The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-01-12
egins His Argument at the Close of
Attorney General Grisgs's Adj
dress to the supreme Court.
BRINGS OUT A NEW POINT
SAYS THE REAL QUESTION AT ISSUE
IN THE CUSTOMS CASES
Is whether h Constitution Extends
Over the Congress-, the Presi-
dent md the Cabinet.

jail 1l.-<AtlOiuSy 1cH-
eral Griggs resumed his argument before
the United States Supreme Court to-day.
continuing his statement of the position
of the government as TO the rule Of uni
formity in tariff and internal revenue
taxes. He insisted that the application of
the internal revenue laws to Porto Rico
profitable. A rule of uniformity in inter-
nal taxes, he said. could be established
when applied to contiguous States. as the
States were governed by similar laws and
similar conditions. But when it came to
applying these taxes to widely separated
territories inhabited by polyglot races a
wide discretion was necessary, and to en-
deavor to apply a system of internal taxes
would be rather applying a strait-jacket
than n constitution. So, he said, the cor
rect rule required US TO consider the uni
formity of the States; but diversity was
the necessary rule as to Territories be-
cause of diversity as to geography and
racial characteristics observable in the
Territories. Continuing, he said Congress
should have discretion TO impose only such
taxes as the people could bear. We have
been so long accustomed 10 regard the
United States in accordance with its old
lines, said Mr.. Griggs, that it is almost a
wrench TO- consider that t there end Is or NOW
~ ot0tNS
circle and in the islands of many seas.
This expansion should result in a larger
comprehension of the duties and necessi-
ties, and the impossibility of enforcing an
ironclad rule of uniformity everywhere
should be borne I'm mind.
Referring to the fact that there were
different rates of taxation applied to the
Indians, the attorney general said there
was no warrant in law for one rule for a
tribe of red men and another for a race
of brown men or a race of black men.
AS to the future he said we must con-
oide the the scd pGisiihf5lity Of net Ggy 1he % t6e sadaS.
central Africa. China or a spot In the ant
arctic circle and the classes of people who
may at any future time be entitled TO citi-
zenshib. The power OF Congress TO legis-
late was amply sufficient to permit the set
Element of all such contingencies. The
that no private right would be conserved,
but tina the rights of the government will
be hampered by the success of the conten-
ton OF the plaintiffs.
cARLIsLE's ARGUMENT.
Hon. John G.. Carlisle. chief attorney
for the plaintiffs, followed Mr.. Griggs. He
began by saying thai he would not discuss
questions of policies, as they belonged to
another forum. The questions were to be
| settled only on the Constitution. He said
he had been as yet unable TO form an
| opinion as TO the exact contention OF the
| government. First, however, he believed
the contention was that the Island of Porto
| Rico did not become a part OF the United
States either on the signing OF the protocol
| or the ratification of the treaty of Paris;
that there was n condition existing which
| placed the island under the general pro-
lection and jurisdiction OF the United
| the period between the acquisition or the
| territory and the passage of laws by Con-
gress the island might be governed by the
President subject TO laws of war, and that
the island did not become part or the
United States until admitted by Congress
and until such time Congress may legislate
for the island. From this IL Is argued.
he said. that not being a part of the United
States Congress has a right to say what
taxes may be levied and collected.
Mr.. Carlisle first took up the conditions
which led to the takingN of the island and
read from proclamations OF Generals Miles
| and Wilson to show that the occupation
was meant to be permanent. The cession
| of the island by Spain, he said, was COM
plete and had been acknowledged by all
nations.
Justice White asked if the President
| might ACQUIRE territory without the consent
of the treaty-making power, but Mr.. Car
Isle said he was arguing that peace OBJ
tanned after the signing OF the protocol:
| that there was then no war and that the
President could only create n de facto gov
| eminent and have it governed.
| While the Constitution imposed the duty
upon Congress of regulating commerce., vet
since the signing of the peace protocol the
President. he said, has exercised the powers
of assessing duties and carrying out all
tlC I - 49," toEc'
the real question was not whether the con-
| stitution extended to the inhabitants of
Porto Rico, but whether it extends over the
| Congress, the President and the Cabinet.
The contention is that the Constitution pro-
tects every person in the land i'm his per-
sonal and property rights OF the citizen.
| When a government takes from one man
| more than IL should, 1t is not taxation, but
Ii is taking his property without due
| process of law and giving him no compensa-
ton for Ii.
INTENTION OF THE FATHERS.
On the point that the Territories were not
a part of the United States, Mr.. Carlisle
read a history of the framing Of the Con-
stitution. showing that. first. it was the
intention that 'all acts and treaties should
be the supreme law Of the land. This was
before the word Constitution" had been
introduced. and he took it to mean thai
1t was the intention to have the Consti-
tuition apply to all parts of the country,
whether in the States or simply I'm terri
tory belonging TO them.
| Mr.. Carlisle argued that the Constitution
must be interpreted as a whole and must
enable the government to accomplish all
the purposes for which Ii was framed. IL
must be considered as entire. TO which all
the agents OF the government must look
| for power. international law, he said, could
not govern any agent OF this government,
but the court could look to it for defining
WHAT the CONSTITUTION means. Inere W0LlQ
be two Constitutions. he said. In the inter-
probation of the counsel on the other side,
one for States and defining the powers and
caring for the rights OF citizens. and the
other for the Territories. and giving no
rights. Upon the Constitution there has
been constructed q comprehensive system
of laws governing all States and Territor-
les and from the first Congress has made
uniform laws for traffic between States and
Territories as well as extradition, bank
ruptcy and naturalization laws. on the lat-
ter point, he said that in Interpretation of
the government there were sitting courts
outside the United States in a territory.
| granting citizenship in the United States
10 q resident upon five years habitation
Of a territory outside the United States.
Mr.. Carlisle undertook 10 show that both
direct and indirect taxes had been laid
upon States and Territories . alike and
duties had been laid upon imports
into Territories as we'll as States. Under
the contention of the government
the United States IL might be taken that
goods could go free from Porto Rico
TO Alaska, but this was not the case, for
the same duties are charged on goods from
81 Territory going TO Porto Rico as from a
State. That the tax levied Is a local tax
was denied. but IL was denominated a tax
for local purposes.
Mr.. Carlisle read the portion of the Porto
Ricaa act establishing the rates OF duty
and disposition of the moneys collected "a
a basis for his complete argument and
from the United States TO Porto Rico there
F, should be levied Is per cent. duties on
foreign goods with the internal revenue
| OF Porto Rico added and that goods from