Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1901-05-31
The COURTS VIEWS.
Supreme Justices Render Decisions
in Insular Cases.
ALL IMPORTANT POINTS COVERED.
One Decision Upholds Policy of AID.
\ ministrntion, While Another
Is Opposed to Claims of
the Government.

e.. NdSHlHSlOu, Nv
States supreme court Monday handed
down opinions covering all OF the IS
,ues on the new insular possessions
which have been in controversy. AL
though several of the decisions upheld
The contestants on certain issues
raised, yet in the most important de-
cision, that of Downs against Bid
well, Justice Brown announced the
sweeping decision of the court uphold
ing the general attitude and policy OF
The government up to the present
kime.
The effect of this decision is to con-
6rm the constitutionality of the For
aker act and to give congress power to
Deal with the newly-acquired territory
In such manner as the legislative
branch may consider suitable for the
new territory. The decision also had
Me effect of declaring that the new
lnsular possessions do not by virtue OF
the treaty of cession acquire all the
privileges and rights of the constitu-
ZION.
The two cases in which no conclu-
Sion was announced were those known
rs the Fourteen Diamond Rings case
and the second of the Dooley cases.
The undecided Dooley case deals with
phase of the Porto Rican question,
and the diamond rings case involves the
right to the free importation of mer-
chandise from the Philippines to the
United States. The original intention
of the court had been to adjourn for
2 The term after Mondays sitting, but
discussion of the cases passed on took
Rbont five hours, so the court adj
iourned until to-day, when it is pre-
sumed the remaining cases will be
passed on.
OF the several cases decided Mon
day, the two which attracted the great
Est share of attention from the .srte
were what is known as tkgswhc Lima
ease and that known ane ne Downes
case, and of theast iss6 the opinion in
ths lmnst, Why pea considered the most
hin tr,,nA.-.g as it affects our future
ssefations, whereas the De Lima case
dealt with a transitional phase of our
insular relations. The De Lima case
was the first to receive the attention of
the court, and as it appeared to be quite
sweepingly opposed to the govern
ment's contentious many persons pre-
cipitately arrived at the conclusion
that the government had been worsted
all along the line. This view suffered a
decided change when the conclusion
was announced in the Downes case.
The court was very evenly divided on
both cases, but political lines were not
at all controlling.
The De Lima Case.
The De Lima case involved the power
of the government to collect a duty
on goods imported into the United
States from Porto Rico after the ratiti
cation of the treaty of Paris and be
fore the passage of the Porto Rical
act The court said the government
contention in this case was substan
italy a claim that Porto Rica is for
eign territory. The entire case turned
upon that contention. The court helt
that the position was not well taken
that Porto Rico was not at the tim
foreign territory, and thattherefor
the duty which had,been collected mus
be returned.
Conclusion of Opinion.
Justice Brown concluded as fo
lows:
"If an act of congress be necessary t
convert foreign country into domesti
Territory, the question al once suggest
itself, what is the character of the legis
lation demanded for this purpose? VIII a
act appropriating money for its purchas
be sufficient? Apparently not. Will al
act appropriating the duties collected upol
Imports to and from such country for tn
benefit of its government be sufficient
Apparently not VIII acts making appro
priations for Its postal service, for the es
Establishment of lighthouses, for the main
tenance of quarantine stations. for erect
ing public buildings, have that effect
Will an act establishing complete locs
government, but with the reservation {
right to collect duties upon commerce
adequate for that purpose? None of thes
nor all together, will be sufficient, If tn
contention of the government be sount
since acts embracing all these provision
have been passed in connection with Port
Rico, and it is insisted that 1t is still
foreign country within the meaning of tn
tariff laws. We are unable to acquiesce /
this assumption that a territory may b
at the same time both foreign and domes
tic.
I'VE are therefore of opinion that at tn
time these duties were levied Porto Rio
was not a foreign country within the NEAR
Ing of the tariff laws, but territory
the United States; that the duties wei
illegally eXacted and that the plaintiff
are entitled to recover them back.
1.-THE judgment of the circuit court fl
the Southern district of New York is ther
fore reversed and the case remanded
that court for further proceedings in col
sonance with this opinion"
The Doyvnes Case.
The decision in the Downes case TO
lowed the history of the dealings
the United States with Porto Rico
step farther. That case dealt with til
legality of the eXaction of duties O
goods imported from Porto Rico int
New York after the passage of til
Foraker act providing for duty upo
goods shipped from the United State
into Porto Rico and also on tho!
shipped from Porto Rico to the Unite
States. In this case the court held tn
such exaction was legal and constit
tional
Point of the Two Opinions.
The point of the two opinions co
sidered collectively is that Porto Ri
was never after the acquisition of iii
island been foreign territory; that IL
tilcongress nctedupon the question
utycould be collected, but that as SOC
as congress outlined method of co
trolling the islands revenues that a
ton became binding; in other word
that congress has power under II
constitution to prescribe the mann
of collecting the revenues of the cou
try's insular possessions and has IL