Gilpin observer., 1901-05-30
INSULAR DECISION.
SUPREME COURTS RULING is A
GOVERNMENT VICTORY.
Ruling Requiring Return of Collected
Duties Afecto Only Transitional
Period Between Treaty Ratification
and Special Enactment.

washington, May ZS.-ln the Uulteu
States supreme court yesterday opin-
ions were handed down in all but two
of the cases before that court involving
the relations of the United States to
It's insular possessions. The two
cases in which no conclusion was an
nounced were those known as the IA
diamond rings case, and the second
Of the Dooley cases. The undecided
| Dooley case deals with a phase of the
| Porto Rican question, and the diamond
/ rings case involves the right TO the
free importation of merchandise from
the Philippines to the United States,
The original intention of the court had
been to adjourn after yesterdays sit
ting for the term, but discussion of
the cases passed on took about hours,
so the court adjourned until today,
when it is presumed the remaining
! cases will he passed upon. OF the
several cases decided, the two which
attracted the greatest share OF atten-
ton from the court were what is
known as the Delima case and that
| known as the Downes case, and of these
two the opinion in the Downes case
/ IS considered the most far reaching
rs it affects our future relations,
| whereas the Deli1a case dealt with a
transitional phase of our insular rela-
tions. The Delima case was the first
10 receive the attention of the court,
and as it appeared TO be quite sweep
/ tnly opposed to the governments con
tentions many persons precipitately
arrived at the conclusion that the gov
N Nta~ hnl r1 al al
tho line. This view suffered decided
change when the decision was received
in the Downes case. The court was
very evenly divided on both cases.
but political lines were not ut all con
trolling. The Delima case involved
the power Of the government to col
iect q duty on goods imported into
the United States from Porto Rico
after the ratification Of the treaty of
Paris and before the passage of the
Porto Rican act. The court said the
governments contention in this case
was substantially a claim that Porto
Rico is foreign territory. The entire
case turned upon that contention. The
court held that the position was not
we'll taken, that Porto Rico was not
ut the time foreign territory, and
that therefore the duty which had
been collected must be returned.
Foraker Act Changes the Situation.
The decision in the Downes case
followed the history of the dealings
of the United States with Porto Rico
Il step farther. That case dealt with
the legality of the exaction of duties
on goods imported from Porto Rico
into New York after the passage of the
Foraker act providing for a duty upon
goods shipped from the United States
into Porto Rico and those shipped
from Porto Rico into the United States.
IN this case the court held that such
exaction was legal and corN ltu.oaI.
The point Of the two opinions con-
siderod collectively is that Porto Rico
was never after the acquisition of that
island foreign territory, that until con-
| Eress acted upon the question, no duty
should be collected, but as soon as con
gress outlined method of controlling
the islands revenues that action be
came binding; in other words. that
congress has power under the constI-
tuition to prescribe the manner of col
lectlug the revenues of the country's
insul2r possessions and has the right
TO lay q duty on goods imported into
our insulnr possessions from the
! United States. II holds. In brief. that
Tor taxation purposes they are not
pnrt Of the United States to the extent
that goods shipped between their ports
and the United States are entitled to
the same treatment as though they
were shipped between New York and
New Orleans.
Justice Brown delivered the courts
opinion on both and there were vigor-
GUS dissenting opinions in both. In
the Downos case four of the nine mem
bors Of the court united in an opinion.
charactorzing In strong language the
opinion Of the majority in that case.
n this opposing opinion the chief
| justice and Justices Harlan, Brewer
and pocl,ham united ana the chief
Justice and Justice Harlan presented
thcir views IN written form Justices
Gray Shiras, White and McKenna also
while agreeing with tho conclusion an
nounccd by Justice Brown announced
that they had reached the conclusion
by different lines of argument. and
Justices Gray White ana McHenna an
nouncod opinions outlining their re
spoctivc positions, Justice Shiras.
White and McKonna also dlssented in
the Delima case. uniting in an opinion.
Justice Gray also presented an indie
pendent and dissenting opinion in that
case.
The other cases decided by tho
court were the Cote Va. the United
States involving duties on importa-
tions from Porto Rico and Crossman
VS.. the United States, duties on
Hawaiian imports being involved. In
these two cases the Delima decision