The bee., 1901-05-30
THE |NSULAR DECISIONS.
Statement Of Solicitor General Rich
ards on the Supreme Court
Decisions.
THE GOVERNMENTS CASE SUSTAINED.
The Government May Rule the Insuiar Z
Possessions as Their Needs Require
The Decisions Rendered Affected Porto
Rico Only Directly, I'ut the philippines
InfsrcntiaIIy.


InfsrcntinIIy.
Washington May @s.-Solicitor-Gcn-
cral Richards of the department OF
Justice, who hs d charge of the insnlar
cases before the supreme court, last
night made the following statement
containing his interpretation of the
decisions of the court:
''1he important question involved in
these cases was whether the cession
of territory contained in The treaty
of Paris made Porto Rico and the
Philippines an integral part of the
United States within the meaning OF
that provision of the constitution re.
quring IAN dlties, imposts and eX.
cises to be uniform throughout the
United States The court held that
the cession simply made Porto Rico
aud the Philippines domestic terri.
tory of the United States subject TO
the full control of congress. which
control could be exercised without ref.
erencc to those limitations. This
limitation, the court held. was ir.
TENDED to apply to the states of the
Union and does not apply TO acquired
territory unless by treaty and by
subsequent act of congress il is i'm.
corporated within and becomes IN in
tegral part of the United States.
THE decisions are substantially a
victory for 'hc government. They
sustain TO the fullest extent the so.
called insiilar policy of the admins
tration. The government now has
the sanction of the supreme court fpr
governing these islands as their needs
require. The court holds that the
constitution did not of its own force
at once apply to those ceded terri
tories, placing their people, their
products and their ports on an imme
date equality with ours and confer.
ring on them the rights. privileges
and immunitjes enjoyed 10y the peo.
pie, the products and ports of the
several states. While their funda-
mental rights are preserved by those
underlying principles of the constitu.
tion which apply everywhere, the
status of tLeir citizens and the nature
of the customs and control regllla
tions are to. be determined by con.
gress. and the exercise of the poweT
vested by the constitution in congress
TO make all ncedful rules and reguia.
tions respecting territory b%longing
10 the United States.
obviously what have said regard
ing Porto Rico applies equally well 10
the Philippines, SO that the president
is perfectly free under the Spooner
act to govern tie Philippines as their
needs and our interests may re,
quire.
"At the same time that the court
has sustained to the fullest extent the
contention of the government in these
cases, it has decided, as a matter OF
statutory construction. that the Ding.
ley act could not be held to impose
duties on goods brought from Porto
Rico. because by cession Porto Rico
became domestic territory of thc
United States, and therefore ceased 10
be "A foreign country The decisions
of the court call for no change in the
administration of the law.
The court did not decide what is
known as the second Dooley case, in
which is involved the validity of the
collection of duties under the Foraker
act on goods taken to Porto Rico
from the United States. While | have
no information on the subject, il may
be that the court thinks there is in
volved in the case another question
as to whether such duties would not
amount to duties on articles exported
from state. The court also failed to
| dispose of what is popularity known
as The FOurteen-Diamond Rings case,
involving the entry for duty of rings
brought into the United States by a
returning soldier from the Philip
pines.
There were no decisions affecting
the Philippines, yesterday, and pre-
sumo both of these cases referred to
will go over until the fall term of the
court
The other cases decided by the
court were the Goetze VS.. The United
States, involving duties on importa.
tions from Porto Rico; and Cross.
man VS.. The United States, the duties
on Hawaiian imports being involved.
In these two cases the De Lima de.
cision was followed and assessment OF
duties prior to the enactment of legis.
lation for the islands held illegal.
The assessment of duties was par.
tally sustained and partly upheld in
the cases of Dooley and Armstrong VS.
The United States. The duties were
held legal when made during military
occupation of Porto Rico and prior 70
ratification of the peace treaty, but
illegal when levied after the peace
treaty, but prior to the passage of
the Foraker act.
Wife nnd SON burned 10 Death.