rico announce its intention of granting independand certain other smaller islands.

ence to these territories, at the earliest prac. The acquisition and subsequent retention of ticable date, and of using all its efforts tothese territories, and particularly the Philip- wards hastening the day when this can be pines, has been bitterly antagonized by a cer- accomplished. tain portion of the population of the United See ANNEXATIONS TO THE U. S.; ANTI-IM. States on the ground both that doing so was PERIALISTS; PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. unwise from a practical standpoint, and be- References: Anti-Imperialist League, Recause it was claimed that such action repre ports (1899–1910); E. Atkinson, The Anti-Imsented a flagrant violation of the fundamental perialists (1899-1910). principles upon which our constitutional sys

W. F. WILLOUGHBY. tem rested. A republic, or at least one having the character and historical tradition of the IMPLIED POWERS. Although the Federal United States, could not, it was held, consist Government is one of enumerated powers (see ently hold territory in a status of dependency, CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION), neverthat doing so introduced in effect the imperial. theless it must be presumed that the intention istic idea.

embodied in the Federal Constitution was to The more active of these persons effected an grant not only the express powers enumerated organization under the name of the "Anti- but the incidental powers reasonably necesImperalist League,” with headquarters at Bossary for their proper exercise. Indeed, there ton. This league has conducted a vigorous is, in a sense, an express grant of implied campaign, through the issue of publications powers in the instrument itself, found in the and other means, for the propagation of its provision that Congress shall have power “to ideas and the adoption by the Government of make all laws which shall be necessary and its principles. This campaign was conducted proper for carrying into execution” (see NECwith especial energy during the period immedi- ESSARY AND PROPER) the powers expressly ately following the war with Spain, when the enumerated as delegated to it "and all other United States was engaged in active hostilities powers vested by this constitution in the govwith the Filipinos for the supression of the ernment of the United States or in any departrebellion led by Aguinaldo. There can be no ment or officer thereof” (Art. I, Sec. viii, 1 doubt that the knowledge that there was 18). strong opposition in the United States to the It is agreed on all hands that the Federal prosecution of this war and in advocacy of Government has, therefore, implied as well as granting, in large part at least, the demands expressed powers. The controversy in this reof Aguinaldo, lent encouragement to the enemy spect has been as to the extent of the implicaand was influential to some extent in prolong. tion. (1) There must necessarily be implied ing the contest. There was, accordingly, strong power to do the things necessary and proper feeling against the anti-imperalists, as they to be done in exercising the powers specifically were called, this feeling going to the extent granted. For instance, the power to collect that their acts were, by some, claimed to be taxes necessarily involves the fixing of schedtreasonable.

ules of duties to be paid on the subjects of The questions involved were of such impor- taxation and provisions for officers to collect tance, that the matter of imperialism, by the taxes imposed and the enforcement of such which the policy of the Republican administra- provisions by fines and other penalties for tion was stigmatized, became a party issue, 'their violation. (2) In a more general sense