New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-12-19

| Som sfter ne began Justice Brown inquired a
20 whether Mr.. Perkins had examined the mos
recent cases relating 10 the extension OF ="
Constitution 10 territories and had eSamihe
those sections OF the United States statute
wherein Congress extended the Constitution e
| certain territories.
Mr. Perkins said he had examined BOTH an'
hoped TO be able TO present answers TO the con
tentions made as TO them.
THE CONVENTIONS SUMMED UP
Continuing his argument. Mr.. Perkins citee
| many other authorities supporting his view tina
the Constitution ia itself extended 70 Territories
He summed up thsArguments for the appellant
| in part as follows:
The people OF the United States in and by M
constitution organized and erected one and the
| same government. OF defined and limited po"ssis
| noinion OF me Nation The whole purpose and
the cry OF the Constitution is the estsoiisni en-
| in a permanent form. unalteraole except py sns .
people themselves. OF fundamental pr.hsp.sa 49,,
rovernn1ent applicable in all time and In every
place.
INTERPRETATION OF PEACE TREATY.
Mr. Harmon continued his argument when the
Court resumed its session. The chief points urged
were;
~, The Treaty OF Peace between the United
STATES and Spain the Philippines became part
OF the United States; The Government ana the
stands under the authority of the Constitution,
with their respective rights defined and markeo
ont: the former can exercise no power over the
sta4es bevons what that instrument confers nor
lawfully DENY any right which il has reserved.
Being part OF the Unitsa ssa'e ,,.s,es of
ciaS,se i Section g Article I. and Of Clauses ,
and e Section O. Article I, OF the Constitution OF
The uni1So stS5aste IN the treaty with respect
to commerce. il became instantly pouno an4 =
privileged by the laws when congress nae pass =
10 raise a revenue from duties on imports ana
The President Of the United States has no
legislative power. The imposltion on cuS Iss
and other parts az the United States after the
Treaty Of Peace and exchange OF ratlncatlons py
executive order is without lawtui anu
the seizure of the property or the pialhtlH IN
error a citizen of the United States, under sCch
pretended authority constitutes a taxing OF MS
property without due process OF law
THE ATToRNEY-GE ARGUMENT
In his general contention on behalf of the
United States ar. Griggs argued that his op-
ponents were wrong from both legal and
constitutional point of view. Referring to the
legal aspect of the case. he asserted that the
Dingley act applied to merchandise imported
from Porto Rico and the Philippines after their
oession TO the United States the same as 1t dld
before and that in view of the fact that tariff
laws are ir rem there is principle of justice
much less of constitutional restriction when
forbids Congress from taxing IN TINS way ths
merchandise of outlying possessions OF me
United States when brought into the ports CT
the Union.
TWO ESSENTIAL POINTS STATED
He laid down as established the two following
propositions:
First-That the tariff act Of 1897 was intended
by Congress TO classify as foreign all countries
not part of or belonging to the United States
cession Of the Spanish islands to the United
States did not operate 10 admit imports from
those islands free Of duty under that law
Secon6-That the tariff act so construed ana
enforced violates no constitutional rule Of uni
formity.
Taking up the constitutional question. the At
torney-General declared that there was no doubt
that il was the intention of the Paris Treaty
not 10 make the ceded islands a part of the
United States. and also that it was intended not
TO make the inhabitants Of those islands citi-
zens. The only thing that could justify a
declaration that the treaty is invalid would be
that it violates the Constitution of the United
States $500.
Calling attention 10 the fact that those who
attack the treaty rest their case on no spe1 nc
provision of the Constitution, but rather a
principle Of government which they say for
bids this Na,icn 10 hold sovereignty over sub
ject territory which il does not make a part Of
itself under the Constitution. Mr.. Griggs said:
If this were true. it would be a limitation
upon the usual and necessary powers Of a sover-
eign independent nation Of such tremendous
Importance as to Justify in inquiring why it
was not clearly expressed in the fundamental
law by the men who drafted our Constitu-
ton. They were learned in the law Of nations.
they knew the nature of colonies and provinces
and how they were acquired by treaty and con-
quest and discovery. and how they were held
ana governed by other nations. They gave TO
Nation founded
n-ellcd powers of making war and treaties. the
most frequent methods by which foreign terri
tory is acquired by the nations Of the earth. If
they intended to restrict or limit their own Gov
/ eminent IN these respects would they not have
done so in express terms? They did not do so
by any language which can even be suggested
capable OF such import. and it is therefore
right-nay, necessary-to conclude that they did
not intend to DO
POWER TO ACQUIRE TERRITORY.
He then proceeded 20 argue that this vas
not only not the intention of the f-amers of
the Constitution. but that it could be positively
shown that so far from their intending to CT
ganize a government which should be incapable
Of acquiring foreign territory except on condi-
ton Of making il an organic part Of the United
States. the early statesmen Of the Republic
were under the impression that no territory
could be annexed to and become a part of this
United States without amending the Constitu
4 ton
Il shall show" he said. that the practical
construction put upon the Constitution by the
Executive and Congressional branches of the
Government To- hundred years has with one
partial exception, been uniform in regarding &c.
quired territory neither bound nor privileged
by that instrument until brought within its
! operation, either by express compact in the
treaty or by act OF Congress- and that act.
Of Congress do not apply to after acquired terri
tory until extended TO il by subsequent legis
lative enactment"
RIGHT TO TAX MERCHANDISE.
] ~ 1r-,s -. -