Show THE dissenting OPINION FOLLOWING is ia the full text of the dissenting opinion of chief justice fuller with whom justices field and lamar concurred in the church case SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES nos NOB 1031 and 1054 october term 1889 the late corporation of the church of jesus christ of latter day saina et al appellants vs the united states george romney henry dinwoodey james watson and john dark clark appellants pel lants vs the united states appeals from the supreme court of the territory of utah may 19 1890 mr chief justice fuller with whom concurred mr justice field and mr justice lamar dissenting I 1 am constrained to dissent disic nac from the opinion and judgment just announced congress possesses such authority over the territories as the constitution expressly or by elear clear implication delegates doubtless territory may be acquired by the direct action of congress gressa as sinthe in the annexation of texas by treaty as in the case of louisiana or as in the case of california by conquest and afterwards by treaty but the power of congress to legislate over the territories is granted in so many words by the constitution art 4 see sec 3 clause 2 and it is further therein provided that congress shall have power to make all laws which shall beneces be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the united states or in any department or office thereof 11 in my opinion congress is restrained not merely by the limitations expressed in the constitution but also by the absence of any airy grant of power express or implied in in that instrument and no such power as ar that involved in the act of congress under consideration is conferred by the constitution noris nor is any clause pointed outa out as sits its legitimate source I 1 regard it of vital viral consequence that absolute power should never be conceded as belonging under our system of government to any one of its departments the legislative power of congress is dele ga ed and not inherent and is therefore fore limited I 1 agree that the power to make needful rules and regulations for the territories necessarily c ampre bends the power to suppress crime and it is immaterial even though that crime assumes the form of a religious belief or creed congress angress Von on gress has the power to extirpate poy polygamy gamy in any of the territories by the enactment of a criminal code directed to that end but it is not authorized under the cover of that po er to seize and confiscate the property of persons individuals or corporations without office found because they may have been guilty ol 01 of criminal practices the doctrine of cypres cy pres is one of x construction and not of administration by it a fund devoted to a particular charity is applied to a cognate purpose and if the purpose for which this property properly was accumulated was such as has been depicted depict edit cannot be brought within the rule of application to a purpose as nearly as possible resembling sem bling that denounced cad nor is there here any counterpart in congressional power to the exercise of the royal prerogative in the disposition of a charity if this property was accumulated for purposes declared illegal that does not justify 11 its arbitrary dh disposition by judicial justify legislation in my iny judgment its diversion under this act of congress is in contravention of specific limitations in the constitution unauthorized expressly or by implication by any of its ins and in disregard of the fundamental principle that the legislative power of if the united states as exercised by the agents of the people of this republic is delegated and riot not inherent |