JACKSON, J., dissenting. 335 U.S. with His Majesty the King) employed by, or under a contract with, the Government of the United States in connection with the construction, maintenance, operation or defence of the Bases." Even so, the lessee must submit to measures to identify such persons and to establish their status. In what formerly recognized possession of the United States mentioned by the Court is American citizens' privilege of ingress and egress, of transit and of residence, so limited? Private trade and commerce by our citizens likewise are wholly in control of the Colony and are no more dependent upon our laws than in any other part of the United Kingdom or any foreign country. Bermudian customs duties are waived only on material for construction and maintenance of our bases, for consumption by our garrisons and supporting personnel, and on their household goods; and we undertake to prevent abuse of this customs privilege and to prevent resale of such imports. This is not greater than the immunity allowed by every foreign country to our diplomatic corps and staffs, and the power reserved by Britain over imports and customs is wholly inconsistent with the concept that these are our possessions. The lease also expressly and unconditionally provides that no business can be established in the leased area and that no person shall habitually render any professional services except for the Government and its personnel. No wireless or submarine cable may be operated except for military purposes. Are such stifling restraints by another state consistent with the idea of our possession? Payment of local income and property taxes are only waived as against those in the area when they are members of our armed forces, employees engaged in our works or contractors with our Government. In short, no actual possession of the United States used by the Court as a standard of reference is so insulated from the United 377 JACKSON, J., dissenting. States in fiscal, social, economic, commercial and political affairs. In none is the commerce power of Congress so stripped of subject matter for regulation or our permissible range of activity so circumscribed. Possessions such as Puerto Rico, Guam, the guano islands, Samoa and the Virgin Islands, which the Court mentions as standards for the treatment of Bermuda, are, in vital respects, as different from it as night from day. Not one of them is subject to even a frivolous claim adverse to our complete ownership. They belong to us or they belong to no one. They are ceded territory over which United States sovereignty is as complete and as unquestioned as over the District of Columbia and they are subject to no dual control or divided allegiance. They are incorporated into our economy, freely trading in our markets, and "protected" by our tariff walls. They are integrated with our social and, in some degree at least, with our political life as well; some of them being authorized to send delegates to our Congress. On the other hand, however, Bermuda never has ceased in its entirety to be a Crown Colony of Great Britain. Social, industrial and labor conditions prevailing at the Island bases are such that both nations made every effort to insulate them from the damaging effects of our limited occupation for military purposes. It seems to me unsound policy as well as capricious statutory interpretation for the Court blindly to mingle them by imposing statutory policies that were not shaped with their existence or peculiarities in mind. It may be that, in some matters, the same policies suited to our legitimate possessions will also be considered adaptable to the bases. But it is not necessarily or presumptively so, and where the bases are to be brought into our scheme of things, it should be deliberately and consciously done by the Congress, in particular matters and with particular JACKSON, J., dissenting. 335 U.S. regard to local conditions,1o and perhaps after consultation with the United Kingdom or Colonial authorities. We should not by the process of judicial interpretation impose upon the bases not only the policies of the Act before us but those of many Acts not involved here and as to which we are even less informed." 