The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1901-01-11

not the case, FOR the same duties are
charged on goods from a territory going
"a Porto Rico as srom "A state.
That tho tax levied IS a local tax was
deaiod, but It was denominatgd tax
for local purposes
Mr. Carlisle reed portions of thc Porto
Rican act establishing the rates of duty
and disposition of the moneys collected
as a basis for his complete argument and
said the court would see that on ali goods
from tho United States 90 Porto Rico
there should be- levied i5 per cent of du.
Ties on foreign goods with thc internal
revenue Of Porto Rico addd aud that
cords from Porto Rico Co. The United
States enter upon the payment of rs per
cent of customs with internal revenue only
added when the good are of Porto Rico
manufacture, while goods from othcg
countries paying the Porto Rico Internal
revenue may come into this country With
ont internal revenue tax.
I'VE insist he added that this Is not
an import duty We object 20 the form
Under which the government seized our
goods and held them on their arrival at
Porto Rico until we paid them tribute IN
the FORM Of tax
An import Is sometlfng he said, coming
from foreign country Porto Rico c,tn-
not be foreign country. for its courts
send appeals 60 this body This is there
fore not am import tax, but an export tax
upon goods sent out OF these states. ana
.hehre are are two specifications against
such export duties Opinions OF the court
were read 20 show that the tribunal had
held that 90 duty might De lam on ex-
ports from one state 20 another as 90 q
foreign country
Following this Mr. Carlisle argued
that there could he mo- export duty and
said that there must be n fixed tax some
time when Porto Rico ceased 20 bo "a for-
,ign territory and even with that point
he urged that the tax must be consider
ed unconstitutional II congress could levy
/ export duties. he said, there would De- as
many rates of duty as there are states
or territories. for there IS no provision for
uniformity Of export taxation
I Argument was made that the tax was ln
export tax and as such in direct violation
I Of the constitution Of the United States.
This tax, ne said, was under this law as
Just and general as tarln law is said
to be local tax. 10 Is collected every
where IN eevry state and territory
How can it becalled locals? Is the fac,
shat the proceeds of thos tax are to be
used for certain purposes Of NOR. conse-
quence than that the tax Is laid first and
appropriated afterward, In proving tina;
this Is q local taxi More than half the
general duties are. he said. collected al
New York, yet II is not local tax, but a
tax the proceeds of which may be used
everywhere
1--WE deny" na went on, that congress
has any right 10 impose amy such ta2
upon the trade between the states and
territories Congress may regulate com
merce and may govern the territory bu'
under the guise OF governing that territory
may not govern the states OF New Yori
of Pennsylvania. When It places m'
upon the goods taken To Porto Rico It &
governing the state The limitation mus
follow every power
The power OF congress 10 leglslate mus
be subject to all Limitation of the coo
stMuton chad It not been that Africai
slavery was involved" Nfr Carlisle said il
conclusion, there would have been no di
ssent from the decision in the Scott case
Now we have case with the negr
eliminated We have a case where citiz
ems are taking their property into terri
tory Of the United States, but In whic
there Is 10 conflicting point Ike slavery
The conditions are changed. Then tn
unlimited power Of congress was urge
BY the advocates OF slavery; now 1t
urged by the advocates Of freedom. u !
Is true that there lies this arbitrary powe
IA the constitution we should be delight
ed that II was not discovered for NOR
than 100 years, until We had grea
country made up OF free states and hlle
with free people
He did not believe that the trainers q
the constitution ever meant 70 give 20 con
gress unlimited power over the lives am
property OF the people
When Mr. Carlisle concluded, Senate
! Lindsay. Of Kentucky began the argumeu
for the plaintiff In the next OF the Port
Rican cases, that OF Huns vs.. the Me-
York city and Porto Rico steamshi
company The case is ono involving th
question OF whether or not congress ha
the right 20 make the trade with the il
lands coasting trade or foreign trade.