The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-12-03
lmportations from the Philippines
Are Entitled to Exemption.
SUPREME COURT THOUGH SUSTAINED
FORAKER ACT FOR PORTO RICO.
Philippines Held Not to Be Foreign Territory, Not
withstanding the Resolution Adopted by the
Senate After Acquiring the Islands

washington becemner @.-oplnlonS were
rendered In the United States supreme
court today In the last two Of the iusu
lar test eases. One Of them was that
known as the Fourteen diamond rings
case, involving the relationship OF the Unit
ed States TO the Philippine Islands from
a tarih point Of view aud the other. what
is known as tho Dooloy case No. ., invclv
ing tho consttutionality or the collections
OF duty on goods shipped from New York
court, through Justice Fuller, held that
the diamond rings brought In from the
Philippines and over which the case arose
should have been exempt from duty under
the Paris treaty, MS that treaty made The
Philippines American territory.
The decision IN the Philippines case fol-
lowed closely that OF the hrst Porto Rictu
case Of last term.
In the second nooley case. II was held
that the duty collected on goods carried
from New York to Porto Rico was per
missihle, but that 1t was In reality tax
for tho benefit Of the Porto Ricans them.
selves rathcr than an export duty as was
| claimed ny tho merchants who antagoniaed
the government in the ease.
| In both cases there were dissenting opin.
! Ions concurrrd in by four of the nina
! justices OF the court
! 1t Is generally believed that the Gpdue
| In the Philippines case win lead to early
Efforts 10 secure legislation for the reGu
| lation Of our commercial relations with
those islands. As tho Porto Rican opinion
sustaIns the copstiutionality Of the Forak
or act no such necessity will arise With
refercuce To Porte. Rico =
| In the Philippines case the opinion was
handed down by Chicf Justice Iuner.
Tho opinion was adverse Ia tho claims
Of the government on tho ground that
tho Philippine Islands at the time tho
rings were brought into American terri
tory were domestic territory. The decision
| IN the De Lima, Porto Rican cases, were
cited Mt length and It. was held that the
resolutions adopted by congress concern,
Ing the Philippines were not sufficient
10 change the situation.
Tho chief Justice concluded his opinion
by reversing the decision Of tho court he
low. Justice Drawn read an opinion con
curing In tho result hut differing from
| the conclusions drawn on minor points
Justices Gray, Shras, White and Nc
| Kenna dsscntcd. In his opinion Chief
Justice Fuller said that the Philippine
islands ceased to he foreign territory rs
soon as the Paris treaty OF peace was
signed and the resolution "a which he re
fcrred as being ineffective and not bind
ing. was the resolution adopted by the
senate soon after the ratification Of the
treaty
After stating the case at some length
Chief Justice Fuller quoted somewhat ex
tensively from the opinion Of this court
in the case Of De Lima vs.. Bidwell. His
principal quotation from that case was
the paragraph setting forth the theory that
a country remains foreign with respect to
the tariff laws until congress has acted
by embracing It Within the customs. The
opinion then continues as follows:
mo reason Is perceived for any diner
ent ruling as to the Philippines. by the
third article Of the treaty Spain coded 70
the United States the archipelago known
as the Philippine Islands aud the United
States agreed to pay 10 Spain the sum OF
! gsbsVfpfVNV NlNnlu iUlft lApuNUht > NJ AAfah ~
was ratified; congress appropriated the
money, the ratification was proclaimed.
The treaty-making power, the executive
power and the legislative power concured
in the completion Of the transaction.
"The Philippines thereby ccnsed, in the
language OF the treaty, TO be spanish.
CeasDg 10 he Spanish territory. ceased 10
be foreign country. They came under the
complete and absolute sovereignty and.
dominion OF the United States .And so be-
came territory Of the United States over
which civil government could be estatFe
llsned. The result was the same, although
there was no stipulation that the native
inhabitants should be Incorporated into
The l>dy polite and none securing 10 them
the right 10 choose their nationality. Their
allegianc, became due TO the United States
and they became entitled To It's protection.
But II IS said that the case OF the
Philippines Is to be distinguished from that
OF Porto Rico because on February IA. 1900.
after the ratification OF that treaty, The
senate resolved that by the ratification OF
the treaty Of peace with Spaiu II is not in
tended 70 incorporate the Inhabitants OF the
philippine Islands into citizenship of the
United States, etc, or 10 permanently an
mex those Islands.
"We do not consider this to have the
force and effect of a resolution OF this sort,