The Billings gazette. [volume] (Billings, Mont.) 1896-1919, 1902-09-30
QUESTIONING GOVERNMENTS
RIGHT TO COLLECT IMPosrs.
ALASKA HAS A GRIEVANCE
Issue Over Taxes Imposed to Be
Fought in United states
Supreme Court.

IA oOpC. Os- 1uC GOVERN
ment has another fight on its hands
involving the question of whether
the constitution follows the flag. This
time the seat Of the warfare Is n
Alaska, where protests are made that
taxes are imposed on American citi
zens there in violation Of the con.
stitution, and, like the De Lima and
Downs Porto Rico cases, the issue
is to be fought out in the United
States supreme court.
The case comes to the supreme
court under four separate suits, all
of which have been grouped into n
since the same question is involved
IN each. On the docket Of the court
they are put down as follows: A. w.
Corbus VS.. The Alaska Treadwell
Gold Mining company; Charles Stew
art, appellant, VS.. The Washington
& Alaska Steamship company; The
Pacific Steam Whaling company VS..
The United States; The Pacific Coast
Steamship company VS.. The United
States. n
The suits are all against the gov
eminent. In the first two cases, how
ever, it was necessary to bring pro-
ceedings against the company in or
der to get the papers in such shape
as to carry them to the higher courts.
The cases We're originally down for
argument before the spring session
oi the supreme court, but they were
postponed to the October term in or
der to have a full bench present, Chief
Justice Fuller believing that they
were important enough to demand
consideration from all the judges.
The law that is declared to be un-
constitutional is the act that was
passed March 3, 1899, establishing
a code of criminal procedure for
Alaska. Sections AGO and 461 are the
Objectionable ones, for it is claimed
that they impose duties and imposts
which arc mot required t0ebo-poia
elsewhere. This is the point raised
in the Treadwell Gold Mining com
pany's case, that corporation being
in the state of Minnesota,
and the steamship cases involve the
right of the government to collect
and other taxes on vessels
engaged in the Alaskan trade when
such vessels have already paid the
taxes in the Pacific coast states.
The argument of the applicants is
based on secticn 8, and article / Of
he constitution, which provides that
all duties, imports and excuses shall
be uniform throughout the United
States, and also that no preference
shall be given by any regulation of
commerce or revenue to the ports of
state v those of another; nor
shall vessels bound to or from one
state be obliged to enter, clear or pay
in another" Objection is made
% the collection Of tonnage taxes
IN the vessels belonging to the ap-
1ellants on their arrival at ports in
Alaska after having previously paid
such taxes in the ports of California
Ind Washington. ,
1t is claimed that since the decis-
on of the supreme court in the De
lima and Downs ase there is nos
any doubt as to the meaning
f the constitution in regard to the
objection Of duties in different parts
f the United States. It is also ar
,ued that it has been definitely set
led that territory acquired by treaty
$ Alaska was, does not become q
tate or subject to the provisions ]