The age-herald., 1901-05-31


 decisions of the Supreme Court in the insular cases continue to attract atten- ton and cause comment. but the uncer- tainties and seeming Inconsistencies arising from nasty consideration of the points decided have practically appeared. The real meaning of the decisions, briefly stated. is that when the treaty of peace was ratified Porto Rico became morgan ized domestic territory and consequently 1t was illegal to assess duties under the Dingley act, which provided for their imposition on goods imported from for eign countries. The court held, however, that the Foraker. or Porto Rican tariff and civil government act is constitutional because the Constitution did not of it's own force extend to the people of the unorganized territory, the provision of the Constitution requiring uniformity of taxation not applying. But the court held that while the Constitution does not apply in It's entirety to annexed terri tory, that body must act in accordance with the underlying principles of the Constitution, which civilization, justice and humanity make necessarily applica- ble. All the privileges, immunities and rights of citizens of the United States are, then not those of inhabitants of an- nexed territory until Congress so pro yides. the annexed territory though being domestic is not incorporated into the United States.
 The importance of the decision Hes in the fact that 1t does not force the gov ernment in the administration of the af- fairs of annexed or domestic territory to govern 1t as states of the union and ter ritories to which the uniformity of taxa tion and other clauses of the Constitu- tion have been specifically extended py Congress, unless of course. provision IS made for such extension and for the en- joyment of all the rights of citizens or the United States by the treaty or act of annexation. Congress, then, has prac- tically unlimited power in providing TOT the government of such territory as Porto Rico, Hawaii or the Philippines and it can employ such forms of govern ment as their needs and our interests require. Tn other words there can be such f1exibility of government as the 0ineTencoS
 pacities and situations make necessary Such full power makes the solution or the difficulties of government in the various parts of the Philippines and in any ter ritory that may later be acquired much more simple.
 There is much disappointment that the court was evenly divided in the great questions at issue, but the differences oi opinion among the justices serve TO enl- phasize the complexity of the ouestiohs at issue, and the fact that there are in- herent differences of opinion in great constitutional questions. However, the answer of the court stands and will stand unless some new cause bringing in new features should change the courts opin- ion. It is peculiar feature of the action of the court that the opinion of one justice Justice Brown. settled the ques- tions involved in the cases before 1t. In | the DeI.ima case, in which it was decided | that Porto Rico was domestic territory l from the moment of the ratification of the l peace treaty Justice Brown was sustained by Chief Justice Fuller, Justices Harlan, | Brewer and Peckham, while Justices Me- Kenna, Shiras, White and Gray dissented, | but in the Downes case, involving the | constitutionality of the Porto Rican act, the Justice who had assented in the former | opinion, Fuller, Harlan, Brewer and Peck ham, dissented and Justice Browns opin- 1 ion was sustained by Justices White. Shlras. McKenna and Gray, who had dis sented in the first opinion. Thus Justice Brown was the controlling justice in the cases, as Justice Shiras had been in the income tax cases when the court had divided, five to four as it did in these insular cases.
 This peculiar condition caused one legal wit to say that he had had a dream the night after the decision in which he saw four justices under the leadership of Jus tice Harlan, crying out, "The Constitution follows the flag" while four other jus tices under the leadership of Justice White replied ''No, 1t doesn't" and Justice Brown raising his hands in a deprecatory way, said: Gentlemen be calm. l alone can unravel the difficulty"
 Perhaps what the Supreme Court failed to do on Monday is almost as important as me QeCls1OnS IL diluounCco. ho bo- called "fourteen diamonds case involv- ing the question whether duties were legally collected under the Dingley act on diamond rings brought from the Philip pines by returning soldier. and the Second Dooley'' case, in which is in- yolved the question whether the section of the Porto Rican tariff act, which as- sesses duties on goods imported from the United States into Porto Rico were left undecided.
 It would seem. at first blush, as if the assessment of duties on goods imported from the Philippines under the Dingley act were illegal because, as the Supreme Court held Porto Rico to be domestic territory" 1t would appear as if the Philip pines were also domestic territory" Doubtless they are or will be when the United States fully possesses them. In other words. quoting distinguished law yer: Tt may be that the Supreme Court found distinction between the condition of the Philippines at the time the case arose and that of Porto Rico at the time the cases decided originated. It has been supposed that as Porto Rico and the Philippines were acquired by the Paris treaty of cession that the decision In the Porto Rican cases applies as we'll to the importation from the Philippines. MT.