The Independent. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1895-1905, 1899-01-31
tConttnued from 1St page.)

constitution not to he mOulneQ by
the government, and under a judi
cial power capable of pronouncing
null and void Legislative enactments
in violation Of that constitution. If
the ratified treaty shall make the
coded islands national domain it will
be beyond the wit of Congress to
prevent those from whom uneonsti-
tutional duties or taxes shall be
therein exacted under color of Amer
lean law from bringing suit against
the person by whom exacted and
going to the Supreme Court The
suits will be more numerous than
the pending "silk trimmings" suits,
and involve millions.
1t is important, in the sense of
amicable relations, that il what
Great Britain seeks cannot he given
she quickly will see the constitution
al reason. There is an Illuminating
case Noughborough VS.. Blake) re-
ported in the fifth volume of Whea-
toms Supreme Court Up. BIO which
Euglishmen should study. The vol
ume is easily obtainabe in London.
The case was decided seventy-eight
years ago by Marshall and his col
leagues on the bench. Congress had
laid direct tax, and it had been
levied in the District OF Columbia.
The levy was resisted because the
power impaired by the constitution
to lay such tax confined Congress
to the several States in the Union,
of which the District of Columbia
was not one, because those persons
taxed were not represented in Con-
gress, because the standard for lay
ing direct taxes was not applicable
in the District of Columbia, and be-
cause laying the tax in the District
of Columbia, would, by the neces-
sity of uniformity, require a laying
of it in the Territories, which, it
YVES argued, could not be.
The Court was unanimously of the
opinion that all the articles OF the
constitution which restrained Con-
gress applied to legislation for the
District of Columbia, and for the
Territories, whether organized or
unorganized.
The Court brushed aside the con-
tention that Congress could not
taxed the Territories, because in the
Revolutionary struggle the colonies
asserted that taxation and represent
tation we're inseparable. 1t said that
the difference between requiring the
colonies to be taxed by the British
Parliament land permitting the re-
representatives. of the American peo-
pie, under the restrictions of the
constitution, to tax a part of the
society which is in state of infancy
advancing to manhood, looking for.
ward to complete equality so soon
as state OF manhood shall be at
tanned, as to the case with the Ter
ritories, i is too obvious not
to present itself to the minds of ALL"
The phrase under the restrictions
of the constitutions" falling from
the pen of Marshall, is far reaching.
Then the Court adjudged the
main question by these words:
"The eighth section of the first
article gives to Congress the power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, i'm
posts and excuses for the purposes
hereinafter mentioned. This grant
is general without limitation as to
place. 1t consequently extends to
all places over which the govern
ment extends. II this could be
doubted, the doubt is removed by
the subsequent words, which modify
the grant. These words are: But
all duties, imposts and excuses,
shall be uniform throughout the
United States 1t will not be con-
tended that the modification of the
power extends to places to which
the power itself does not extend
The power, then, to lay and collect
duties, imposts and excuses may be
exercised, and must be exercised,
throughout the United States.
Does this term designate the whole