rendered allegiance to the other great world
 powers were given the same designation and
 status as those living in their respective home
 countries so far as protection against foreign
 injustice went. It became a yearning of the
 Porto Ricans to be American citizens,
 therefore, and this act gave them the boon.
 What additional rights did it give them? It
 enabled them to move into the continental
 United States and becoming residents of any
 State there to enjoy every right of any other
 citizen of the United States, civil, social and
 political. A citizen of the Philippines must be
 naturalized before he can settle and vote in this
 country. Act of June 29, 1906, 30, 34 Stat.
 606 (Comp. St. 4366). Not so the Porto Rican
 under the Organic Act of 1917.

 In Porto Rico, however, the Porto Rican
 can not insist upon the right of trial by jury,
 except as his own representatives in his
 legislature shall confer it on him. The citizen of
 the United States living in Porto Rico cannot
 there enjoy a right of trial by jury under the
 federal Constitution, any more than the Porto
 Rican. It is locality that is determinative of the
 application of the Constitution, in such matters
 as judicial procedure, and not the status of the
 people who live in it.

 It is true that in the absence of other and
 countervailing evidence, a law of Congress or a
 provision in a treaty acquiring territory, declaring
 an intention to confer political and civil rights on
 the inhabitants of the new lands as American
 citizens, may be properly interpreted to mean
 an incorporation of it into the Union, as in the
 case of Louisiana and Alaska. This was one of
 the chief grounds upon which this court placed
 its conclusion that Alaska had been
 incorporated in the Union, in Rasmussen v.
 United States, 197 U. S. 516, 25 Sup. Ct. 514,
 49 L. Ed. 862. But Alaska was a very different
 case from that of Porto Rico. It was an
 enormous territory, very sparsely settled, and
 offering opportunity for immigration and
 settlement by American citizens. It was on the
 American continent and within easy reach of
 the then United States. It involved none of the
 difficulties which incorporation of the
 Philippines and Porto Rico presents, and one
of them is in the very matter of trial by jury. This
court refers to the difficulties in Dorr v. United
States, 195 U. S. 138, 148, 24 Sup. Ct. 808,


 812 (49 L. Ed. 128, 1 Ann. Cas. 697):

 "If the right to trial by jury were a fundamental
 right which goes wherever the jurisdiction of the
 United States extends, or if Congress, in framing
 laws for outlying territory, was obliged to
 establish that system by affirmative legislation, it
 would follow that, no matter what the needs or
 capacities of the people, trial by jury, and in no other
 way, must be forthwith established, although the
 result may be to work injustice and provoke
 disturbance rather than to aid the orderly
 administration of justice. Again, if the United
 States shall acquire by treaty the cession of
 territory having an established system of
 jurisprudence, where jury trials are unknown, but a
 method of fair and orderly trial prevails under an
 acceptable and long-established code, the
 preference of the people must be disregarded, their
 established customs ignored, and they themselves
 coerced to accept, in advance of incorporation into
 the United States, a system of trial unknown to them
 and unsuited to their needs. We do not think it was
 intended, in giving power to Congress to make
 regulations for the territories, to hamper its exercise
 with this condition."

 The jury system needs citizens trained to
 the exercise of the responsibilities of jurors. In
 common-law countries centuries of tradition
 have prepared a conception of the impartial
 attitude jurors must assume. The jury system
 postulates a conscious duty of participation in
 the machinery of justice which it is hard for
 people not brought up in fundamentally
 popular government at once to acquire. One of
 its greatest benefits is in the security it gives
 the people that they, as jurors, actual or
 possible, being part of the judicial system of the
 country, can prevent its arbitrary use or abuse.
 Congress has thought that a people like the
 Filipinos, or the Porto Ricans, trained to a
 complete judicial system which knows no juries,
 living in compact and ancient communities, with
 definitely formed customs and political
 conceptions, should be permitted themselves
 to determine how far they wish to adopt this
 institution of Anglo-Saxon origin, and when.
 Hence the care with which, from the time when
 Mr. McKinley wrote his historic letter to Mr. Root
 in April of 1900 (Public Laws Philippine
 Commission, 6-9-Act of July 2, 1902, 691,
 692), concerning the character of government
to be set up for the Philippines by the
Philippine Commission, until the Act of 1917,