The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1902-12-03
A CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION.

An Interesting Case Now on It's Way to
the United States Supreme Court
James D. Dewelf jr.. Attorney for
the Plaintiffs.
Judge Platt, while holding court in
the United States circuit court in New
York yesterday, granted a writ of err
ror to the Supreme court upon the pc
tition of Attorney James D. Dewell, jr.,
in the case of J. D. Dewell & Co. VS..
John W. Mix, which case was decided
adversely to the plaintiffs in the Circuit
court.
The case involves the payment Of du-
ties on certain cargoes of molasses and
sugar, products of the island of Porto
Rico and entered in this port during the
months of May and June. 1882 there
having been no protest fled against the
payment of such duties, the plaintiffs
contending that Porto Rico was a part
OF the United States and the goods were
not subject to any duties wha tsoever.
These goods We're entered after the
proclamation of the treaty of peace and
before congress had passed any laws
| to govern the island.
The case is one of deep interest to
| importers throughout the United States
as there are many cases involving the
same points that are set up in this case
and as the decision In this case was the
first one to be decided, the decision Of
the Supreme court will be watched for
with great interest.
| This case is similar to the case of
DeLima VS.. Bidwell, one of the famous
insular cases which divided the su-
preme court and upset previous ideas
that all territory annexed to the United
States came under the constitution, in
deciding by a vote Of five to four that
congress had the right to impose tariff
regulations upon the imports from new
! possessions. But in this case it was de-
cided that all duties collected under
protest after the ratification of the
| treaty of Paris and before congress
passed the Foraker bill, were unlawful
| ly collected and must be returned.
| 1t will be noticed that there is only a
slight difference between the two cases
in that in the DeLima case the formal
| protest had been filed and in the case
in question no protest was filed, the
plaintiffs claiming that the goods were
not imported merchandise.
There were several claims due citi-
zens Of Porto Rico who had paid duties
| upon goods going from the United
| States into Porto Rico without protest,
after the proclamation Of the treaty Of
Paris and before the passage Of the
Foraker bill
Congress passed bill last April Civ
| ing such citizens of the island of Porto
Rico the right TO sue to recover these
amounts in the court of claims.
The first suit to be handed down I'M
der that act was the case of Gonzales
and Alonzo. who recovered judgment
for the full amount of duties which they
had been compelled to pay with per
cent interest.
A bill was presented to congress to
refund the monies to citizens of the
United States who had paid duties on
goods coming from Porto Rico during
these two periods and who had filed no
/ protest. but the bill did not pass.
In the writ of error prayed out in the
Dewell case the plaintiffs claim that the
constitution has been violated in that
| if they are compelled to pay these duties
that duties are not uniform throughout
the United States and they further as
sign many reasons Of error in the de-
/ cision of the trial court.