New-York tribune., 1901-05-28
SETTLED, SAYS FORAKER.
AUTHOR OF THE PORTO RICAN TARIFF
EXPLAINS THE QUESTIONS DE
CIDED BY THE COURT

Senator J. B. Foraker of Ohio. author of the
law interpreted by the Supreme Court in the
insuar cases. said last night at the Waldorf
Astoria:
Tho decision is a complete vindication Of the
position held by the Republican party with
speCt TO the power of Congress to legislate for
Porto Rico and the Philippines. and settles once
and for all that the United States is the equal
in sovereign power of any other independent
government"
When asked for a statement of his views on
the decisions Of the court Senator Foraker said
There seems to be some confusion in the news
paper reports of the decisions rendered by the
Supreme Court in the insular cases, owing to the
fact that number or cases were considered and
disposed of at the same time, each raising
a different question, and all together Supposed
10 cover the various questions that have been
raised with respect TO the constitutional power
Of Congress to legislate for our new acquisitions
II IS unnecessary 10 speak of these cases in de-
tail TO point out specifically the several
questions disposed OF in order to get the effect
of what the court has held.
In order that the decision may be fully under
stood IL is necessary TO bear in mind that Porto
Rico has passed through three distinct periods
that have relation 10 these cases. In the first
place prior TO the Spanish American War Porto
Rico was province Of Spain. and such for
eign territory in every sense Of the word. The
island remained foreign territory in a legal
sense, notwithstanding our conquest and mill
tary occupation and government, until the ratl-
fcatiOn Of the treaty Of peace. when il ceased
to be foreign territory, and became possession
or dependency Of the United States but not a
part Of the United States. Being a dependency
Of this country. it was domestic territory, as
contradstinguished from foreign territory. II
is domestic territory STILL but il underwent a
further change in its legal relation 10 this coun-
try when Congress enacted the law OF April l2
1900, providing civil government and tariff
duties for the support of the same. Since April
u, 1900, IL is territory belonging TO the United
States with respect OF which Congress has en-
acted legislation fixing the status OF its inhab-
ltanTS providing a government
providing also for the necessary revenues to sup
port the same. Between the ratification Of the
Treaty Of Peace and this legislation of April 10.
1900. ii was territory Of the United States with
respect of which Congress had not exercised any
power whatever by legislation otherwise.
What the court decided that while
were occupying Porto Rico prior to the ratifiCa-
tion Of the treaty Of peace it was foreign terri
tory, and occupation and government
the nature Of military necessity and valid
on that account; that from and after the rati-
fCatiOn of the treaty Of peace il no longer
foreign but domestic territory within the mean
ing of tariff law, according which tariff
duties can be collected only on importations
from foreign countries, and that consequently
the duties collected on imports from Porto Rico
after the ratification Of the treaty Of peace and
prior TO April u. 1900, when Congress first
leglslated. illegally collected-illegalIy col
lected, however. not because Congress was with
out constitutional power to impose such duties
importations from Porto Rico. but because
during that period Congress had not so legis-
lated.
The third proposition decided by the court
and the one Of supreme Importance was that
Porto Rico being a territory of the United
States is not part of the United States but
only territory belonging TO the United States
and that ii IS, therefore, within the constitu-
Iional power Of Congress to so legislate with
respect to II including the imposition OF tariff
duties as il may see fit. and the Congress having
so legislated on the 18th day of April 1900 the
provisions OF that law valid and to be up
held and enforced; in other words the effect Of
the decision is that the Constitution does not
follow the flag and that Congress has plenary
power under the constitution to govern our in
suar acquisitions according to their respective
necessities. The Supreme Court goes even
further and says that If there constitu-
tional provisions investing Congress with this
power it would yet nevertheless. ex necessitate
have this power since the States acting in their
Statal capacity. could not provide the necessary
legislation. and political sovereignty can be
exercised only by the political department of the