The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-28

such territory is admitted as a state
WHEN SOVEREIGNTY CHANGES.
''By parity of reasoning a country ceases
to be foreign the instant it becomes do
nestle So. too, If Congress ses fit to cede
one of its newly acquired territories (even
assuming that it had the right to do so) to
a foreign power; there could be no doubt
that from the day OF such cession and the
delivery of possession such territory would
become a foreign country and be reinstated
a such under the tariff laws. Certainly no
act OF Congress would be necessary In such
case to declare that the laws of the United
states had ceased TO apply to II.
The theory that country remains for
eign with respect to the tariff laws, until
Congress has acted by embracing il within
the customs union, presupposes that
country may be domestic for one purpose
and foreign for another. Ii may undoubt-
edly become necessary for the adequate ad-
special act providing the proper
machinery and officers. as the President
would have no authority. except under the
war power. 10 administer IL himself; but
no act is necessary 10 make II domestic
territory II once IL has been ceded TO the
United States. We express no opinion as
10 whether Congress is bound to appro-
pirate the money to pay for 1t. This has
been much discussed by writer's upon con-
sttutional law, but it is not necessary TO
consider in this case, as Congress made
prompt appropriation OF the money stipu-
lated in the treaty. This theory also pre-
supposed that territory may be held in
definitely by the United States; that il may
be treated in every particular, except for
tariff purposes, as domestic territory; that
laws may be enacted and enforced by
officers of the United States sent there for
that purpose: that instructions may be
suppressed, wars carried on, revenues col
lected. taxes imposed; in short. that every
thing may be done which a government
can do within its own boundaries. and yet
that the territory may still remain for
eign country. That this state of things
may continue for years. for century even,
but that until Congress enacts otherwise,
it still remains foreign country. To hold
that this can be done as a matter OF law,
we deem to be pure judicial legislation.
We find warrant for 1T in the Con-
stitution or In the power conferred upon
this court. 1t Is true the nonaction OF
Congress may occasion a temporary in
convenience, but ii does not follow that
courts of justice are authorized TO remedy
it by inverting the ordinary meaning of
words.
THE MAIN QUESTION.
''If an act of Congress be necessary to
convert foreign country into domestic
territory the question at once suggests it
self, what is the character OF the legisla-
ton demanded for this purpose? Will an
act appropriating money for its purchase
be sufficient? Apparently not. VIII an act
appropriating the duties collected upon i'm
ports TO and from such country for the
benefit of its government be sufficient? APP
parently not Will acts making appropria-
tions for its postal service, for the estab-
lishment OF lighthouses. for the mainte-
nance of quarantine stations, for erecting
public buildings, have that effect? VIII
an act establishing complete local gov
eminent be adequate for that purpose?
None OF these. nor all together. will be
sufficient, II the contention or the govern
ment be sound. since acts embracing all
these provisions have been passed IL con-
nection with Porto Rico, and it is insisted
that il is still foreign country within the
meaning of the tariff laws We are unable
to acquiesce in this assumption that a ter
ritory may be at the same time both for-
elgn and domestic
"A single further point remains to be
considered: 1t is insisted that act Of
Congress, passed March "a. 1900 (91st Stat,
1511), applying for the benefit of Porto Rico
the amount OF customs revenues received
on importations by the United States from
Porto Rico since the evacuation OF Porto
Rico by the Spanish forces Oct. Is, lS9S TO
Jan. /, 1901, together with any further Gus
toms revenues collected on importations
from Porto Rico since Jan. !, 1900, or that
shall hereafter be collected under existing
law. is a recognition by Congress OF the
right to collect such duties as upon im-
portations from foreign country, and
recognition of the fact that Porto Rico
continued to be foreign country until
Congress embraced it within the customs
union.
''It may be seriously questioned whether
this is anything more than a recognition
OF the fact that there were moneys In the
territory not subject to existing appropria
tion law. Perhaps we may go farther
and say that so far as these duties were
paid voluntarily and without protest the
legality of the payment was intended TO
be recognized: but II can clearly have no
retroactive effect as TO moneys heretofore
paid under protest for which an action TO
recover back had already been brought.
AS the action in this case brought
March 13. 1900, eleven days before the act
was passed, the right to recover the money
sued for could not be taken away by a
subsequent act of Congress. Plaintiffs sue
In assumpsit for money which the collector
has in his hands, justly and equtably be-
longing 10 them. To say that Congress
could by subsequent act deprive them of
the right to prosecute this action would
be beyond it's power. In any event. II
should not be interpreted so as to make it
retroa ctive.
1--WE are therefore. OF opinion that at the
time these duties were levied Porto Rico
was not a foreign country within the mean
ing of the tariff laws. but territory of the
United States; that the duties were IL
legally exacted and that the plaintiffs
entitled to recover them back.
1.-THE Judgment of the Circuit Court for
the Southern district of New York is. there
fore reversed and the case remanded to
that court for further proceedings in con-
sonance with this opinion"