The leader., 1901-01-02
THE CONSTITUTION AND THE
FLAG.

The tONNII q IION avn abE
FLAG.
Not for a generation, it is pretty
generally agreed, has the Supreme
Court of the United States been
called upon to render decision more
important and reaching in its eff
fects than in the two tariff cases now
before IL, and in the four or five others
that are to come up on January !.
ITO very large extent" says The
Chicago Record 1ud. 1.-THE whole flu
ture policy of the United States as
concerns the colonial question will be
determined by these decisions" OF
the two cases now before the court,
one involves the status of the Philip
pines under the Constitution, the
other the status of Porto Rico. The
former case is that of Emil J. Pepke,
a North Dakota volunteer, who
brought fourteen diamond rings to
San Francisco from the Philippines.
As he paid no duties the rings were
seized at Chicago as struggled proper
ty. Pepke is suing to recover them
on the ground that the Philippines
are part of the United States, within
which all duties imports and excuses
must be uniform. The other case in
volviug the Porto Rican tariff, is on
the assessment of duty on tobacco
imported by J. II. Goetze from that
island.
If the Constitution extends, by its
own power, to all new territory that
comes under the flag, it follows, OF
course. that neither labor nor mer-
chandise from that territory can be
barred out of the States by congress
sional enactment, nor can their en-
trance into the States even be restrict
ed and the fear is that, as a result of
this condition, flood of cheap labor
and cheap merchandise may work dis
aster to American industries. On the
other hand, it is argued that to hold
distant people as subjects is contra
nv to the spirit of our Government,
and thai it is better not to keep under
our flag a people who cannot partici-
pate in our institutions.
In the course of his argument before
the Supreme Court, Charles II. Al
drich, of Chicago ex Solicitor General,
senior counsel in the Philippine case,
referred to the American Revolution,
of which the Constitution was re-
suit. and. speaking of the then asserted
| power of Parliament to tax the colonies,
| he declared it was IA startling propo-
siton . that power the assertion
of which justified rebellion and bit
! ter war to resist, was carefully pre-
served in the very Government es-
! tablished as the result of such
resistance; that our forefatherS de.
MED an omnipotent Parliament to de-
cree an omnipotent Congress-; that
what was tyranny as to them in 1863.
| l7I6 is less than tyranny now. Time
must be capable of changing principles
| if this proposition be true" Mr.,
| Lawrence Harmon. also counsel in
the Philippine case, referring more
directly to the tariff barrier between
the United States and the Philippines
said, The President of the United
| States has no legislative power. The
imposition of customs duties upon
commerce between these islands and
other parts of the United States after
the treaty of peace and exchange of
Publications by executive order is
without lawful authority, and the seiz-
ure of the property of the plaintiff
in error, citizen of the United States,
under such pretended authority, con
stitutes a taking of his property
without due process of law"