The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1901-05-31
ITS RELATIONS TO THE HOME GOV.
EMINENT DEFINED
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
the Provisions of the
Federal Constitution as to This Newly
Acquired Territory Announced-The
Action of Congress to the Present
Time SHstained-Four of the Justices
Dfssent-Majorfty Reach Same Con.
cIusion by Different Reasoning.

Washington, May 27.-In the United
States supreme court today opinions
were handed down in all but two of the
cases before that court involving the
relation of the United States to our in
sular possessions. The two cases in
which no conclusion was announced
were those known as the fourteen dia-
mond 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 to the free inn
p%ortation of merchandise from the
Philippines to the United States.
The original intention of the court
had been to adjourn for the term after
today's sitting, but the dozen Of cases
passed on today took about five hours,
so the court adjourned until tomorrow
when it is presumed the remaining
cases will be passed on.
OF the several cases decided today,
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,
n of these two the opinion in the
Downes 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-
lations.
The Delima case was the first to re-
ceive the attention of the court, and as
1t appeared to be quite sweepingly op-
posed to the government contentious,
! many persons precipitately arrived at
the conclusion that the government
had been worsted all along the line.
This view suffered a decided change
when the conclusion was announce
in the Owl case. The court was
very evenly divided on both cases, but
| political lines were not all controlling.
The Delima case involved the power
of the government to collect duty on
goods imported into the United States
from Porto Rico after the ratifc2 ion
of the treaty of Paris and before the
passage OF the Porto Rican act. The
! court said the governments conten-
ton in this case was substantially a
claim that Porto Rico is foreign terri
| tory. The entire case turned non that
contention. The court held that the
| position was not we'll taken that Porto
Rico was at the time foreign territory,
and that, therefore, the duty which
| had been collected must be returned.
IN rs III NlNC ho" NoSC lol-
lowed the history of the dealing of the
United States with Porto Rico a step
farther. That case dealt with the le-'
! gality of the eXaction Of duties on
| goods imported from Porto Rico for
| New York after the passage Of the
Foraker act providing for a duty upon
I goods shipped from the United States
| into Porto Rico and also on those
shipped from Porto Rico to the United
States. In this case the court held that
such eXaction was legal and constitu-
| tional.
The point of the two opinions con-
| Sidered collectively is that Porto Rico
was never after the acquisition of that
island foreign territory; that until con-
| gress acted Upon the question ne duty
l could be collected, but hat as soon as
congress outlined a method Of controll-
ing the islands revenues that action
| became binding; that congress has
| power under the constitution to pre-
scribe the manner of collecting the rev.
| enueS of the country's insular posses
| sions and has the right to lay a duty on
goods imported into our insular pos
session from the United States or ex-
l ported from them into the United
States. 1t holds in brief that for tax
alton purposes they are not a part of
! the United States to the extent that
l goods shipped between their ports and
United States are entitled to the same
L treatment as CnOugn tney were Snlpp-
ed etwee New York and New Or
leans.
Mr.. Justice Brown delivered the
courts opinion in both cases and there
were vigorous dissenting opinions in
both. In the Downe case, four of the
nine members Of the court united in
an opinion characterizing in strong
language the opinion of the majority
in that case. In this opinion the chief
Justice and Mr.. Justices Harlan, Brew
er and Peckham united and the chief
justice and Mr.. Justice Harlan pre-
sented their views in written form. JUS
tees Gray, Shiras, White and Nc
Kenna also,while agreeing with the
conclusion announced by Justice
Brown, announced that they had reach
ed the conclusion by different lines of
argument. and Justices Gray, White,
and McKenna announced opinions out
lining their respective positions. JUS
tees Shiras. White and McKenna dis
sented in the Delima case. uniting in
an opinion. Justice Gray presented an
Independent and dissenting opinion in
that case.
The small court room was crowded
to repletion throughout the day. prom
inent government officials and many
attorneys being present, and the pro-
ceedings were followed from start to
finish with keen interest.