Middletown transcript., 1901-06-08
THE PHILIPPINES

lie 0HnlldQolpnla fT6SS WHICH L.
recognized as an administration
organ, and always gets very
near the truth of the policy anc
aims of the government, boldly
announces the purposes OF the
President in reference to the
Philippines
president Mckinley has fol
lowed the example Of the Su
preme Court in treating the
Philippines as being under con
ditions sufficiently different in
law and in fact to render it un.
necessary to treat the archipe,
lago and it's administration as
affected, for the present, by the
recent decision of the court OF
last resort. If no such differ.
ence existed the court would
have decided the fourteen
diamonds case" when it decided
the Delima case. Because some
such difference existed, it post
poned decision upon issues
argued by the Attorney General
as precisely similar to the cases
from Porto Rico.
''The treaty Of Paris began
the difference between the posi-
tion held by the Philippines and
Porto Rico. By the fifth ar
ticle of the treaty Spanish
ships and merchandise" we're ad-
mitted for ten years "to the ports
of the Philippine Islands on the
same terms as ships and mer-
chandise of the United States. p"
No. such provision was made in
Porto Rico. An analogous pro-
vision with reference to Florida
was early held by the Supreme
Court to be valid in spite of the
constitutional requirement that
"all duties, imports and excises
shall be uniform throughout the
United States" This special
privilege in the Philippines is
undoubtedly therefore binding,
yet it manifsstly alters the posi-
ton in which the Philippines
stand to the tariff as compared
with Porto Rico. Whether this
would alter the conclusion reach
ed the Delima case, that duties
could not be collected under the
Dingley tariff on imports from
Porto Rico from the cession to
the Foraker act, no one can say,
but the clause plainly creates a
differing condition and implies a
"foreign" or at least q special
condition in the Philippines sub
sisting for ten years after the
cession.
The Senate continued this diff
erence by passing the McEnery
resolution. introduced February
6 by Senator McEnery, it was
passed February IA by a vote of
26 to %. 1t ran as follows
Resolued, That by the ratification OF
the pending treaty of peace with Spain 1t
is not intended to incorporate the inha-
bitants of said islands into citizenship OF
the United States, nor is it intended to
permanently annex said islands as an
integral part of the territory of the United
States; but it is the intention of the
United States to establish on said islands
a government suitable to the wants and
conditions of the inhabitants OF said
islands, to repare them for local self
government and in due time to make such
disposition of said islands as will best
promote the interests of the citizens OF
the United States and the inhabitants of
said islands.
This was a joint resolution. 1t
was never passed by the House.
If it had been it would not have
been law. 1t would have been a
mere academic opinion. 1t is no
more for the Senate. It sue
ceeded and did not accompany
the ratification of the treaty.
The treaty was ratified by two
thirds majority, 81 to q. The
resolution barely received the
votes on both sides of a ma
iority of the Senate, 26 to %. 1t
expressed the opinion of the SEN
ate. 1t did no more. 1t is diff
cult to see how on any possible
view it could be held even to be a
contemperaneous Interpretation
of the treaty. Yet it was quoted
by the Solicitor General in the
argument on the Hawaiian cases
as Indicating that Congress could
part with the Philippines because
they we're not yet "an integral
part of the United States under
the Constitution" Mr.. Justice
White, in a colloquy, spoke of it
as creating "suspensive con-
dition." His language indicates
that he has in his mind the view,
since embodied in his opinion
that a treaty and its concomitant
acts measured the power Of Con-
gress over new territory. What
ever the effect of this resolution,
great or small, it manifestly Gre
ated a condition, if any, different
from that in Porto Rico.
Third, resistance to the "pos-
session. of the United States
sprang up in the Philippines the
day before cession took effect.
In dealing with Porto Rico, in
the Delima case, Mr.. Justice
Brown laid stress on "cession"
and "possession" in that island.
Possession" in the international
sense existed in the Philippines
for the United States, from the
ratification of the treaty. Peace
; full possession did not Hostil-
ties continued.
PENINSULA CROP REPORTS
- - f-o,,, Ala -of4inaru