The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-05-28
WHAT IT DECIDED.
Solicitor General Richards Re-
views the Opinions
Rendered by Supreme Court in
the InsuIar Cases.
TARIFF TAX STANDS
On Goods Imported From Porto
Rico to U. ..
No Opinion Rendered Regarding
q. s. Exports.
DECLARED A VICTORY
For the Entire Insular Policy
of the Government.
TARIFF TAX STANDS
On Goods Imported From Porto
Rico to U. 3.
No Opinion Rendered Regarding
Q. s. Exports.
DECLARED A VICTORY
For the Entire Insular Policy
Of the Government.

Washington, May 2s-soIicitor Cen
eral Richards, of the department of
justice, who had charge of the insular
cases before the supreme court, made
the following statement containing his
Interpretation of the decisions of the
court:
The important question involved in
these cases was whether the cession of
territory contained in the treaty of
Paris made Porto Rico and the Philip
pines an integral part Of the United
States within the meaning of that pro-
vision of the constitution requiring all
duties inposts and excises to be uni
form throughout the United States
The court held that the cession simply
made Porto Rico and the Philippines
domestic territory Of the United States.
subject to the full control of congress,
which control could be exercised with
out reference to those limitations. This
Limitation, the court held, was intended
to apply to the states of the union and
does not apply to acquired territory
unless by treaty and by subsequent act
OF congress it is Incorporated within
and becomes an integral part OF the
United States. The decisions are sub
stantially a victory for the government
They sustain to the fullest extent the
sO-called tnSular policy of the admins
tratiOn. The government now has the
sanction of the supreme court for gov
erning these islands as their needs and
our interests may require The court
holds that the constitution did not of
its own force apply to those ceded ter
ritOries placing their people, their
products and their ports on an imme-
date equality with ours and confer
ring upon them all the rights privileges
and immunities enjoyed by the people,
products and ports Of the several
states.
While their fundam entail rights are
preserved by those underlying prin-
ciples of the constitution which apply
everywhere, the status of their citizens
and the nature of the customs and
commercial regulations are to be de-
termined by congress and the exercise
of the power vested by the constitution
In congress to make all needful rules
and regulations respecting territory be-
longing to the United States Obvious
~ what 1 have said regarding Porto
Rico applies equally wen to the Philip
pines, so that the president IS perfectly
free under the Spooner act to govern
the Philippines as their needs and in
terests may require
AT the same time that the court has
sustained to the fullest extent the con-
tentiOn Of the government in these
cases it has decided as a matter of stat
utory construction that the Dingley act
could not be held to impose duties on
goods brought from Porto Rico, because
by cessiOn Porto Rico became domestic
territory Of the United States. and
therefore ceased to be a foreign coun-
try
ssThe decisions of the court call for
no change in the administration of the
law. The court did not decide what is
known as the second Dooley case,
which involved the validity of the col
lection of the duties under the Foraker
act on goods taken into Porto Rico
from the United States. While I have
no information on the subject it may be
H-raH -
in the case another question as to
whether such duties would not mount
to duties on articles exported from
state. The court also failed to dispose of
what is popularity known as the IA dia-
mond rings case. involving the entry
free of duty of rings brought into the
United States by a returning soldier
from the Philippines. There were no
decisions affecting the Philippines and
7 presume both of these cases referred
TO will go until the fall term of the
court"
WHAT OTHERS THINK.
New York. May 2s.-Frederick R.
COudert, jr.- who argued the cases of
Delima and Downes before the supreme
court said:
This Delima decision affects only the
duties collected on Porto Rican prod
ucts previous to the passage of the For
aker act We have covered the question
OF duties collected since the passage of
that act BY what is called the Downes
ated to test the consututionality Of the
law
Speaking of the DeIima decision. Mr..
COudert said:
This case. I think I can saw is a
history making decision It viii have
bearing upon the position not only of
Porto Rico, but Of the Philippines and
Hawaii as well 1t practically means
that this government can have no such
thing as colonies in the sense that
Great Britain has them. Every inch of
territory over which the flag floats
must hereafter be considered an in
tegral part of the union"
Charles Frederick Adams, of the law
firm of COudert Bros, who prepared the
case Of Delima, said.
If the court says that the Fora ker
act is right then the constitutional
question is against us. for congress has
the power TO discriminate against ceded
countries. In that act a duty of Is
per cent. Of the Dingley tax was re-
garded as legal on goods shipped from
Porto Rico, but IN the case of Downes
II was brought up as a test case, their
auty being levied after the passage of
the Foraker act
Naturally members of the firm of
y Delma were elated by the decisions.
Said Mr.. Delima.
our contention that Porto Rico
sugar was American sugar. and there
fore not dutiable. has been sustained" Z"
Anotner member of the firm said.
We are much gratified to learn that
great national question has finally
peen settled Since Porto Rico came
anoer tne American nag the firm has
Raaa onoer protest duties amounting to !