Evening star., 1901-05-31
MR.CHANDLER'SVIEWS
Not Satisfied With the Supreme
Courts Decision
De LIMA Case SHOULD Be REARGUED
Logical Effect in Regard to Impor-
tations From Philippines.
T II E POON ER A T

Former Senator Chandler of New Hamp-
shire, the head of the Spanish claims COM
mission, holds some very decided views On
the Porto Rican decision recently rendered
by the United States Supreme Court. Mr..
Chandler is satisfied with the decision that
the Foraker law is constitutional. but in
sists that the conclusion reached that duties
collected under the Dingley act before the
operation of the Foraker law were levied
unconstitutionally is a mistake, and that
1t ought to be rectifed. He is of the opin-
ion that the Attorney General should make
application for reargument of the case.
believing that upon further consideration
the court will perceive the justice of
decision declaring the Dingley law valid
in the premises.
incidentally Mr.. Chandler contends that
the holding of the five judges of the court
as to the unconstitutionality of the Dingley
law In the case makes it clear that all
duties which have been collected on :ner-
chandise from the Philippines have been
taken by the government illegally and that
If the court insists that the Dingiey col
lectiOns in Porto Rico were unlawful, then
all duties which have been levied thus far
on goods from the Philippines must be re-
funded.
ImpOrtations From Philippines.
In speaking of the subject to a Star re-
porter this morning, Mr.. Chandler said: Il
think decision that importations from the
Philippines are taxable would be very
strange one in view of the decision that i'm
portations from Porto Rico before the
operation of the Foraker act were free of
duty. The United States obtained title to
both Porto Rico and the Philippines first
by conquest, and second by formal cession
from Spain. The latter nation was the abb
md Of
Philippines when Admiral Dewey destroyed
the Spanish fleet in Manila bay. Later she
transferred her sovereignty to us in the
same language used in transferring Porto
Rico to u.s. The treaty says: Spain ceces
to the United States the Island of Porto
Rico. Spain cedes to the United States the
archipelago known as the Philippines To
hold that Porto Rico became SO completely
a part of the United States that goods COM
ing from the island to the United States
were free of duty, and then to hold that
goods coming from the Philippines are
duttable merely because we entered into
new contest with the Filipino insurgents
would be almost absurdity. l shall not
believe that the five members of the Su-
preme Court who held that the Constitution
so followed the flag as to exempt Porto
Rico from tariff duties merchandise
coming in to the United States will fail to
hold the same position regarding the Philip
pines because of any imaginary difference
Of status growing out of the Filipino war.
This would be a stultification, in my judg-
ment, which I not prepared to see any
five judges Of the court commit
Decision Nearly Intolerable.
1.-The truth Is that their decision in the
Porto Rican case is welI-nigh intolerable.
A reargument should be applied for by the
Attorney General The whole argument Of
Mr.. Justice Brown was based upon the
words in the Dingley tariff law from for
eign Countries but those words were not
ao1o Of +1o
sidered. The vital part was the provision
that merchandise imported into the United
States should pay duties. That provision
meant that duties should be paid upon
merchandise coming into the United States
as the nation was then constituted or as
the states should be constituted if enlarged
by additions Of territory made part of the
country by action of Congress. Conquer
Ing territory. purchasing territory or re-
ceiving a territory by donation does not
bring such territory within the United
States within the meaning of the tariff
law. If the words from foreign countries
had not been contained in the law it is
doubtful whether Mr.. Justice Brown and
his four associates would have ventured to
declare that the Dingley tariff law as ap-
piled to Porto Rico went to destruction as
soon as we received from Spain the cession
of the territory Of which we had previous
ly taken possession. OF course Porto Rico
was then no longer foreign country in
many senses, but it continued to be a for
eign country within the meaning of the
tariff law, and the United States within
the meaning Of that law continued to be
the old United States, the new United
States being its former limits plus Porto
Rico and the Philippines. That complete
Incorporation of Porto Rico and the Philip
pines which would annihilate the tariff on
merchandise coming into the United States
from those islands could not take place un-
til Congress SO declared.
Reargument in De Lima Case.
THE effect Of the decision in the De
Lima, or first Porto Rican. case should
therefore be resisted by a request for a re-
argument. AS for the Philippines it will be
dangerous for the Secretary Of the Treas
ury to rely upon obtaining a decision from
the court that a distinction exists between
the status of Porto Rico and the Philip
pines. Such distinction would be- In nv
opinion, merely fanciful, and 1 believe the
more the five judges think over the matter
the less likely they are to promulgate a
decision based upon such distinction.
1.-The military power In the Philippines
should be invoked for the imposition Of a
duty equal to the home duty upon the
merchandise from those islands brought
into the United States. 1t would not be
an export duty, for the. court would hard
ly hold that the duty on merchandise COM
ing from one port Of the United States to
another would be an export duty. Or else
there should be no merchandise allowed to
come here until Congress meets and acts.
The SpoOner Act.
1.-The Spooner act, standing alone, is not
like the Foraker act. The latter specifcal-
| ly imposes duties Of Is per cent Of the rates
scheduled in the Dingley bill. The Spooner
act merely authorizes the President to
govern the Philippines according to his
| Judgment, but gives him no power in
| United States ports. If the Spooner act
| had provided that until further legislation
| by Congress the duties of the Dingley bill
| should apply to importations to the United
States from the archipelago, then that act
| would have the same effect that the For
| aker act had in the opinion of the second
| set Of five judges Of the court In the de-