Northern Wisconsin advertiser. [volume] (Wabeno, Wis.) 1898-1925, 1900-03-01

dealing with the territories or the
United States had absolute power I'M
fettered by any limitations OF the con-
stitution Our revolution" he said,
was based on the idea that one COM
munity had no right to permanently
levy taxes upon another community
and the prime motive which led to the
establishment of the constitution was
the desire to do away with barriers up
on trade, which were set up on the
frontiers of each state, so that trade
might be freely carried on throughout
the dominion of the United States AS
our government is not simple and
elementary government, but one OF
limited powers and under a written
constitution, the power to tax and Gre
ate barriers within our dominion
against trade should, in view of our
history before the adoption of the con-
stitution, be most strictly construed.
The power of taxation and the meth
| cd of its exercise are conferred in the
same clause. If congress has power to
levy duties over the area comprising
the territories, then the rule of uni
formity applies to that same area. This
is in accordance with the primary rules
of construction. But the decisions OF
the supreme court put the matter above
question. John Marshall as great a
jurist as ever sat upon the bench, de-
clared in the case of Loughborough vs..
| Blake that the rule of uniformity in
the imposition of duties extended to the
territories The fantastic theory which
has been discovered by some modern
jnrists within eighteen months holds
that this opinion of MarshallS was a
mere dictum, and that the District OF
Columbia, in regard to which the deci
sion was rendered, got under the con-
stitution by some process which made
it different from mere territory. A third
of century after the Loughborough
case the supreme court again, when
California became a territory, decided
that the rule of uniformity would ap-
PLY to it. Here are two different deci-
sions, a generation apart, by our high
est court each rendered when the
court was composed of entirely differ
ent justices, specifically holding that
the rule of uniformity in imposts ap-
plies to territories and those decisions
stand absolutely uncontradicted. And
yet in the face of those decisions we,
who have taken an oath to protect and
defend the constitution, are asked to
levy duties against an American terri
tory If congress is not bound by these
limitations against taxing unequally, it
is not bound by any limitation upon
its power in the constitution. The case
is conclusive so far as judicial author
ity is concerned and when we regard
the circumstances out of what our gov
eminent and constitution sprang, the
words of the taxing power and direct
adjudication of their meaning, a long
line of authorities which deny the ex-
lstence of absolute power in congress.
1t is clear that the theory of despotic
power is absolutely repugnant to our
institutions But we are asked to pass
this Dbl because somebody has called
IN question our constitutional right IN
do 1t. But if you are going to pass I'M
Just measures merely to show your
strength, why not begin by shearing
your wolves, New Mexico, Arizona. and
Alaska, instead of shearing this poor
little pet lamb of Porto Rico? We
have had one decision of the sunrama
court rendered in times of great polit-
lcal distress, that the black man had
no rights which the white man was
pound to respect and this country was
deluged with blood to wash that daci-
sion from our laws. Now we are asked
10 lay the foundation for a moot casa
with the weight of congress behind II
ana ask for another decision thar tba
Whlte man and brown man of Porto
Hico are merely our chattels and that
lhe commonest constitutional right 60
cured TO the men that tread orr sol,
uoes not belong to them althougb tbav
are under our flag. We impose nv thi.
0iii d certain per cent. of duties unon
goods passing to and fro. between tbot
isiahd and this country. How lono will
1t De before some powerful intorost
" uemand that they be recognized
representatives of these Interests voto
anu erect members of congress porto
nicans do not vote; they are meroIr
our subjects. Can there be anv dorht
mat the tax to be levied will no w.
ana more for the benefit Of great 49,.
ssts IN this country and the banIess
p t% 'nat We're told by our generals
mat they were to receive the oIonie
DRESSINGS Of American libertv n DuS
'ro"hed our soldiers with wreatbs ".l',
become the victims of extortion ~. VIII
nan sharers in our rreedom9y amer
hoooy rep Mass) spoke in favor W. u:
ne Dill Mr.. Parker (rep. N 49, VI
legal argument in support of the ", ralD
.'aii,y Oh the proposed tariff and aIs.
Urged that it would prove of srhat 80 aiSo
n.s to the island. Speeches wori
naue oy Nh. Wilson (dem : " Cr
iiss.) in opposition to the 6i II Nuem''
E1DfrT