The united opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1881-1970, 1901-05-31

'The United States Supreme Court Re-
verses Decision In De Lima Case
and Sustains Circuit Court In
DowneH Case-Justice Brown
Delivers Opinion In Both
Cases-Dissenting Opin-
ions Are Presented.
WASHINGTON, May 2S.-In the
United States supreme court yesterday
opinions were handed down in all but
two of the cases before that court in
voIving the relation of the United States
to its insular possessions. The two cases
in which no conclusion was announced
were those known as the Ia diamond
rings case and the second Of the Dooley
cases The undecided Dooley case deals
with a phase of the Porto NRican ques-
ton, and the diamond ring case involves
the right TO the free importation of mer-
chandise from the Philippines to the
United States. The original intention OF
the court had been to adjourn for the
term after yesterdays sitting, but dis
scussiOn of the cases passed on took about
fee hours, SO the court adjourned until
today, when it is presumed the remain
ing cases will be passed on.
OF the several cases decided yesterday
the two which attracted the greatest
share of attention from the court were
what is known as the De Lima case and
that known as the Downes case, and of
these two the opinion in the DOwnes case
is considered the most farreaching, as it
affects our future relations, whereas the
De Lima case dealt with a transitional
phase of our insular relations. The De
Lima case was the first to receive the at
tention of the court, and as it appeared
to be quite sweepingly opposed to the
governments contentious many persons
precipitately arrived at the conclusion
that the government had been worsted all
along the line. This view suffered a de-
cided change when the conclusion was an
nounced in the Downes case. The court
was very evenly divided on both cases,
but political lines were not at all con-
trolling.
The De Lima case involved the power |
of the government to collect a duty on |
goods imported into the United States
from Porto Rico after the ratification of
the treaty of Paris and before the pas
sage of the Porto Rican act. The court
said the governments contention in this
case WAS substantially claim that Porto
turned upon that contention. The court
held that the position was not well taken,
that Porto Rico was not at the time for
eign territory and that therefore the duty
which had been collected must be re-
turned
The decision in the Downes case fol-
lowed the history of the dealings Of tho
United States with Porto Rico a step
further That case dealt with the le-
gality of the eXaction of duties on goods
imported from Porto Rico into New York
after the passage of the Foraker act pro-
viding for duty upon goods shipped
from the United States into Porto Rico
and also on those shipped from Porto
Rico to the United States. In this case
the court held that such exaction was
legal and constitutional.
The point of the two opinions consid-
cred collectively is that Porto Rico was
never after the acquisition of that island
foreign territory; that until congress act
ed upon the question no duty could be
collected, but that as soon as congress
outlined a method of controlling the Is
lands revenues that action became bind
ing-in other words, that congress has
power under the constitution to prescribe
the manner of collecting the revenues of
the country's insular possessions and has
the right TO lay duty on goods imported
into our insular possession from the Unit
ed States or exported from them into
the United States. 1t holds, in brief, that
for. taxation purposes they are not a
part of the United States to the extent
that goods shipped between their ports
and the United States are entitled to the
same treatment as though they were
shipped between New York and New
Orleans.
Justice Brown delivered the courts
opinion in both, and there were vigorous
opinions in both. In the
Downes case four of the nine members Of
the court united in an opinion, charac-
terizing ia strong language the opinion
of the majority in that case. In this
opposing opinion the chief justice and
Justices Harlan, Brewer and Peckham
united, and the chief justice and Justice
Harlan presented their views in writing.
Justices Gray, Shiras, White and Nc.
Kenna also, while agreeing with the con.
clusion announced by Justice Brown, an.
that they had reached the con.
clusion by different lines of argument,
and Justices Gray, White and McKenna
opinions outlining their re.
spective positions. Justices Shiras, I
White and McKenna also dissented in
The De Lima case, uniting in an opinion. I
Justice Gray also presented an independ-
emit and dissenting opinion in that case
The small courtroom was crowded tC
repletion throughout the day, prominent
government officials and many attorneys
being present, and the proceedings were
followed from start to finish with keen
interest.
DECISION INTERPRETED.