The daily morning journal and courier., 1900-12-19
GOVERNMENTS DEFENSE.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GRIGGS ON
 STATUS OF NEW ISLANDS.
Right to Acquire Territory Asserted i'm the Declaration of Independence Jefferson and the Louisiana Purchase Question as to Whether the Constitu- ton Follows the Flag.
ion Follows the Flag.

JGHcESOh uMu Gne LOulbHahh EMEChtst
 Question as to Whether the Constitu-
 ton Follows the Flag.
 Washington, Dec. 1S.-The principal arguments before the United States Supreme court in the two cases which will decide the status of Porto Rico and the Philippine Islands and other in- sular possessions, with respect to Unit ed States proper, were made to-day Great interest is manifested in the cases. Edward c. Perkins, senior coun- sel in the Porto Rico case, after speak ing at some length summed up the ar guments for the appellant in part as follows:
 "The people of the United States in and by the constitution organized ana erected one an the same government Of defined and lin.'ed powers, for all reople who might iEhabit within the dominion of the nation. The whole purpose and theory of the constitution is the establishment in permanent form, unalterable except by the people themselves of fundamental principles Of governmnt, applicable in all time and in every place."
 MT. Perkins also referred to some other constitutional requirements such as the right of habeas corpus, which might have to be extended to all terri tory alike. Justice Brown asked in this connection if counsel thought we could single out what provisions of the con- ,stitution apply to new territory and what do not MT. Perkins responded that it was for the court to say, thus far and no farther; that it was Tor Congress to act, always however, with in the limits defined by the constitu- tior.
 "The power to govern the people in- habiting the territory of the nation, which is delegated by the constitution to Congress, is limited and defined by the constitution and Congress cannot transcend the limits imposed.
 ",rhe constitution limits the powers of Congress to impose taxation by the mandate that all duties, imposts and exercises shall be uniform throughout the entire domain of the United States"
 MT. Perkins said the appellants felt that they had established that neither the treaty of Paris nor the tariff act of 1897 are violative of the constitu- tional principles he had set forth, but that the tariff act was in full force and effect throughout the national domain as well as in Porto Rico and the Phil ippines as well as elsewhere and it does not contemplate tax upon goods transported from one part of the na- tional domain to another.
 When counsel referred at one point to the need of applying general consti- tutional principles to the new domain instead of considering mere commercial or practical features, Justice Brown asked if the court could not consider the practical effect of extending to the Philippines the requirement for trial by jury in every case. MT. Perkins said that if the constitution provide that trial by jury should not be withheld he doubted whether the court would con- sider the practical inconvenience of the giving that right to particular To- ca1ities MT. Harmon, of counsel for appellant 1 in the Philippine case, followed MT. | Perkins, speaking at times in impas- stoned tones which rang through the chamber. He spoke of the august . character or the court and the senti- ment that on this "holy ground' jus tice and right were certain to prevail . The proposition now present, small in itself, involved results affecting the en- tire future of the government. MT Harmon briefly recited the circum- stances of the Philippine case. Emil . J. Pepke, volunteer serving in the Philippines, where he purchased four teen diamond rings valued at S900 to $1,- 900, bringing them back to the United States, where at Chicago the United States customs officers confiscated the diamond rings on the ground that they
 (Cnntinnnd an Sixth Do ero \