10 The following statutes use language expressly covering the leased bases or language which seems to imply that the statute will reach as far as there is power to make it reach: I. Statutes which explicitly cover the leased bases: 55 Stat. 622, as amended, 42 U.S. C. § 1651 (1). II. Statutes employing the phrase "places subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" or similarly sweeping language: 38 Stat. 270, as amended, 12 U. S. C. § 466; 58 Stat. 624, as amended, 10 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 1213; 56 Stat. 176, 15 U. S. C. § 606b-2 (a); 61 Stat. 512, 16 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 776a (c); 40 Stat. 231, 18 U. S. C. § 39; 35 Stat. 1136, 18 U. S. C. § 387; 35 Stat. 1138, as amended, 18 U. S. C. § 396; 54 Stat. 1134, as amended, 18 U. S. C. § 396a; 49 Stat. 494, 18 U. S. C. § 396b; 35 Stat. 1148, 18 U. S. C. § 511; 40 Stat. 559, as amended, 22 U. S. C. § 226; 42 Stat. 361, 22 U. S. C. § 409; 52 Stat. 631, as amended, 22 U. S. C. § 611 (m); 58 Stat. 643, 22 U. S. C. § 701; 32 Stat. 172, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 95; Rev. Stat. § 4438a, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 224a (6); 35 Stat. 1140, 46 U. S. C. § 1351; 40 Stat. 217, 219, as amended, 50 U. S. C. §§ 31, 37; 54 Stat. 1179, 50 U. S. C. App. § 512; 56 Stat. 177, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 633 (4), (6); 56 Stat. 185, 50 U. S. C. App. § 643a; 58 Stat. 624, 50 U. S. C. App. § 777; 56 Stat. 390, 50 U. S. C. App. § 781; 60 Stat. 211, 50 U. S. C. App. § 1828 (c). 11 The following tabulation of statutes whose coverage provisions are so similar to those being construed as to either be governed by today's decision or to require most sophisticated distinctions shows in what a network of legislation the Court is entangling the bases: I. Statutes employing the term "possessions," (a) in the phrase "States, Territories, and Possessions" or the like: 43 Stat. 1070, as amended, 2 U. S. C. § 241 (i); 42 Stat. 998, 7 U. S. C. § 3; 42 Stat. 159, 7 U. S. C. § 182 (6); 49 Stat. 731, 7 U S. C. § 511 (i); 30 Stat. 544, as amended, 11 U. S. C. § 1 (10); 48 Stat. 2, 12 U. S. C. § 202; 39 Stat. 601, as amended, 61 Stat. 786, 14 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 29; 55 Stat. 11, 12, as amended, 14 U. S. C. Supp. I, 377 JACKSON, J., dissenting. Neither should we embark upon a course of making the same naked words mean one thing in one Act and something else in another. It cannot be pretended that such an interpretation as the Court announces is in response to any demonstrable intention of Congress on the §§ 302, 307; 48 Stat. 882, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 78 (c) (16); 54 Stat. 790, 15 U. S. C. § 80a-2 (37); 44 Stat. 1406, 15 U. S. C. § 402 (c); 44 Stat. 1423, 15 U. S. C. § 431; 47 Stat. 8, as amended, 61 Stat. 202, 15 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 607; 61 Stat. 515, 15 U. S. C. Supp. I, 619; 52 Stat. 1250, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 901 (2); 56 Stat. 1087, 18 U. S. C. § 420g (2); 42 Stat. 1486, 21 U. S. C. § 61 (b); 52 Stat. 1041, 21 U. S. C. § 321 (b); Int. Rev. Code §§ 22 (b) (4), 251, 252, 1621 (a) (8) (B), 813 (b); 49 Stat. 1928, 27 U. S. C. § 222 (a); 28 U. S. C. § 411 (a); 61 Stat. 150, 29 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 161 (2); 61 Stat. 86, 90, 29 U. S. C. Supp. I, §§ 252 (d), 262 (e); 29 U. S. C. App. Supp. I, § 203.7; 55 Stat. 179, 30 U. S. C. § 4o; 54 Stat. 1086, 31 U. S. C. § 123; Rev. Stat. § 3646, as amended, 31 U. S. C. § 528 (c); 61 Stat. 787, 33 U. S. C. Supp. I, §§ 883a, 883b; 44 Stat. 900, as amended, 39 U. S. C. § 654 (c); 49 Stat. 2038, 41 U. S. C. § 39; 58 Stat. 682, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 201 (g); 49 Stat. 624, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 405 (d); 50 Stat. 888, 42 U. S. C. § 1402 (12); 60 Stat. 774, 42 U. S. C. § 1818; 35 Stat. 65, 45 U. S. C. § 52; 52 Stat. 1107, as amended, 45 U. S. C. § 362; 45 