Daily inter mountain., 1900-12-18
Argument On Legal Standing Of the Philip
pines and Porto Rico as American
Territory.
ARE THEY TO BE STATES?
CLEAR EXPOSITION BY ATTORNEY GENERAL GRIGGs OF THE
STANDING OF PEOPLE IN TERRITORY AN
NExED IN THE PAST.

Washington, Dec. 1s-Arguments in
the Porto Rico Philippine cases involv-
ing the status of those countries to the
United States was resumed in the Su-
preme Court today. The wide spread
interest in the cases was shown by the
large attendance OF prominent members
of the bar and by a crowd Of spectators
which filled the public area and over
flowed in the corridor. Senators ana
representatives in congress dropped in
as the arguments proceeded and gave
attentive ear to the proceedings.
Prior to the opening Of the court the
counsel conferred and arranged gem
eral plan Of procedure by which Ed
ward G. Perkins. senior counsel in the
Porto Rican cases will conclude his ar
gument today, being followed by Law
renee Harmon, counsel in the Philippines
case. The appellant will then give way
to Attorney General Griggs for the pre-
sentation of the case in behalf of the
government. This, it was expected
would be continued until Charles Aid
rich, former solicitor general and senior
counsel in the Philippines case will close
in behalf of the appellants.
Mr.. Perkins. on resuming his argu-
ment took up the Dred Scott and other
cases relating to the extension of the
legislation over territory. soon after
Mr.. Perkins began, Justice Brown in
terposed an inquiry as to whether Mr.
Perkins had examined those sections of
the United States statutes wherein cong
ress extended the constitution to GER
tain territories Mr.. Perkins said he haf
examined both of those branches and he
hoped to be able to present answers to
the contention made as to them.
ATTORNEY GENERAL BRIGGS
REPLY.
Mr.. Griggs' plea was based on a
brief of LOO pages, the greater part Of
which is devoted to presenting the argu-
ment of the United States, while the re-
naming portion is in the shape of an
appendix giving the text of the Peace
Treaty between the United States and
Spain and also the text of other treaties
supposed to bear upon the question.
In presenting the governments side Of
the controversy, the Attorney General
first cited the two cases on which the
proceeding is based. This was followed
by general explanation and a summing
Of the governments position, after which
came the citation of innumerable au-
thorities under appropriate headings,
with pertinent running comment upon
them The Attorney General contended
that the United States has the power to
acquire territory. that having acquired
il, it has the right to govern it: that ad-
ministrative construction. congressional
action and judicial precedent affirm that
every part in ceded country is properly
regarded as foreign until laws are eX-
tended by congress to the new posses
sions: that the clause of the constitution
of the United States declaring duties
uniform throughout the United States is
not applicable to new possessions and
that the constitution does not extend of
Its own force over acquired territory.
In his general contention on behalf of
the United States, Mr.. Griggs argued
that his opponents We're willing from
both legal and a 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 af-
ter their cession to the United States. the
same as it did before and that in view OF
the fact that the tariff laws are in ren
there is no principle of justice. much
less of constitutional restriction which
forbids congress from taxing in this
way the merchandise Of outlying pos
sessions of the United States wher
brought into ports of the union.
He laid down as established the two
following propositions:
1)-That the tariff act of 1897 was il
tended by congress to classify as foreign
all countries not a part of or belonging
to the United States at the time of it