Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1901-05-31
United States Supreme Court De-
cides That Tariff Cannot Be Col
lected on Porto Rico Sugar.
ISLAND is NOT FOREIGN COUNTRY.
When the Duties Were Collected Porto Rico
Vas u Territory OF the United States
and Our Laws Applied to tho Island
the Same Any Other Territory of
the United States.

Gay announced the decision OF thAf
court in the insular cases. The main
opinion was handed down in the De-
lima case. Justice Brown first an
nounced the courts decision on poin:
of jurisdiction, holding that the coure
had jurisdiction. The Delima case in
volved the importation of goods into
the United States from Porto Rico
after the ratification of the treaty of
Paris and before the passage of the
Porto Rican act. Delima e. Co., do
ing business in New York, imported
from San Juan, p. R., during the
months of June and July, 1899, certain
sugars, the product of Porto Rico.
Upon these sugars the collector at
New York demanded and collected
about $4,000 as customs duties.
Delima & Co. sued Bidwell, the col
lector, as an individual in the SUI
premc court of the state of New York
to recover back the duties thus paid,
alleging that they were unlawfully
demanded, in violation of the consti-
tuition and collected by duress, the
collector exacting the payment of the
duties as a condition to the delivery
of the sugars. On the petition of the
collector the suit was removed to the
circuit court of the United States for
the Southern district, both on the
ground that no cause for action was
stated and that the court had no juris-
diction. From the judgment dismiss
ing the complaint Delima & Co. prose-
cuted error from this court.
Justice Brown said that whether
the sugars imported from or into Por-
to Rico were dutiable depends upon
whether Porto Rico is foreign coun-
try. He held that the right to acquire
territory involves the right to govern
and control it by congress, but he said
that a country could not be both for
eign and domestic. The opinion was
opposed to the contention of the gov
eminent. He concluded that at the
time the duties were collected Porto
Rico was territory and not for.
eign country, but territory of the
United States. Justice Brown conclud-
ed as follows:
II an act of congress be necessary to
convert a foreign country into domestic
territory, the question at once suggests
itself, what is the character Of the legis-
lation demanded for this purpose! VIII
chase be sufficient? Apparently not. VIII
an act appropriating the duties COLI
lected upon imports to and from such
country for the benefit of its government
making appropriations for it's postal serv-
ice. for the establishment Of lighthouses.
for the maintenance OF quarantine sta
lions, for erecting public buildings. have
that effect? Will an act establishing
complete local government, but with the
reservation of right to collect duties
upon commerce be adequate for that pur-
pose? None of these, all together
will be sufficient, If the contention of the
government be sound, since acts embrace
ing all these provisions have been passed
in connection with Porto Rico. and it is in
sisted that 1t is still foreign country
within the meaning of the tariff laws. We
are unable to acquiesce in this assump
ton that q territory may be at the same
time both foreign and domestic.
We therefore of opinion that at the
time these duties were levied Porto Rico
was mot a foreign country within the
meaning of the tariff laws but territory
of the United States; that the duties were
illegally eXacted and that the plaintiffs
are entitled to recover them back. The
Judgment Of the circuit court for the
Southern district of New York is there
fore reversed and the case remanded to
that court for further proceedings In con-
sonance with this opinion.
Justice Mckenna delivered the dis
senting opinion of the supreme court.
He was Joined in that opinion by JUS
tices Shiras, White and Gray. JUS
tice McKenna went into detailed ex-
animation of the cases cited in the
majority opinion. He maintained that
they did not show a clear current of
decision, but disclosed much diverg-
ence of view.
Justice Brown also announced the
opinion of the court in the case of
Dooley VS.. the United States, involv-
ing the validity of duty levied on
goods imported into Porto Rico from
the United States between the date of
military occupation and the taking
effect of the Porto Rican tariff act.
The court held that there could be no
doubt of the validity of the duties
levied by virtue of Gen. Miles, order
prior to the ratification of the treaty
of peace. It placed this right on the
ground of military necessity.
With reference to duties levied aft
er ratification of the peace treaty the
court said different rule applied and
it held these duties invalid. Justices
Gray, Shiras, McKenna and White dis
scented, the latter delivering the opin-
ion.
In the Downes case the United
States supreme court decides, in an
opinion by Justice Brown, that while
Porto Rico is a territory of the Unit
ed States, it is not such for tariff pur.
poses and that the Foraker act is con-
stitutional The judgment of the cir
cult court was affirmed. A dissent
ing opinion was handed down by JUS
tice White In which Justices Shiras
and nMcKennas concHfred.
Two Kansas sSTrustiesss ESCAPED.
Leavenworth, Kan, May. 2s.-Two
S'trusty" convicts, w. A. Jort1on and
James Mayhood. both from Oklahoma,