Arizona republican., 1901-10-27
STATUS
6upreme Court Decision Ex- pected Soon
b,bsr Important Insular Cases to be Decided-Ruling on Constitution ality of Foraker Act as to Duty
 on Exports to Porto Rico.

,pasbipeton. Oct. 26.-Several impor- ", csses are pending before the Unit 1 states supreme court. In them are tu,.olved questions arising under the fn.nIar nolicy of the United States. One In ,be so-called Fourteen Diamond ar Pepke case. The question in [sat is the constitutionality of duties fnnosed on importations from the Phil [nnina islands subsequent to the ratifi- [e,ion of the treaty ofpeace. Emile J. Eparke WAS an enlisted man in a North L,atota volunteer regiment, serving in 1 nzon Subsequent to the treaty of roacs he bought eleven diamond rings nd made loans on three others to fel- n,v soldiers, who subsequently, released [.,a rings to him. The fourteen rings Ipanke brought with him to the United Etat.s on his discharge from the army. Lrhen he returned with his regiment on l trunsport. The rings were seiezd in [rhicago by customs officers on tha vroil,id that they had ben brought into he United States illegally.
 On the face of it the case seems to Iainer very little from the De Lima ase. which was decided by the su- Lbrerne court at the last session. The
 he Lima case involved duties levied on Smnortations of sugar from San Juan, Porto Rico. in 1899, subsequent to the Ratification of the treaty of peace, but L,rior to the enactment of the Foraker aw. The decision of the court was .hat at the time those duties were lev ed Porto Rico was not foreign coun- +ry within the meaning of the tariff ! laws, but territory of the United ktates; that the duties were illegally kSacted, and that. the plaintiffs were Untitled to recover them. Should Similar finding be made in the Pepke | ase then all duties levied on importa- tions from the Philippines since the Ratification of the treaty of peace have
 been illegal, and will have to be re- burned. It has been believed, however. that the supreme court had in mind a distinction between the two cases, oth- erwise 1t would have handed down q |decesion in the Pepke case at the same tlme as it handed down those in the other insular cases.
 The government has been proceeding |bn the assumption that the decision Irould be in it's favor and has continued to collect duties on goods from the Philippines. In deciding the De Lima kase. however. Justice Brown held that Porto Rico had become territory of the United States before .'the country had
 been ceded to us. the cession accepted.
 possession delivered without interfer-
 ence by Spain or any other power." and that it was thus domestic territory. It has been believed by the law off, Irers of the government that the court bad in mind a distinction between 'ces-
 sion' and possession" in the Philip
 pines and that military operations were
 necessary in order to preserve peace Eind maintain American control may
 have guided its decision. Should the foUrt have taken that view then the
 Philippines would not become domestic territory until after peace had been fully established and duties could con sequently be legally imposed.
 It suggested also that the court may have had in mind the McEnery.resolu- ton adopted by the senate after the ratification of the treaty disclaiming any purpose on the part oG the Unitel States to incorporate the territory or people of the Philippine islands as