The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-05-28
Congress Invested With the
Right to Govern.
THE FORAKER ACT CONSTITUTIONAL
The Territories Declared to be States
as the Word is Used in Treaties
But Not States as the Term
10 Ueed EIsAwherA
is Used Elsewhere
(By the Associated Press.)

(By the Associated Press)
Washinton. May 27.-The United States
Supreme Court today handed down opin
ions covering all of the issues on the new
insular possessions which have been in
controversy. Although several of the de-
cisions upheld the contestants on certain
issues raised, yet in the most important
decision, that of Downes against Bidwell,
Justice Brown announced the sweeping de-
cision of the court upholding the general
attitude and policy OF the Government up
TO the present time. The effect of this
decision is to affirm the constitutionality
of the Foraker Act and to give Congress
power to deal with newly acquired terri
tory in such manner as the legislative
branch may consider suitable for the new
territory. The decision also has the eff
feet of declaring that the new insular pos
sessions do not by virtue of the treaty
a. cCesien acuuiro all the privileges and
rights OF the Constitution.
justice Brown also delivered the opinion
Of the court in the case of Downes VS..
Collector Bidwell, of the New York port,
in which suit was brought by Downes to
$659.35 exacted and paid under protest
upon certain oranges consigned to the
plaintiff at New York and brought thither
from the port of San Juan in the Island
of Porto Rico during the month of No
vember, 1900.
The case involved the question wheth
er merchandise brought into the port of
New York from Porto Rico since the pas
sage of the Foraker act is exempt from
duty, Notwithstanding the third section
of that act which requires the payment
of fifteen per cent of the duties which
are required to be levied, collected and
paid upon like articles of merchandise
imported from foreign countries
The Circuit Court of the United States
for the Southern District of New York
sustained the Government in this posi-
ton in imposing a duty.
The Supreme Court affirmed the opinion
of the Circuit Court, saying in conclu-
sion:
1--WE are of opinion that the Island of
Porto Rico is a territory appurtenant
and belonging to the United States, but
not part of the United States within
the revenue clause of the Constitutions
that the Foraker Act is constitutional so
far as it imposes duties upon imports
from such island and that the plaintiff
cannot recover back the duties exacted
in this case
The opinion of the court went into the
case very fully. Justice Brown early in
his opinion outlined the distinction be-
tween this case and the De Lima case,
which had just been decided, saying
I'm the case of De Lima VS.. Bidwell, we
hold that upon the ratification of the
Treaty of Peace with Spain, Porto Rico
ceased TO be foreign country, and that
duties were no longer collectible upon
merchandise brought from that island. We
are now asked to hold that it became
part of the United States within that pro-
vision of the Constitution which declares
that "all duties, imposts and excuses shall
be uniform throughout the United
States" Cart. 1, Sec 81.
IF Porto Rico be part of the United
States. the Foraker Act imposing duties
upon it's products is unconstitutional not
only by reason of a violation of the uni
formity clause, but because by section
vessels bound to or from one State"
duties in another"
THE case involves the broader question
whether the revenue clauses of the Con-
stitution extend Of their own force to our
newly acquired territories. The Constitu-
tion itself does not answer the question.
It's solution must be found in the nature
of the Government created by that in
stTument, in the opinion of its contem-
poraries, in the practical construction put
upon it by Congress- and in the decisions
of this court"
Justice Brown then entered upon a re-
view Of the formation of the Government
and the constitutional provision requiring
that duties, imposts and excuses shall be
uniform throughout the United States,
saying that sit is explained by subse-
quent provisions of the Constitution that
mo tax or duty shall be laid on articles
exported from any State, and no prefer
ence shall be given by any regulation of
commerce or revenue to the ports of one
State over those of another; nor shall yes
sells bound to or from one State be
obliged to enter clear or pay duties in
another
In short, he concluded, on that point
the Constitution deals with States, their
people and their representatives.
Acquisition of territory and the forma-