Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1901-05-28

Sharp Criticism.
Justice White said the court would,
later in the Downs case, hold that
congress had the power, under the
Porto Rican tariff act, to impose
tariff duty on goods coming from Por-
to Rico. He expressed himself as un-
able to conceive of what theory they
thus proceeded, and expressed the
opinion that it was due to confusion of
thought in the Delima case. 1t was
settled by law, by decisions in the
Woodruff case and in the Houston
case, he said, that the power of con-
gress to levy an import duty did not
extend to any territory that is part
of the United States, and the result Of
the majority opinion in the Downs
case thus would be to bring about a
state of things where territory was
a part of the United States before the
Foraker act, became foreign territory
after the Foraker act. The dissent
ing justices throughout their dissents
took occasion to sharply criticise the
apparent conflict between majority
ruling in the Delima case and that
which would follow later in the
Downs case.
On the Downs case the court decid-
ed, in an opinion by Justice Brown,
that while Porto Rico is territory of
the United States it is not such for
tariff purposes and the Foraker act is
constitutional. The judgment Of the
circuit court is affirmed A dissent
ing opinion was handed down by JUS
tice White in which Justices Shiras
and MoKppn oopnurrod
The Armstrong Case.
After Justice White concluded the
opinion Justice Brown. announced the
decision of the court in the case of
Armstrong VS.. the United States, COW
ering the shipment Of goods to Porto
Rico. This case, the court said, is
similar to the Dooley case. While du-
ties prior to the treaty were proper,
those subsequent to the treaty were
not. The judgment of the circuit court
| is reversed. Justice White announced
the dissent of Justices Gray, Shiras,
| McKenna and himself; sg
Should Not Closely Follow Precedent.
/ Justice Brown next announced an
opinion in the case of Downs VS.. Bid
| well relating to the shipment of
oranges from Porto Rico to New York
after the enactment of the Foraker
act. The objections to the lower court S
| jurisdiction was overruled. Brown
then proceeded to show the difference
in the question in this case from that
| involved in the first case and decided
that this difference is being based on
time and the course taken by the ex-
ecutive and legislative branches of the
government. He said there is consid.
cradle divergence in the opinion of the
court in the past, and to much weight
should not be given to particular
/ phases of past decisions, such as that
referring to the supreme authority of
congress under the constitution. AT.
ter analyzing the case of Loughborough
vs.. Blake, the justice summed up the
conditions under which territories not
in the same positions as states.
Has Some Rights Under Constitution
The United States supreme court to.
day handed down an opinion covering
all the issues raised, yet in the most
important. decision, that of Downs
against Bidwell, Justice Brown an
nounced sweeping decision of the
court upholding the general attitude
and policy of the government up to
the present time. In effect this deci
sion is to affirm the constitutionality
of the Foraker act, and to give con
gress power to deal with newly ac
quired territory in such manner as
the legislative branch may consider
suitable for new territory. The deci
sion also has the effect of declaring
that the new insular possessions dc
not, by virtue of the treaty of cession
acquire all the privileges and rights
of the constitution