The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1901-06-05
FROM THE NATIONS CAPITAL.
Nrons Oay O.oa Correspondent.

g WARRINGTON. D. c., Jaue 8. 1901.
The event of the week has, OF course,
been the extraordinary decislon of the
Supreme Court-extraordinary not be-
causc it was decided contrary to the
hnnee ct at least half the people Of the
Unitsf; states, but extraordinary DO.
cause OF the wide divergence Of opinion
amongst the Justices. Broadly speak
| Ing. four of these held that the Cnnati-
tuition followed the flag in oil cases of
annexation, and four that Congress had
full powers to control all territories Of
United States, irrespective Of the Con-
stitution. One, Justice Brown, Joined
with the first four in regard to cases
that arose before Congress took action
in regard to Porto Rico, and with the
last four in cases arising after that
event. 1t is thought extremely doubt
ful whether such & decision so render
ed, will command respect or will stand
the test of time. Based, as it is, on n
bare majority of one, protested against
by all the rest Of the Court as ssover-
throwing the basis of our constitutional
law" can it, it is asked, be said to set
tie even the one special point it de-
cides, to say nothing of the momen-
tous issues it throws into dispute7 In
short, can it endure permanently and
withstand the attacks that time and
its own weakness are sure to bring?
Meanwhile the Court has adjourned for
four months, leaving the Philippines
cases and the power of Congress to
order the collection of duties on United
States goods shipped to Forto Rico,
hanging in the air. The Court, be it
remembered, decided the "first Dooley
case," concerning importations into
Porto Rico from this country before
the passage of tho Forto Rican Act,
adversely to the Government. 1t did
not decide the Second Dooley casen
which arose after that Act at all. The
Inference is that the Court is badly
divided on this question. The stumb-
ling block, of course, is whether such
duties do not amount to an export tax
on goods shipped from the United
States. -Four Justices OF the Court
have held that all of the revenue por-
tion of the Foraker Act was unconsti-
tutional. If, therefore, one more Jus
tice who believed that the rest of the
Foraker Act was unconstitutional
should happen to take the notion that
duties levied in Porto Rico were to all
intents and purposes a burden or tax
upon exports of the United States.
then decision again st the Govern
ment would become necessary. Alto
gether the matter is left in such q
state that it will take dozens of other
decisions before any one can be sure
just what the Court does hold.
The announcement by Senator Lodge
that he will. If appointed to tb - Chair
manship of the Foreign Relations
Committee Of the Senate, introduce q
resolution looking to the abrogation of
the Clayton Bulwer treaty, has fright
cned the anglomaniacs in the Cabinet
and the railway interests which have
been using the treaty to cloak their op-
position to any canal at all. Mr.. Lodge
can only become chairman by the de-
cislon of his two seniors, Frye and
Cullom, to stay at the heads of the
important Committees over which they
now preside. The chances are, how
ever, that one Of them will be induced
to give up his present place in order to
Keep Lodge from his abrogating act.
Senator Cuilom has come ont in an in
terview in which he opposes Mr..
Lodges plan and shows plainly that
nothing will be done if he becomes
Chairman. He says: 81 am in favor
OF abrogating the Clayton Bulwer
treaty by agreement, as this is the only
way in which it can be done properly.
1t must be remembered that q treaty is
solemn agreement between two ma
tlons, and merely because one party to
IL becomes dissatisfied with it's provis-
ions it has no right to break the agree
ment abruptly. Toabrogate the treaty
by legislative enactment is forcible
and improper manner OF escaping the
carrying ont of an agreement which
was entered into in good faith. The
latter course may be cause for war;
!, inis ls the same old story we have been
listening to for so long.
While it is most probable that neith-
er Tillman nor McLaurin will venture
to do so, still there is little doubt that
II either of them chose TO withdraw his
resignation he would be sustained
therein by the Senate, as n resignation
dated ahead has been held not to be
resignation, but o mere notice of inten-
tion to resign. Hence, the So called
resignation is not legally such until
September Is, when it becomes opera
tive; until then. either mar may with