The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1901-05-29
Suprenlle Court O!Il Decides Decides -lns -|nsII-
lar Gases.
Porto Rico Is Not Foreign Tsrritory
but Congress Has Power to.
Impose Tariff 5Ii Imports Z .
and Exports.
COURT Sally DIvIDE1--bIs
ssEsTING OPINIONS + ]
- s. -

States supreme court today opinions
were handed down in all but two Of
the:cases before that court involving
the relation Of thef United STATES TO
its insular possessions. The two cases
in which no conclusion was announced
were Chose known as the xfoarteea dia-
mond rings case'' and the second Of
the Dooley cases. The .zzssnlE snEndecSdesdd
Dooley case deals with a phase OF the
Puerto 4Rican questions apd the dla- ls.
mon6 ring case involves the rlgnC 10
the free Importation Of merchandase
from the Philippines to the United
The The original in@ha6h ps thgsceoass
had been to adjourn for the term after
todayss si+tinesbut discussion OF the,
casespasssd 6n today@t6ek abouS i've
hours So tie c5urt adjourned until to-
morrow, when it is presumed the re-
naming cases~ill be passed on. = OF
the seyeral leases decided today theSWo
which attracted the greatest share sot
attention from the court we're what IS
known as the DeLima case and that
known as the Downess case, and 1of
these two the opinion in the Downes
case IS considered the most far-r reach
inc as itaEects the1 fnture, whereas
the DeEmascase dealt. with a transit,
tionaI phase of Our insular relations.
The DeLima case was the hrst.to re-
ceiye the asten5on of The court and as
1T appegre6 to be quite sWeepingly ops
posed to the governments contentious,
many persens precipitately arrived at.
The .eonclusion that the government
had been worsted all along the line.
This view suffered a decided change
when theseonclusion aseannounced IN
the Bawnesscase. The court was near
w evenly divided on both cases but
political lines were not at all controu-
ing.
The DeLima saseia aveked dsheypa9sr
Of the government to collect duty on
goodsimp5rted into the Bnited States
from PnaFbc Rieo after the ratification
of the treaty of Paris and before the
passage of the. Puerto Rican act. The
court said the governments contention
In this case was. Substantially a CLAIM
that Puerto Rico s 81 fof5efgh tesrftoEs 81 4
The entire case turned upon that con-
tention. The court held that the
positioga was not well taken3 that
Puerto Rico was not at the time for
eign tsrsitory51and that Sherefore-Sae-
dnty which had been collected must
be returned. .kEss15s- -33-&S s3sz<s Ass5.:1'
The decision in the Downes case fol-
lowed the history of the dealings OF
the United States with Raegto Rico
step farther. That case Sa# with the
legalityss6 tl1 eSsss ssgnasoN duties oHs
goods iMgsStsl Mom gge9 Rico into
New Yosssaftsr Che lassagelpf the Foas'
rakerA Sd5ng :1sy sdpty upoa
goods Shipped from the United States
into Puerto Rico and also on those
shipped from Puerto Rico to- tbs lsals
ted States: IN THIS case the court held
that such ezaction was gal. and con-
s'!Ebssgas TRs 81 D. 70 a iinssas a Se9
sidered eaaect ire yis tbas Ppsstdscp
was negeEsEe 81 ssscq qsfsi tion Of
island foreign territory; that until
congress acted upon the, question no
duty eenldbe eolects8 sbuft ;sstthat @as
soon as congress outlined a method Of
controlling the islands revenues that
action became bindinga in oshera
words, that congress has power under
the constitution to prescribe the man
ner of eeollectiag ehe venues OF the
countIs fnsIlar possessions AND has
the right to lay duty on goodsslm-
ported into our insula- possessions
from the United States or exported
from them into the United States.
It holds in brief that for taxation
purposes they are net "a part of the
United States TO the extent that
goods shipped between theif ports and
the United States are entitled to the
same treatment as If they were ship
ped between New York and New Or
leans.
opinion On both and there were Wig
orous dissenting opinions in each. In
the Downes case, four Of the nine
members of the court united in an
opinion characterizing in strong Ian.
guage the opinion of the majority in
the case. In this, opposing opinion
Chief Justice Fuller and justices Har-
Ian, Brewer, and Peckhanl, united,
and the chief justice and Justice; Har-:
ian presented their. views in written
form. Justices Gray S5liras. White.
and Mchenna also agreeing with the
conclusion announced that they had
reached the conclusion by different
lines Of argument, and Justices Gray.
White and McKenaasYannounced oPin-
ions outlining SasGs respective posi-.
tions. Justices Shiras, White and Nc
Kenna dissented in the DeLima case.
uniting In an1opinlon4 Justice Gray
presented an independent. and dissent
ing opinieR1in that case. : ~. = = -
Albany AAY !, :, May 26. Electric
cars racing FER assWitch shile running
in opposite d5re6Sons the rate of
forty miles an hour, cost i've lives this
afternoon by a.terrifc collision in
which oFeF forty prominent peePk
were injured, some fatally and Others
seriously W - ff8}S - T
Blacksburg, May Pa shooting
affrav took place in our town this