The age-herald., 1901-01-08
Question of Sovereignty.


 The second point relating to sovereignty, is elaborated in part as follows:
 Tn using the expression sovereignty or ownership of -the United States we mean not the sovereignty or ownership of the government, or the President or the Con- gress, but the sovereignty or ownership of the people of this country, in whom the ultimate power is lodged and by whom not all power, but certain enumerated powers only have been delegated to the various coordinate branches of the government. Consequently it does not follow that because Spain has yielded her sovereignty, Congress has unlimited sovereign powers. Congress has no powers whatever derived from any other source than the constitution. It does not derive any additional powers from in- -ternational law or from the fact that the United States is sovereign nation or from the fact that the exercise of such power may be deemed necessary in order to carry out the policy of a particular administra- tion"
 There is also elaborate argument on the question of lawful power of the President in connection with the order of January 2O 1899. in so far as it related to duties. The contention Is made that notwithstanding this step was taken by the chief executive as commander-n-c chief of the army, it was not a necessary military measure.
 "If this duty was lawfully imposed" is asked, what limit is there upon this despotic military power?" Other similar questions follow.
 If the President could levy this tax on commerce between Porto Rico and other of tl,A Tptta GfatS m 1 1899, did he continue to have this power until Congress should act, and what il Con- gress had not acted for years or had been prevented from acting by the Presidents s veto? Is the military power Omnipotent in a new territory until Congress acts? Is 1t the function of the President when Con- gress does not legislate to legislate in its place? What difference does the fact-if It be fact-that the proceeds of these du- ties were expended for the benefit of Por- to Rico make? Is the constitutionality of a tax to be determined by the object to which it is applied? Was the Louisiana lottery changed into public Benefit and legalized because part of the proceeds were spent upon public or charitable works?"
 Not American.
 The conclusion is drawn that "the exist ence of any such power in one man, how ever exalted his office, is opposed to the whole spirit of our institutions"
 The scope of the discussion of the fourth point in the summary is indicated by the following questions:
 What is meant by the term United States as here used2 Does it include only the forty-five states end leave the trade be- tween Porto eIaico and Arizona, New Mex ico, Alaska and the District of columbia free, CT does it mean the United states as constituted before the late war with Spain and hence not apply to the trade between Porto Rico and Hawaii, Guam and the Phil
 ippines. In this an attempt to levy duties upon commerce between domestic ports or are these exactions of the nature of ex- cises or internal revenue taxes? Are they subject to the requirement of uniformity and if so, are they uniform and final Has Congress any warrant for laying these taxes arising out of its power to govern that territory of the United States?'
 The conclusion is drawn that the taxes are not imports or customs duties, but in the nature of internal revenue duties or exercises.