The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-08-11
Q Q $500


fu Error. IS George r Bioweil.
in error 10 the Circuit Court Of
TIE United States soF the South
ern District Of New York May
-. 1901
This vas an action originally insti-
i1ted Ia the Supreme Court Of the
state of New York By the hrm Of
10 A De Lima 4 Co. against the
collector OF the port Of New York
10 recover back duties alleged % have
been illegally exacted and paid under
protest upon certain impOrtations
al sugar from San Juan IN the island
Of Porto Rico, during the autumn Of
1893 and subsequent 70 the ceasion OF
the island 10 the United States.
Upon the petition Of the collector,
and pursuant 70 r. 5. sec. CAS-. the
case was removed by certiorari to the
Circuit Court Of the United States.
On which the defendant appeared and
domurrcd 10 the complaint upon the
ground that i did not state cause OF
action. and also that the court had
no Jurisdiction OF the case. The de-
murrer was sustained upon both
grounds. and the action dismissed
Hence this writ OF error.
In this and the following cases.
which may be collectively designated
Is the 'Insular Tariff Cases" the
dates here given become material:
In July. 1898. Porto Rico was in
vaded by the military forces OF the
United States under General Miles.
on August -, 1898. during the pro
Eress OF the campaign. a protocol was
entered into between the Secretary
OF state and the French Ambassador
on the part Of Spain. providing for a
suspension OF hostiiities, the cession
OF the island and the conclusion OF
treaty OF peace. $50 Stat. 1742l
On October IS. Porto Rico was
evacuated by the Spanish forces.
On December 10. 1898. such treaty
was signed az Paris lunder which
snain ceded to the United States the
island Of Porto nicu.l Was ratified
by the President and Senate. Febru-
airy 6. 1899. and by the Queen Regent
OF Spain. March 10. 1899. $50 Stat
l754)
on March ?, 1899. an act was pass
ed making an appropriation to carry
out the obligations OF the treaty.
On april II. 1899. the ratifications
were exchanged. and the treaty pro-
claimed at Washington.
on April u. 1900. an act was pass
ed. commonly called the Foraker act.
10 provide temporary revenues and
a civil government for Porto Rico.
which took effect May l. 1900.
Mr.. Justice Brown delivered the
opinion OF the Court.
This case raises the single question
whether territory acquired by the
United States by cession from for
eign power remains a foreign eoun-
try" within the meaning Of the tariff
laws.
I DID the question Of jurisdiction
raised by the demurrer involve only
the jurisdiction OF the Circuit Court
as a Federal court. we should be OBJ
liged 20 say that the defendant was
not In a position 20 make this claim.
since the case was removed 90 the |
Federal court upon his own petition. |
Il Is no infringement upon the an
Client maxim OF the law that consent |
cannot confer jurisdiction. to hold |
that. where a party has procured the |
removal % a cause from a State court /
upon the ground that he is lawfully |
entitled 20 a trial Ia a Federal court /
he Is estopped 20 deny that such /
removal wss lawful. II the Federal /
court could take Jurisdiction OF the /
case or that the Federal court did not
have the same right TO pass upon the /
questions az issue that the State court |
would have had II the cause had re-
NAMED there Defendant neither /
gains nor loses by the removal. and |
the ease proceeds as II no such remov-
al had taken place. tCowley v. North
ern Pacific Railroad Co. iSs L. s
sea. SIS. Mansfield Railway Co. v,
Swan. III Z. s. STs: Mexican Nat.
Raiiroaa Y. Davidson. Isl {. s. 20il 1
This. however. Is more a matter Of
words than % substance. as the de- /
PENDANT nnouestionabiy has the right
70 show that the State court had no
Jurisdiction. or that the complaint
did not set forth facts sufficient 70
constitute n cause OF action. This we
understand 10 be the substance Of
the defense in this connection.
by r 5. sec. 1881. 4 was enacted
that the Decision u the collector
as 20 the rate and amount OF duties
q Be paid upon imported MERRIAM
disc should be final and conclusive.
unless the owner or agent entered a
protest. end within thirty days aD-
peale5 thercfrom 20 the Secretary
q the Treasury, and. further. that
the decision 81 the SECRETARY should
be naal and conclusive. unless suit
were troathf within ninety DAYS after
IRE decision d the Secretary. Nv
= sec. S9lt. any person having made
payment under such protest was xiv
en the riStt e bring an action a
law and recover hack any excess ~
duties So paid.
The law stood 81 tAis condition an.
ti sene le 1850. when an act known
e 'ae Customs Administrative Act
ne abere sections IN. S. SECS ses1