The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1901-06-13
.s*.s.ss.:.s;s.s..s..s.s.':..s:'.:;..s
THE PORTO RICO CASE.


THE PORTO RICO CASE.
BY vote of five to four the supreme
curt has declared President McKin-
ey emperor of Porto Rico, and accord
ng to the press dispatches the emperor
las gladly and gratefully accepted the
title and authority thus conferred upon
him by the highest judicial tribunal
Be the land.
AS the last issue Of The Commoner
vas going to press, Justice Brown be-
yan reading the opinion of the court in
The De Lima case and as the decision
vas against the government in that
ease it was at first thought that the
Inhabitants Of Porto Rico had been
brought under the protection OF the
constitution. But those who were en-
couraged to believe that the constitu-
ton had caught up with the flag were
doomed to disappointment. In the
Downes case, decided Immediately af-
Rewards, a majority Of the court. com
posed of Justices Brown, Gray, White.
Shiras and McKenna, held that con-
Egress could deal with Porto Rico land
the same logic applies to the Philip-
pines) without regard to the limita-
tions of the constitution. Chief JUS
tice Fuller and Associate Justices Har-
Ian, Peckham and Brewer ulssented in
strong and vigorous language, but the
opinion of the majority even ma
pority Of one stands until it is re-
yersed. This is one of the most i'm
pnrtant decisions. ii not the most i'm
portant, ever rendered by the court;
1t not only declares that congress is
greater than the constitution which
created 1.-THE creature greater than
the creator-but it denies the necessity
Tor written constitution. The posi-
ton taken by the court is defended.
or rather excused, by reasoning which.
II followed out, will destroy constitu-
tional liberty in the United States.
Every reason given by Justice Brown
could be used with even more force to
support decision multiplying all limita-
tions placed by the constitution on
congress- when dealing with the citi-
Gems OF the several states. If the Porto
Hlcans can trust the wisdom and ius-
1ice OF congress which .4ey do not
elect ana cannot remove, why do the
people OF the United States need CON
stltution to protect them from con-
gress which they do elect and can re-
move! The decision in effect declares
that the people are not the source of
power; 1t defends taxation without
representation and denies that gov
ernments derive their just powers
from the consent OF the governed"
It assails the foundations of the re-
public and does so on the ground of
expediency.
The dissenting opinions bristle with
precedents and burn with patriotism;
they ought to awaken conscientious
republicans to a realization Of the
meaning Of imperialism.
This decision, like the bred Scott
decision, raises political issue which
4 must De settled by the people. The
supreme court has Joined with the
Il president and congress in an attempt
g saange the form Of our government,
q people. go - ~
The election Of 1900 did not decide
this question, for the republicans de-
D MED that they favored imperialism
6t Trey can deny
must now admit their repudiati6n 81
the constitution as well as the Declar-
X alton OF independence.
So much space is given to the ma
Jority and minority opinions that ex-
tended comment is impossible at this
time. but the discussion of the subject
Will be continued in future issues.
a STATEMENT OF THE CASE.
The opinions delivered by the United
states supreme court in the Porto
R1can cases are so important, not only
TOT the present, but for the future, that
It behooves every American citizen tc
thoroughly understand their purport.
In these opinions, three separate per-
i0ds We're treated and it will be well
to consider them in proper order.
Between the time when General
Miles took possession of Porto Rico
and the time of the ratification of the
peace treaty. the military authorities
establ ished certain military tariff du-
= ties. The court sustained these duties
on the broad ground Of military au-
thOrity and necessity.
After the ratification of the peace
treaty and prior to the enactment of
the Foraker law, in which law the
present Porto Rican tariff duties are
set forth, tariff duties were levied on
goods coming from Porto Rico to the
United States under the terms and
rates Of the Dingley law. On this point
the court held that the Dingley law
contemplated the leyying of duties on
foreign goods from foreign countries;
that after the ratification of the peace
treaty Porto Rico became domestic
territory, and therefore the Dingley
duties could not prevail.
In the Downes case the court tool
up that feature Of the Foraker Law
which established tariff duties or
goods coming from Porto Rico to the
United States. The court held these
duties to be lawful on the ground that
congress had full authority to make
rules, regulations and laws for the gov.
eminent Of domestic territory othel
than states.
In order to fully understand these
opinions 1t must be known that in rul
ing that the Dingley tariff rates coult
not prevail against Porto Rico, tn.
court did not act on the theory thai
the constitution followed the flag dur
4 ing any Of these periods under con
sideration. This ruling was made be
cause, in the opinion OF the court. {
law enacted for the purpose Of levyint
tariff duties against a foreign countr.
could not be applied in levying tariff
duties against 3 country that was no
foreign" In other words, il imme
rakine cara Of Forests.