The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-03-06
SOME MORE coxuNDRums.


The recommendation by the president.
in his recent message. in favor of re-
funding to the Puerto Nicans OF the
amount OF duties rald by them under the
Dingley law is by no means the least ex-
traordinary or the performances OF that
sin"t US politician In his assumption Of the
roe OF statesman. 1t is IN view, he says,
of the pressing necessity for immediate
revenue In Puerto Rico for conducting the
government" and in order to make the
principle Of the 10 per cent tariff applica-
bic to the past. that he recommends the
return to the people of the island of the
moneys collected.
What really wonderful recommended
ton is this. coming from such source.
1t is the same man who recommended
little before that no such duties whatever
be levied. Yet row. after he has been
turned down by his party associates In
the house. and after he has implicitly ad-
mitted that the turning down process is
eXcusable al least. he finds that the ext
gencies OF conducting government on thu
island require that a present shau be
made to the Puerto Ricans Of all the
moneys collected from them under a tar
if which. we are assured on the highest
Republican authority, Is levied only for
the benefit of the Puerto Ricaus. And.
even still more wonderful to relate, the
recommendation was received with pro-
longed cheers by the legislators who had
turned down their executivei
1t would be hard problem to solve, If
one were to attempt (which of the two
great Republican influences. the ma jarity
in the house OF representatives or the
president in the White house, it is that
appears in the more ridiculous light In
this extraordinary transaction. What are
customs duties levied for. anyway" To
make political capital for party which
knows not over night where it Is "at" on
any one matter which Is concerned in the
new imperalIstic policy? Is there any
constitutional provision on this subject?
Is it that ancient instrument which gives
the president and congress the right to
devote the proceeds of our tariff duties
to a people who are OF country which
is no part Of the United States. and which
does not come within the operations of
that same constitution? If we can thus
hand over the proceeds of tariff taxation
to the people OF Puerto Rico, why not to
the people of Cuba or the Barbados: I'M
port duties, the constitution tells us, are
levied for the use of the treasury of the
United States. and for providing revenue
for the conduct of the government OF the
United States Since Puerto Rico IS no
part of the United States, wherein does
the benefit inure to the United States OF
duties collected from and afterwards re-
funded to the people of that country?
And, If we lay aside the doctrine that
Puerto Rico is net part of the United
States, what becomes of the old idea that
all imposts shall be uniform in all ports
of the United States?
But there are still a few other inqui-
ries: If the money we have filched from
the Puerto Ricans is so urgently needed
for maintaining government and schools
on that island, why ever have collected
It? And having. according to the presi-
dent, done wrong In so doing why does
he not stand up like a man and say that
he recommends the return Of the money.
because they are SO sadly needed on tho
island, rather than indulge himself in dis
ingenious twaddle about acting In ac.
cordance with the 10 per cent arrange
ment that has been forced down his
throat? Are we to do the same by the
proceeds of the Is per cent arrangement
after they have been collected? And if
we are not. how are we to sustain the
claim that even the Is per cent arrange
ment is made for the benefit of the Puer.
TO RIcans?
But even a 1.-THE of the conundrun1s
which press on each other as the result
Of our imperiaiistic policy are really
enough to make the ordinary head ache
In contemplation of them And, out Of
charity to the readers of the G l o b e, We
abstain from stating any more Of them
at this time. or even In this connection.