The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-05-28

hiAhSSllS out no act Is necessary 10 make
it domestic territory, if once it has been
ceded to the United States. This theory
also presupposes that territory may be
ned indefinitely by the United States;
that ic may be treated in every particu-
lar, except for tariff purposes, as domes-
tic. territory: and yet that the territory
may still remain a foreign country. To
hold that this can be done as matter of
law, we deem to be pure judicial legisla-
ton. We find no warrant for it in the
constitution or in the powers conferred
qulcsce in this assumption that a terri
tory may be at the same time both for
eign and domestic.
I'VE are therefore of opinion that at
the time these duties were levied Porto
Rico was not a foreign country within
the meaning of the tariff laws, but
territory of the United States, that the
duties were illegally exacted and that
the plaintiffs are entitled to recover
them back"
Justice McKenna in his dissenting opin-
ion referred to the effects wrought upon
the country at large by decisions limit
ing the governmental authority in re-
spect to customs The industrial policy
of the country might be destroyed and
those signing the dissenting opinion could
not acquiesce in a view that might lead
TO such an end In the opinion of those
dissenting Justice MeKenna said the
judgment of the circuit court should be
affirmed.
The Opinion of the Court.
Justice Brown also delivered the opin-
ion of the court in the case of Dowf1es
vs.. Collector Bidwel of the New York
port, in which suit was brought by
Downes to recover back duties to the
amount of s659.35 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 November, 1900.
This case involved the question whether
| merchandise brought into the port of
New York from Porto Rico since the
passage 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 du-
| ties which are required to be levied, COL
lected and paid upon like articles of
merchandise imported from foreign coun-
tries
The Circuit Court of the United States
for the Southern District of New York
sustained the government in this position
in imposing duty
The Supreme Court affirmed the opin-
clusion:
I'VE are of opinion that the island of
| Porto Rico is a territory appurtenant and
| belonging to the United States, but not
| a part of the United States within the
revenue clause of the constitution; that
| the Foraker act is constitutional 50 far
as it imposes rules 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 DeLima case,
which had just been decided. saying:
I'm the case of DeLinra VS.. Btdwen we
| hold that upon the ratification of the
treaty Of peace with Spain. Porto Rico
| ceased to be a foreign country, and that
| duties were no longer collectible upon
| merchandise brought from that island.
The Point at Issue.
1--WE are now asked to hold that it be-
| came a. part of the United States within
| that provision of the constitution which
declares that all duties, imposts and ex-
| cises shall be uniform throughout the
United States (Art. /, sec. 81 If Porto
Rico be a part of the United States, the
| Foraker oct imposing duties upon its
| products is unconstitutional, not only by
reason of a violation of the uniformity
| clause, but because by section vessels
bound to or from one state cannot BE
obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in
| anotherr
| 1.-THE case also involves the broader
| question whether the revenue clauses of
| the constitution extend of their own force
to our newly acquired territories. The
| constitution itself does not answer the
question. It's solution must be found in
| the nature of the government created hy
| that instrument, in the opinion of its
contemporaries, in the practical construc-
| tion put upon 1t by Congress and in the
decisions of this court"
Justice Brown then entered upon a re-
view of the formation of the govern
ment and the constitutional provision re-
| quring that duties imposts and excises
shall be uniform throughout the United
| States. saying that 'it is explained by
| subsequent provisions of the constitution
| that no tax or duty shall be laid on ar
ticles exported from any state and no
| preference shall be given by any regula-
| tion of commerce or revenue to the ports
| of one state over those of another; nor
shall vessels bound to or from one state
| be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties
in another In short. he concludes on
that point. the constitution deals with
states, their people and their representa-
| tives."
The acquisition of territory and the for
nation of territories was discussed and
many authorities quoted. AS a result OF
these citations the Justice laid down the
| following general conclusions:
eliminating, then, from the opinions of
| this court all expressions unnecessary to
| the disposition of the particular case and
| cleaning therefrom the exact point de-
| cided in which the following propositions
may be considered as established:
| Now You See Ii and Now You Don't
First. That the District of Columbia
and the territories are not states, with
| in the judicial clause OF the constitution.
| giving Jurisdiction in cases between citi-
| zens of different states.
Second That territories are not
states, within the meaning of Revised
Statutes. section 7O9, permitting writs of
error from this court In cases where the
validity of states statute is drawn in
| question.
Third. That the District of Columbia
and the territories are states. as that
word is used in treaties with foreign
Powers, with respect to the ownership.
disposition and inheritance of property.
Fourth. That the territories are not
within the clause OF the constitution pro-
viding for the creation of a Supreme
Court as Congress may see fit TO estab-
| lish.
Fifth. That the constitution does not
apply TO foreign countries or TO trials
| .t~~,f.. co,,Jnotad and that CtonCroao mn sy