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

New Yo,l
was taken from this decision to the TTn;ta An appsl
Court The Goetse case of the InsI ~ SalGue
decided What did the United States Suner IS recently
TINS case a was 50 strongly eonfmatory of tho W with
IN the PeacocS caseI fetersed it. Oh Sup CT pss ssg
With Fleming T. Page overruled and G,i ~ hen 74S
reversed, it seems that the reasoning il M oaed Stat
mains with us little less than disanbo,,,I Gaze
stance on which to hang the decision in tn, 'm sub
The decision in the De Lima ease settle, vi"
squarey, that is that when possession wo I; que Question
Newlands resolution the Hawaiian Islands h,. ucf the
rory of the United States and was not fo; 10nsle ter
any purpose The theory of 'inchoate or narto 1s lo
finds no support in that decision. The question
case was whether the island of Porto Rico after M - a
OF the treaty OF ceson was foreign country in tho s
Of the Dngley tariff law authorizing the collection oe ua
duties goods imported from foreign countrvn ~ A
said that when the island ceased to be foreign it became @
and it ceased to be foreign immediately on the b a'
Publications OF the treaty of cesson and the delivery Of
sion Hereunder In the Bidaoeu case the Question ~ s
or not after the passage of the Foraker Act proyd ~
temporary government for the island it then became Nv
the United States within the provision of the Cons,
requiring all duties etc. be uniform throughout tho T
States The court held that the island was q" TERRITORY
tenant and belonging to the United States but not mart I
United States within the clauses Of the Constb
The reasoning by which the court arrived at the ca
and judgment announced in those interesting sna
sructve and the individual opinions of the judges ara ,
with learning but the important fact be lost sight
that all of the questions raised and passed upon in those ~
related to the clauses of the Constitution
that affected property only That question was raised n
tive to the fundamental safeguards life and liberty cn
in the 9Th and 9Th Amendments These last are of different
character and cannot be considered with the former unless life
and liberty placed commercial basis This cannot
done under the Constitution and laws of the United States
This distinction that the failed make the first
Edcards case involving liberty, where the decision was
based the reasoning in the Peacock case involving
a commercial question pure and simple.
Judge Brannon of the Supreme Court of West Virginia saws
t8tL
pooer OF Congress the territories except that found
e Fifth and Sint Amendments, b they bear sVay whaa
the flag territory iohn the cpiI jurisdiction
the United States Those amendments tie the hands of Con.
gess ohereue 1t makes toos for cuil government he italics
mne) Justice Brewer so declared The Constitution
stretched these islands the moment they became territory
of the nation to give them freedom, just the Thirteenth
Amendment abolished slavery at in Alaska held in
I-re Sab Quah (31 Fed Rep. 327). The proclamahcm Of
President Mckinley have declared and admitted these pnn
cpes of free government the right of Fpnos and Porto
Rcans He directed the military commander and the
msoners sent to the Philippine Islands So this governmental
action comedies this doctrine" Brannon, Fourteenth Amend
ment PIP. sc and 81
The discussion of the question whether the Constitution came
these islands propo rigore with the acceptance OF the
cession the United States by the express terms OF the
Newands resolution, whether it in whole or psr
only, may be interesting and profitable but not atoe1
pertinent to the issue presented The question ought 70
determined by the language of the Resolution independent
the fact whether the Constitution remained at nome
By the of the resolution certain municipal esau"
of the Hawaiian Islands not inconsistent with the Consuuu
of the United States continued force until such ue
the Congress of the United States should otherwise determine
Congress have had purpose in placing tins phrase
the resolution 1t possible that it inserted out OF aO
of caution 1t possible that the representation haq
made Congress that the government OF the HaWalan %
was 'he best on EARTH that American civilization was
established here and that the laws and institutions were m
after American laws and institutions 1t IS possible th
representations believed and relied by the author
resolution or the committee that reported it but out OF
caution to avoid any possibility of continuing IN 1orce az
the Hawaiian laws that contrary to the
the United Staes if there any, this phrase was
This it the clear purpose and intent OF u
this Interpretation correct it follows that any laws OF s
waan Islands that contrary to the Constitutes no
United States were annulled and abrogaed by the
matter whether the Constitution here or eEe" Iou
seems to be conceded that the provision OF the fAW II
authorized the Circuit Judges perform the 1uncO ron
grand jury and for nine jurors to return verdict ~ TO
trary to the Constitution. If these laws are no" we
the Constitution they July th' n0'0, ;tutop
abrogaed and annuled by the resolution Inc ~ July
has not changed It is the now as on the I'LL 'A'
1898. 49,. 80 treat
The argument advanced the hearing that ' 70 hold
deal of money" to convict these petitioners anu arv