Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1901-06-01


the Philippines to the United States
The original intention Of the court had
been to adjourn for the term after yes
terdays sitting but discussion of the
cases passed on yesterday took about
five hours, SO the court adjourned un
til today. when ii is presumed the re-
naming cases will be passed on.
OF the several cases decided yester
day the two which attracted the great
est share of attention from the court
were what is known as the DE Lima
case and that known as the Downes
case, and OF these two the opinion In
the Downes case is considered the
ture relations, whereas the De Lima
case dealt with transitional phase
OF our insular relations. The court
was very evenly divided on both cases
but political lines were not at all con
trolling.
The De Lima case involved the pow
er of the government to collect a duty
on goods imported into the United
States from Porto Rico after the rari-
fcation OF the treaty of Paris and be
fore the passage of the Porto Rican
act. The court said the government q
contention in this case was substal-
TALLY claim that Porto Rico Is foreign
tefritcry The court held that the po-
sition was not well taken that Porto
Rico was not at the time foreign ter.
which had been collected must be re.
turned.
The Downes case dealt with the le-
gality OF the exaction of duties on
goods imported from Porto Rico into
New York after the passage OF the For
aker act providing for a duty upon
goods shipped from the United States
into Porto Rico and also on those ship
ped from Porto Rico to the United
States. In this case the court held that
such exaction was legal and constitu-
tional
The point of the two opinions consid,
cred collectively is that Porto Rico
was never after the acquisition OF that
island foreign territory; that until con-
gress acted upon the question no cuty
could be collected, but that Is soon
as congress outlined method o. con
trolling the islands revenues that &C.
ton became binding; In other words,
that congress has power under the con
stitution to prescribe the manner OF
collecting the revenues of the coun-
right to lay duty on goods imported
into our insular possession from the
United States or exported from them
into the United States. 1t holds In
brief that for taxation purposes they
are not part 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 in both, and there were vigor-
Gus dissenting opinions in both. In
the Downes case four OF the nine mem
bers of the court united In an opinion.
characterizing in strong language the
opinion Of the majority in that case.
In this opposing opinion the chief jus
tice and Justices Harlan, Brewer and
Peckham united. Justices Gray, Shiras,
White and McKenna also, while agree
ing with the conclusion announced by
Justice Brown, announced that they
had reached the conclusion by differ
ent lines of argument, and Justices
Gray, White and McKenna announced
opinions outlining their respective po-
sitions. Justices Shiras, White and
McKenna also dissented In the De
Lima case. uniting in an opinion. JUS
tice Gray also presented an independ-
ent and dissenting opinion in that case.
The other cases decided by the court
were those of Goethe VS.. the United
States. involving duties on importa-
lions from Porto Rico. and Crossman
VS.. the United States. duties on Ha-
waiian imports being involved. In