Stat. 1492, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 85; 49 Stat. 888, 46 U. S. C. § 88; Rev. Stat. § 4472, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 170; Rev. Stat. § 4370, 46 U. S. C. § 316 (a); 41 Stat. 996, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 813; 39 Stat. 735, 46 U. S. C. §§ 819, 823, 826, 829; 40 Stat. 901, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 835 (a), (d); 41 Stat. 998, 46 U. S. C. §§ 880, 882, 883; 41 Stat. 1003, 46 U. S. C. § 951; 49 Stat. 2016, 46 U. S. C. § 1244 (a), (b); 49 Stat. 1212, 46 U. S. C. § 1312; 48 Stat. 1065, as amended, 47 U. S. C. § 153 (e), (g); 48 Stat. 1084, 47 U. S. C. § 308 (c); 48 Stat. 1087, 47 U. S. C. § 314; 44 Stat. 568, 572, 573, 49 U. S. C. §§ 171, 176 (c), 179; 52 Stat. 977, 979, 980, 984, 998, 49 U. S. C. §§ 401 (3), (21) (b), (29), (30), 425, 486; 40 Stat. 415, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 5; 60 Stat. 50, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 32 (a) (2) (B); 54 Stat. 890, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 308; 61 Stat. 31, 32, 50 U. S. C. App. Supp. I, §§ 324, 326 (a) (2), (3); 54 Stat. 859, as amended, 50 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 403 (b) (A); 56 Stat. 777, 50 U. S. C. App. § 574; 59 Stat. 542, 50 U. S. C. App. § 639a; 56 Stat. 182, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App § 640; 55 Stat. 206, 50 U. S. C. App. § 702; JACKSON, J., dissenting. 335 U.S. subject, for when this Act was passed the Bermuda base was not in being nor was it within the contemplation of even the more foresighted. It should be enough to dispose of this matter to point out that the United States has no supreme authority or sovereign function in Bermuda, where every commer 56 Stat. 461-62, 50 U. S. C. App. §§ 791, 792, 793, 801; 56 Stat. 1041, 50 U. S. C. App. § 846; 56 Stat. 23, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 901; 56 Stat. 245, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 1191 (i); 57 Stat. 162, as amended, 50 U. S. C. App. § 1472 (a) (A); (b) qualified, usually in a similar phrase, by the word "island" or "insular": 54 Stat. 1137, 1139, 8 U. S. C. §§ 501 (e), 604; 59 Stat. 526, as amended, 12 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 635; 38 Stat. 730, 15 U. S. C. § 12; 48 Stat. 74, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 77b (6); 61 Stat. 726, 16 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 758a; 56 Stat. 1046, 21 U. S. C. § 188d; 56 Stat. 1063, 22 U. S. C. § 672 (b); Int. Rev. Code §§ 2563, 2602, 2733 (g); 49 Stat. 2011, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 1204; 40 Stat. 388, 50 U.S. C. § 137; 53 Stat. 812, 50 U. S. C. § 98f. II. Statutes listed under heading I above, the application of which to the leased bases might cause conflict with Bermudian law: 42 Stat. 998, as amended, 7 U. S. C. §3 (Commodity Exchange Act); 42 Stat. 159, 7 U. S. C. § 182 (6) (Packers and Stockyards. Act, 1921); 49 Stat. 731, 7 U. S. C. § 511 (i) (Tobacco Inspection Act); 54 Stat. 1139, 8 U. S. C. § 604 (Nationality Act of 1940); 59 Stat. 526, as amended, 12 U. S. C. Supp. I, § 635 (Export-Import Bank Act of 1945); 55 Stat. 11, 12, as amended, 14 U. S. C. Supp. I, §§ 302, 307 (Coast Guard Reserve Act); 38 Stat. 730, 15 U. S. C. § 12 (Clayton Act); 42 Stat. 1486, 21 U. S. C. § 61 (b) (Filled Milk Act); 56 Stat. 1063, 22 U. S. C. § 672 (b) (Settlement of Mexican Claims Act); Int. Rev. Code §§ 22 (b) (4), 813 (b); 29 U. S. C. App. Supp. I, § 203.7 (Rules and Regulations implementing the National Labor Relations Act as amended by the Labor Management Relations Act); 49 Stat. 624, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 405 (d) (Subpoena provision of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Benefits Act); 50 Stat. 888, 42 U. S. C. § 1402 (Low Rent Housing Act); 60 Stat. 774, 42 U. S. C. § 1818 (Atomic Energy Act); 35 Stat. 65, 45 U. S. C. § 52 (Federal Employers' Liability Act); 52 Stat. 1107, as amended, 45 U. S. C. § 362 (Railroad Unemp. Ins. Act); Rev. Stat. § 4370, as amended, 46 U. S. C. § 316 (a) (Act for the |