The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-09-12
ADVERTISER

former line OF reasoning perhaps correspondent nearly with
the views expressed by Of the majority Nor would
that difference reasoning make difference the Peacock
50 far as the construction of the tariff laws concerned
although led the branches of the majority to the Con-
stution to opposite conclusions the tariff laws of
those
The Dngey tariff act imposed duties al articles imported
from foreign countries The Foraker Act which took effect
than year the treaty cession imposed special
duties goods imported the United States from Porto Rico
and on goods imported into Porto Rico from the United States
Now bearing mind the of the minority the Const
uton and the different OF the majority both branches
holding that the Constitutional applicable but
that Congress could legae pleased but Justice hold
ing that after the treaty Rico domestic
territory though the Constitution did extend the
follows: Since Porto Rico domestic territory within
the meaning of the Dngey Act though part the United
States within the meaning the constitutional provision duties
could not be collected goods imported the
from Porto Rico after the treaty ceson and before the Forak
Act de Lima BidceH Supr. CT r. 743 Goetse o.
United States To- 42 upon goods imported into the United
States from Hawaii (Crossan United States H. 742)
upon goods imported into Porto Rico from the United States
Dooey United States To- 1862; armstrong United States
10 S2D The four members of the majority the Const
tuition who took the that Porto Rico foreign
after of course dented holding that duties could be col
eced after con in spite of the express provisions of Ding
ley Act But these Justices Joined by Mr. Brown
IN holding that when Congress by the Foraker Act than
after the imposed special duties goods whether
imported from Porto Rico into the United rice ue1sa
the duties could be lawfully collected the reason that the
constitutional had yet been made applicable to
Porto Rico either by extending that by ncorpora
ing that island integral part of the United States DCones
BadeA To- no From this it would follow that the
provision IN the Joint Resolution anneng the Hawaiian Islands
to the United States that Until legislation shall be enacted
tending the United States customs laws and regulations the
Hawaiian Islands the existing relations of the Hawaiian
Islands with the United States and other countries shall remain
unchanged held in the Peaco valid exercise
of by Congress- notwithstanding the constitutional pro-
vision in question: in other words held case that
duties could be collected here rates ON goods i'm
ported into these islands from the United States and foreign
countries during the period question: although they could not
lawfully be collected under the Dngey on goods imported
into the United States from these islands nsuar Cases.
therefore, appear sustain both conclusion
ing In the Peacock They sustain the view that
tuition did not in all its funes popo gore follow the flag
these islands
Do the Insuar Cases throw upon the next ques
nonwhether the clauses of the Constitution relating to grand
and petty ures became applicable here of their
medatey upon annexation? It are
tam fundamental of civil rights which limit power
of Congress wherever reaches and that among
right not to be held for infamous unless
an Indictment by grand jury be convicted of crime
cet by unanimous verdict of trial jury In the dissenting
opinion the second Eddrds which adopted by the
majority of the Court in the Marshall pointed
exceptions to the application of the provisions relating grand
and petty Jue for instance pages 1919 that Amer
lean citizen could be lawfully tried under passed by
Congress for murder committed American vessel and be
sentenced to death American consular court Japan,
without any Indictment by grand jury trial by petty jury
I'm re Ross 40 u. S. 453) and that Congress could permit
indian naon territory the United States and subject
the sovereignty of the United States conduct trials
pleased without reference the provisions of the Constitution
relating to grand and petty ues (Talton Mae 1853 o. S.
376 In the opinion Also assuming that there might be
fundamental limitations which, said in Mormon Church