Audubon County journal. (Exira, Iowa) 1884-1993, 1901-05-30
SUPREME COURTS RULING is A
GOVERNMENT VICTORY.
Ruling Requiring Return OF Collected
Duties Affects Only Transitional
Period Between Treaty Ratification
and Special Enactment.

Washington, May 28.-In the United
States supreme court yesterday opin.
ions were handed down in all but two
of the cases before that court involving
the relations Of the United States to
it's insular possessions. The two
cases in which M conclusion was an
nounced were those known as the Ia
diamond rings case, and the second
of the Dooley cases. The undecided
Dooley case deals with a phase of the
Porto Rican question, and the diamond
rings case involves the right to the
free importation of merchandise from
the Philippines to the United States,
The original intention of the court had
been to adjourn after yesterdays sit
ting for the term, but discussion of
the cases passed on took about 5 hours,
so the court adjourned until today,
when it is presumed the remaining
cases will be passed upon. Of the
several cases decided, the two which
attracted the greatest share of atten-
ton from the court were what is
known as the Delima case n that
known as the Downes case, and of these
two the opinion in the Downes case
Is considered the most far reaching
as 1t affects our future relations,
whereas the Delima case dealt with a
transitional phase of u insular rela-
lions. The Delima case was the first
to receive the attention of the court,
and as 1t appeared to be quite sweep
inly opposed to the governments con-
tentions, many persons precipitately
. arrived at the conclusion that the gov
ernment had been worsted all along
the line. This view suffered a decided
change when the decision was received
In tho Downes case. The court was
very evenly divided on both cases,
! but political lines were not at all cor
J trolling. The Delima case involved
) the power of the government to col
! lect a duty on goods imported into
J the United States from Porto Rice
after the ratification Of the treaty Of
Z Paris and before the passage of the
Porto dGn act. The court said the
} governments contention in this case
was substantially a claim that Porto
Rico Is foreign territory. The entire
case turned upon that contention. The
court held that the position was no
well taken, that Porto Rico was no
!, at the time a foreign territory, ant
q that therefore the duty which hat
been collected must be returned.
Foraker Act Changes the Situation
The decision in the Downes cas-
followed the history of the dealing
of the United States with Porto Ric
a step farther. That case dealt witt
the legality Of the exaction of dutie
on goods imported from Porto Rio
{ into New York after the passage of tn
" Foraker act providing for a duty upo
5 goods shipped from the United State
into Porto Rico and those shippe
y from Porto Rico into the United State.
~ In this case the court held that sue
ie eKaction was legal and coKEitusoa
IL The point of the two opinions col
r. sidered collectively is that Porto Ric
" was never after the acquisition of tha
island foreign territory, that until CO
gress acted upon the question, no dut
should be collected, but as soon as col
gress outlined a method of controllin
ut LILO lSLdlu , f0Ntuu6A tudL dGtlOu y
gu came binding; In other words, tn;
s. congress has power under the const
tuition to prescribe the manner of &C
= lecting the revenues Of the country
%insular possessions and has the rigl
=. to lay a duty on goods imported I'M
81 our insuiar possessions from til
ii. United States. 1t holds, In brief, tn;
Z: for taxation purposes they are not
81: part of the United States to the extel
-: that goods shipped between their por
&: and the United States are entitled
&: the same treatment as though the
81 were shipped between New York al
b. New Orleans.
8: Justice Brown delivered the court
3: opinion on both and there we're vigc
IS: Gus dissenting opinions in both.
b. the Downes cas four of the nine me-
5: bers of the court united in an opinio
a: charartertzing in strong language I'll