New-York tribune., 1901-01-03
MORE INSULAR TEST SUITS
TO BE ARGUED IN THE SUPREME COURT
NEXT MONDAY.
BRIEFS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENTS CON
TENTION NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. CAR
Isles ARGUMENT

BRIEFS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENTS CON
TENTIoN FILED-EX-sECRETAR CAR
Isles ARGUMENT.
lBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TR1BUNE1
Washington, Jan. 2-Ex-Secretary John G. Car
isle has completed his brief in the suit in which
he is attorney to test the constitutionaEty of the
Governments present colonial policy The style OF
the case is Carlos Armstrong, appellant against
the United States. appellee. Associated with Mr..
Carlisle Charles g. Leeds. of New-York, and
John G.. CLANCY and Alphonso Hart. of Washing
ton. The is set for hearing in the Supreme
Court of the United States next Monday. Attorney
General Griggs will personally look after the Gov
| ernments interests in this case he did two
weeks ago in the Goetze and Pepke cases, In which
! the principles involved The Attorney
General has not yet completed his brief. though
there is no .doubt that he will have it ready by
Monday.
The Armstrong has to the Supreme
| Court on appeal from Court of Claims. Arm
strong is a citizen of Great Britain and for many
| years has been merchant in Ponce, Porto Rico
He brings suit under the authority of a section OF
| the Revised Statutes of the United States which
provides that "aliens who are citizens or subjects
Of any Government which accords to citizens of
the United States the right to prosecute claims
against such Government in its courts. shall have
| the privilege of prosecuting claims against the
United States in the Court of Claims whereof such
court, by reason of their subject matter and char
acter, might take Jurisdiction. The allegation is
/ that the transfer of the island of Porto Rico
from the sovereignty of Spain to that of the United
! States Armstrong was a merchant at Ponce and
that he imported from the ports of New-York. Bal
timore and Philadelphia merchandise of the growth,
I product or manufacture of the United States or
which. If grown produced or manufactured I'm other
countries. had been regularly in ports OF
entry of the United States and lawful customs du-
ues We're paid thereon During the real and tech
meal military occupation of Porto Rico-that IS,
from the date of the surrender of the island 10 this
nf
bill (the Foraker bilD. Armstrong paid to the mill
tary authorities under protest sS1 oo in customs
autes. lie brought suit in the Court of Claims
| the recovery OF this amount and lost The duties
were collected by the military authorities under a
! schedule of rates fixed by an order and procIama
tion of President Mckinley.
MR.. CARIIsLES ARGUMENT
Mr.. Carlisle claims that the imposition and cousc
zion of these duties and taxes were in violation OF
the rights and privileges secured to his client under
the constitution and laws OF the United States and
also IN violation OF the Treaty OF Peace between
| the United States and Spain Article TX of which
provides that Spanish subjects, natives OF the
peninsula, residing in the territory over which
| spain by the present treaty rellnqushes or cedes
her sovereignty, may remain in such territory or
may remove therefrom. retaining in either event all
their rights Of property including the right to sell
or dispose OF such property of its proceeds: and
they shall also have the right carry on their in
dustry, commerce and professions being subject in
/ thereof IN
other foreigners
Mr.. Carlisle who listened attentfveIv through four
days Of the trial OF the Goetze and Pepke cases and
| Is presumed 70 have learned something then OF
| value 70 the Armstrong case bases his argument
| on four general propositions. follows:
| First-The Constitution OF the United States
whether in the form OF States Territories or Dis
as well as saes % tSe pTooGo 5or IeI and
! Treaty OF Peace between this Government and
/ Z ed IN and
/ accepted by the United States. There was an alb
longer foreign territory. but is part Of the United
second-ours Is a constitutional government
Every public officer, whether belonging 90 the Legis
! ject 20 a written Constitution and every person
however exalted or humble owes obedience to it's
Third-The President OF the United States is an
iegisatye functions The Imposition by executive
order order OF customs euties on commerce between the
/ United States after the Treaty OF Peace and the
exchange OF ratications Is unauthorized and void,
! and the collection of such duties is without war
Fourth-A government without limitations was
never intended by the founders OF the Nation.
| stitGtionai reoubiic which furnishes written
guarantee of protection TO all its inhabitants. The
/ idea that In portion OF the country the Execu-
tive and Legislative authority is subject restric
is without any restriction limitation-that in
part republican government exists and in another
theory upon which the Government was founded.
| Bill of Rights.
| CONSTITUTION AND NEW TERRITORIES
From the foregoing general propositions Mr..
| Carlisle deduces these conclusions:
The Constitution is the supreme law OF the land.
Since the Constitution extends 10 the furthermost
territory of the United States. and is the funda-
mental law thereof. the question arises TO when
the Constitution extends 10 newly acquired terri
| tory.
Our contention is that when and at the time the
| ereignty which has held II and becomes possessed
by the United States the sovereignty of the United
| States extends thereto and that that sovereignty
abides there by virtue OF the Constitution.
Mr.. Carlisle then quotes the decision Of the
United States Supreme Court the celebrated case
| OF Cross VS. Harrison. This decision, which was
written by Justice Wayne. was employed by Attor-
| ney-General Griggs in his great argument IN the
Goetze and Pepke cases. The decision is follows:
BY the ratification OF the treaty with Mexico)
! California became part or the United states and
| as there is nothing dinerently stipulated In the
treaty with respect 20 commerce, it became in
stantly bound and privileged by the laws which
! Congress had passed 10 raise revenue from duties
on imports and tonnage. This Government
| de facto will OF course. exercise no power incon-
sistent with the provisions OF the Constitution OF
the United States which is the supreme law of the
| land. For this reason no import duties be
levied in California on articles the growth produce
| or manufacture OF the United states as no such
duties be imposed in any part OF the Union
IN te d IN aiifornis unnn snch fore,sn nrndIc
tions have already paid duties in any of
! ports or entry. ior the OBVIOUS reason that Gait
Attorney-General Griggs quoted the foregoing de-
csion in the Goetze-Pepke cases because Justice
Wayne took pains insert the saving clause that
there is nothing differently stipulated In treaty
with respect to commerce." The Governments con-
tention is that something different with respect
to commerce. is distinctly stipulated ia the Paris
Treaty in that clause which provides that the civil