Vilas County news. [volume] (Eagle River, Vilas County, Wis.) 1896-1927, 1900-12-24
ARGUE ON STATUES
LAWYERS TALK INSULAR SUB
JEcT TO SUPREME COURT.
IMPORTANT SUBJECT UP
Several Attorneys Take Part in the
iscussion-Former Secretary of
the Treasury Carlisle Among the
Listeners-Griggs Appears for the
Government.

washington, Dec. 1.-THE case of
John H. Goetz VS.. the United States,
involving the status of Porto Rico, was
taken up in the United States supreme
court yesterday. Attorney General
Griggs was present in behalf of the
government and number of promi-
nent attorneys, including Former Sec
rotary Carlisle, as interested listeners.
Edward G. Perkins, of the counsel for
Goetz, asked that the Porto Rico case
and that involving the status of the
Philippines be combined The attor-
ney general assented and it was ar
ranged that each side should have five
hours.
The opening argument in behalf of
Goetz was then begun by Everitt
Brown, who rehearsed the main feat
ures as the cession of Porto Rico with
circumstances of the enactment of the
tariff law of '97 and the imposition of
duties on the goods of Goetz. The
main contentious, he said, were that
Porto Rico was not foreign country"
as contemplated by the tariff act and
that Porto Rico was within the United
States, SO that an impOst duty against
goods of Porto Rico would be in VIC
lation of the constitutional provision
that all duties, imposts and excuses
shall be uniform throughout the
United States"
Mr. Perkins followed, taking up
more particularly the constitutional
phases of the case. He maintained
that the constitution was in effect
power of attorney and said the ques-
ton was as to what were those pow
ers. The prosecution of war to Porto
Rico or elsewhere, or to the acquisition
of this or that place,
were all acts which must be
brought within the power of the con-
stitution The metaphor as to the
constitution following the flag Mr..
Perkins regarded as equivalent to say
ing a mans shadow followed him. The
first constitutional point urged by Per-
kins was that the "claim of I'M
limited power in new territories is OPP
posed to our entire theory of constitu-
tional government"
A large number of cases were cited
to show the attitude of the United
States supreme court on analogous is
sues in the past. An unbroken line of
decisions it was maintained, estab-
lished that the prohibitory clauses of
the constitution apply in the govern
ment of the territory CT the United
States Other chief points advanced
in behalf of the appellant were: "The
treaty of Paris was not open to the
construction that it provides for the
governing of Porto Rico without re-
gard to constitutional limitations. and
as a country foreign to the United
States. If it were possible to place
provision would be void. as contrary
to the constitution. but this would not
in any way prevent or affect the ac-
cOmplishment or usual results of an
nexation. If the tariff act imposes
duty or tax upon goods brought from
Porto Rico to place elsewhere in the
United States after annexation, the
imposition is void as being in conflict
with the express provision of the con
stition. When the treaty of Paris
took effect Porto Rico ceased to be "a
foreign country within the meaning of
those words as used in the tariff act "
Mr. Perkins will continue his argu-
ment today.