Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-12-19
STATUS OF The ISL ANDS
ACQUIRED FROM SPAIN.
Continued From First Page.

tax at orr own ports merchandise COM
ing from outlaying territory OF the
United States is not a strange nor an
unusual exercise of power There is
nothing essentially unjust in such a
practice. II may be made unjust by
the severity of the tax or the rigor OF
the prohibition, but so may any other
kind . a custom house imposition.
Such a practice has long been followed
by every civilized power England to-
day ]eyies duties on the merchandise
of all her colonies when brought into
the United Kingdom. She did the same
in ante-revolution&ry days, and we will
not mi among the complaints of the
American colonists any protest on this
score"
He gave three definitions to the
term United States, as follows:
"First-The corporate name of the
nation or governmental entity, the
same as was provided in the articles
OF confederation, which declared the
style OF this confedeTacy shall be the
United States OF America.
Second-The States United-Refer-
ring to the several States composing
the Union. In this sense, of course.
it excludes territories
"Third-The international sense.
designating the extent OF our domain
as a sovereign nation"
IN this sense it includes all terri
tory under our dominion wherein no
other nation has sovereignty. even
such as may be under our control oy
temporary conquest, as Tampica, Next
co, during the Mexican war; while in
domestic sense it includes geograph-
ically the States of the Union and such
territory as the President and his SEN
ate have by treaties expressly annex
ed TO and made part of the United
States. and such as Congress and the
President, by act OF resolution, have
expressly annexed to and made part
OF the United States, as the Hawaiian
Islands.
The last feature of the argument
was a contention that the constitution
does not extend OF its own force over
acquired territory, and in this con-
nection the attorney general sought to
refute the doctrine as laid down by
Chief Justice fancy in the bred Scott
case-that the United States could not
acquire territory for any other purpose
than to convert it into States of the
Union. The doctrine of the ex pro-
priO vigOre extension of the constitu-
ton was never heard Of" he said,
until it was invented and advocated
by Calhoun as a means of fastening
slavery upon California and New Mex
leo beyond the power of Congress to
disturb or abolish 1t. 1t was in con-
flict with all the previous views Of
statesmen of all parties, and opposed
TO the compact in the ordinance of
1857, as we'll as TO the act of Congress
known as the Missouri compromise
The doctrine announced in the bred
Scott decision was, said Mr.. Griggs. not
original with Chief Justice fancy. but
was originated by John c. Calhoun,
and pronounced by him during the
discussion of the Wilmot proviso OF
1S4I. This doctrine had been tactily
ignored and repudiated in later opin-
ions and in Congressional action. to
say nothing of the effect upon it Of
the result of the Civil war Indeed.
said the attorney general, in the Ian
guage Of Prof. Pomeroy, the bred
Scott decision had become "a by-word
and a Kissing"
IN conclusion NJ. Griggs submitted
that the judgments in the lower courts
in both cases violate no constitutional
or other right, and therefore, should be
affirmed.
The opening argument in behalf Of
Goetz was then made by Everit Brown.
He reheGrsed the history OF the cession
of Por-0 Rico. with the circumstances
Of the enactment of the tariff law OF
1897. and the imposition of the duties
on the goods OF GOetZ. The.main con-
tentionS. he said. were that Porto Rico
was not foreign country" as con-
templated by the tariff act, and that
Porto Rico was within the United
States, So that an impost duty against
the goods OF Porto Rico would be in
violation Of the constitutional provis-
ion that ali duties. imposts and ex-
cises shall be uniform throughout the
United States
Mr.. Perkins followed. taking I'D
more particularly the constitutional
phases of the case. He maintained that
the constitution was in effect a power
of attorney, and he said the question
was as to what were these powers.
The prosecution OF the war to Porto
Rico or elsewhere. were all acts which
must be brought within the powers of
the constitution. The metaphor as
to the constitution following the flag,
Mr.. Perkins regarded as equivalent
to saying that a mans shadow follow
ed him.
After examining numerous cases.
Mr.. Perkins saiXthat the doctrine that
the constitution did not extend to the
territories was pasA8 on the idea that
the constitution was substance. a