The daily morning journal and courier., 1901-05-28
DECISIONS IN
 |NsuLAR CASES Government Wins in Some of Its Contentious and
 Loses in Others.
SAVED BY THE ,F0RAKER ACT
TAXES ON PORTO RICAN IMPORTS BEFORE TT ILLEGAL.

TAXES ON PORTO RICAN IMPORT
 BEFORE IT ILLEGAL.
 Not Foreign rritory After the Treat.
 of Paris-Congress, However, HaS
 Power to Levy Custom Duties-Con
 stitution Follows tho Flag Until Con
 gress Decides DifferentIy--SoIe Powe,
 Rests in That Body.
 Washington, May 27.-In the United
 States supreme court to-day opinions
 were handed down in all but two of II (
 cases before that court invloying the
 relation of the United States to it's in
 sular possessions. The two cases ill
 which no conclusion was announced
 were those known as the fourteen dia-
 mond rings case and the second of the
 Dooley cases. The undecided Dooley case deals with a phase of the Poi to Rican question and the diamond rings case involves the right to the free i'm portation of merchandise from the Phil ippines to the United States.
 The original intention of the court had been to adjourn for the term. after to-day's sitting but discussion of the cases passed on to-day took about five hours, so the court adjourned until to- morrow, when it is presumed the re- s.s .x,st1 l.
 Of the several cases decided to-day the two which attracted the greatest share of attention from the court were what Is known as the De Lima case and that known as the Downes case, and of these two, the opinion in the Downes case is considered the most far-reaching as 1t affects our future relations where as the De Lima case deals with a tran- sitional phase of our insular relations. The De Lima case was the first to re- ceive the attention of the court, and as it appeared to be quite sweepingly op- posed to the governments contentions many persons precipitately arrived at the conclusion that the government had been worsted all along the line This view suffered a decided change when the conclusion was announced in the Downes case. The court was very evenly divided on both cases, but politi- cal lines were not at all controlling.
 The De Lima case involved the power of the government to collect a duty on goods imported into the United States from Porto Rico after the ratification of the treaty of Paris and before the passage Of the Porto Rican act. The f,e in this case was substantially a claim that Porto Rico is foreign territory. The entire case turned upon that conten- tion. The court held that the position was not well taken; that Porto Rico was not lat the time foreign territory and that therefore the duty which had been collected must be returned.
 The decision in the Downes case fol- lowed the history of the dealing of the United States with Porto Rico step farther The case dealt with the legal ity of the exaction of duties on goods imported from Porto Rico into New York after the passage of the Foraker act providing for duty upon goods shipped from the United States into Porto Rico and also on those shipped from Porto Rico to the United States. In this case the court held that such exaction was legal and constitutional
 The point of the two opinions consid- cred collectively is that Porto Rico was never after the acquisition of that is- land foreign territory, that until con- gress acted upon the question no duty could be collected, but that as soon as congress outlined a method of controll- ing the islands revenues that action be- came binding; in other words, that con- gress has power under the constitution to prescribe the manner of collecting | revenues of the countrys insular pos sessions and has the right to lay duty on goods imported into our insular pos sessions from the United States or ex- ported from them into the United | States. It holds in brief that for tax ation purposes they are not a part of | the United States to the extent that goods shipped between their ports and the United States are entitled to the same treatment as thought they were shipped between New York and New Orleans.
 Justice Brown delivered the courts opinion in both and there were wig orous dissenting opinions in both. In the Downes case, four of the nine mem bers of the court united in an opinion, in strong language the opinion of the majority In that case In this opposing opinion the chief jus tice and Justices Harlan, Brewer and Peckham united, and the chief justice and Justice Harlan presented their views in writing. Justices Gray, Shi- ras White and McKenna also while agreeing with the conclusion announc- ad by Justice Brown they had reached the conclusion by different lines of ar gument, and Justices Gray, White and McKenna announced opinions outlining heir respective positions. Justices Shi- as, White and McKenna also dissented n the De Lima case, uniting in on opin- on. Justice Gray also presented an and dissenting opinion in hat case, The small court room was crowded 0 repletion throughout the day, prom nent officials and many attorneys be-
 lContinued on Fifth Page.)