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

Washington, May 27.--The United States
Supreme Court to-day handed down opin-
ions covering all of the issues of the new
insular possessions which have been in
cisons uphold the contestants on certain
issues raised, yet in the most important
decision. that of Downes against Bid
well. Justice Brown announced the sweep
ing decision of the court, upholding the
general attitude and policy of the gov
ernment up to the present time. The ef-
feet of this decision is to affirm the con-
stitutionality of the Foraker act and to
rive Congress power to deal with newly
ACQUIRED territory in such manner as the
legislative branch may consider suitable
for the new territory. The decision also
has the effect of declaring that the new
insular possessions do not by virtue of
the treaty of cession acquire all the priv
Heges and rights of the constitution.
Opinions were handed down in
all but two of the cases be-
fore that court involving the re-
lation Of the United States to its insular
possessions. The two cases in which no
conclusion was announced. were those
known as the Fourteen Diamond Rings
case, and the second of the Dooley cases.
The undecided Dooley case deals with a
phase Of the Porto Rican questions, and
the diamond ring case involves the right
70 the free importation of merchandise
from the Philippines to the United States.
Tile original intention of the court lad
been to adjourn for the term, after to-
days sitting, but discussion of the cases
passed on to-day took about five hours,
80 the court adjourned until tomorrow,
when il is presumed the remaining cases
will be Passed on. OF the several cases
decided to-day the two which attracted
the greatest share of attention from the
court were what is known as the DeLima
case and that known as the Downes
case, and of these two the opinion in
the pownes case is considered the most
& far-reaching, as it affects the future,
whereas the DeLima case dealt with a
transitional phase of our insular re-
latlons. The DeLima case was
the first to receive the attention
OF the court, and as it appear ed
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,
out political lines were not at all con-
4 fpXnlWH6
power of the government to collect duty
on goods imported into the United States
from Porto Rico after the ratificat ton of
the treaty of Paris and before the pas
sage OF the Porto Rican act. The court
saio the governments contention in this
case was substantially a claim that Porto
Hlco Is foreign territory. The entire
case turned upon that contention. The
court held that the position was not well
TAKEN that Porto Rico was not at the
ome foreign territory, and that there
IoFe the duty which had been collected
must be returned.
me decision in the Downes case fol-
IoWeo the history of the dealings of the
Dn'ed states with Porto Rico a step fur
1ner. That case dealt with the legality
ol the exaction of duties on goods i'm
por'ed from Porto Rico into New York
ai.er the passage of the Foraker act pro-
.illhg Tor duty upon goods shipped from
% %e United States into Porto Rico and
s.s' on those shipped from Porto Rico to
ne S"e United States. In this case the court
r eIu mat such exaction was legal and
constitutional.
The Meat of the Business.
me point of the two opinions consid-
@ @el collectively is that Porto Rico was
for.,.tter stter the acquisition of that island
5'eish territory; that until Congress act
upon the question no duty could be
IN ,s1'ed' but that as soon as Congress
-siihed a method of controlling the ISL
u revenues that action became bind
, IN other words. that Congress has
4 ~ under the constitution to prescribe
~ manner OF collecting the. revenues OF
th oouhtrys insular possessions and has
in, sH' 10 lay duty on goods imported
reV our lnsular possession from the
:, NY. states or exported from them in
we United States. It holds. in brief.
lor taxation purposes they are not
Oh the United States to the ex-
,or,. mat goods shipped between their
ana the United States are entitled
~, same treatment as though they
Orleans. -'e" ioiN e'iu we"
Justices Differ in Opinion.
Susuce Brown delivered the courts
sI.,ao1 sI.'oh on both and there were vigorous
oo.'Iung opinions in both. In the
N ,h' case four OF the nine members
.rt1, court united In an opinion charac-
~ IN strong language the opinion
,no.,- majority In that case. In thl.
ss,I"is opinion the Chief Justice aud
Ar.,s Harlan. Brewer and Peckham
s,,., and the Chief Justice and Justice
presented their views In written
~, justices Gray. shiras. White and
anelu.,In also while agreeing with the
s.elusion announced BY Justice Brown.
eG1uoceo that they had reached the con
"a ey different lines OF argument,
'1suees Gray. White and McKenna