Case Name: Méndez v. the Adminstration of Porto Rico
Court: Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
Jurisdiction: Puerto Rico
Decision Date: 1904-01-15
Citations: 5 P.R. 167
Docket Number: No. 7
Parties: Méndez v. the Adminstration of Porto Rico.
Judges: Chief Justice Quiñones and Justices Hernández, Figueras and Sulzbacher concurred.
Reporter: Puerto Rico Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 167–175

Head Matter:
Méndez v. the Adminstration of Porto Rico.
Appeal from the District Court of San Juan.
No. 7.
Decided January 15, 1904.
Taxes — Power op the Treasurer to Modify Tax Laws. — Under the Poraker Act the Treasurer of Porto Rico has no power to make any additions to the taxes established by General Order No. 176, series of 1899, inasmuch as only the legislative authority provided for Porto Rico by said- act has power to modify the same or make any additions thereto.
Id. — Operation of Revenue Laws. — The laws and other provisions in the matter of imposts and revenues have no extra-territorial character, being confined in their operation to the territorial limits of the state enacting them.
Id. — Manufacturers.—The word “manufacturer,” as used in the fourth paragraph of General Order 176, series of 1899, has no application to the foreign manufacturers of alcoholic liquors.
Id. — Power to Tax Poreisn Manufactuerers. — Although the state may indirectly tax foreign manufacturers of alcoholic liquors, the adequate manner of doing this is by compelling importers to pay the imposts through definite legal provisions.
STATEMENT OP THE CASE.
This is an appeal pending before us, the parties to which are the Attorney General of Porto Rico; represented and de fended by Emilio del Toro, Esq., Fiscal, and Antonio Méndez, acting in the capacity of president of the £ ‘ Centro de Detallis-tas” (Retailers’ Organization), represented and defended by Jacinto Texidor, Esq., from the judgment rendered by the District Conrt of San Jnan, May 4, 1903, in litigative-admin-istrative proceedings, which judgment is word for word as follows:
“Judgment. — In the city of San Juan, Porto Rico, May fourth, one thousand nine hundred and three. In the matter of these litiga-tive-administrative proceedings instituted by Antonio Méndez, president of the ‘Centro de Detallistas’ represented, first by Herminio Díaz Navarro, Esq., and afterwards by Jacinto Texidor, Esq., against the Administration, represented by the Acting Attorney-General, concerning a decision of the Treasurer of Porto Rico.
“In the Gazette of June 5, 1900, which appears in the record, circular No. 8 of the Treasurer, dated June 4, was published stating that the internal-revenue tax on alcoholic liquors imposed by virtue of General Order No. 176, series of 1899, and by the act of Congress, approved April 12, 1900, should be paid, unless theretofore collected, on all' alcoholic liquors manufactured in Porto Rico or imported into Porto Rico, by the affixture of a three-cent internal-revenue stamp for each litre or fraction of litre on every package containing more than one litre; and each bottle exposed to the public for retail sale should bear the stamps, and the proper stamps should be purchased and retained for delivery at each sale of packages intended for sale at wholesale.
“A litigative-administrative appeal, accompanied by a copy of the said Gazette, was taken from said circular in the name of Antonio Méndez, president of the ‘ Centro de Detallistas ’; and on March 23, 1901, proceedings were instituted for the annulment of said circular on the ground that it was ' contrary to law and that the tax referred to therein could not be levied or collected, the following being found as facts: The circular and its contents; that Méndez took an appeal therefrom to the Governor, as established by the communications of the 12th and 16th of July, attached to the record, which appeal was unsuccessful; the law on the subject being found in paragraph 4 of General Order No 176 of No vember 7, 1899; that neither that order nor the Foraker Act refers to liquors introduced into the country prior to the promulgation of said laws, nor to those which continued to be imported from foreign countries; that in order that the same should be applied it was nec.essary that it should have been ordered by the Congress of the United States or the Insular Legislature; that the liquors found in the country when the Foraker Act was promulgated could not be subjected to additional taxes, because both the general order and the act are silent with reference thereto, for the reason that laws do not have a retroactive effect, and because said liquors previously imported had paid all taxes, and among them, the local consumption tax and the surcharge of fifty per cent, on the customs, tariff, according to order published November 9, 1899.
“In his answer the Attorney-General asked that the complaint be dismissed, pleading the following facts: Paragraph 4 of General Order No. 176 of November 7, Í899; that upon carrying into effect the said general order some doubts arose which were decided after consultation, and the Treasury, being authorized therefor, issued circulars No. 5 of May 24, 1900, and No. 8 of June 4 of the same year, the latter being quoted in full; that the appeal was directed against said circular No. 8; the legal authority being: The circular in question, the same not conflicting with paragraph 4 of General Order No. 176 of 1899; that said circular does not impose new taxes, the only exception made in aforesaid general order being of liquors that had been exported; and therefore the decision appealed from has been issued in the exercise of' lawful authority and in furtherance of the interests of the Treasury, without violating any right whatsoever.
“That the case having been opened for the reception of evidence, and the same having been waived by the plaintiff, and none having been offered by the office of the Attorney-General, a day was set for the hearing in compliance with legal formalities, when the parties pleaded such matters as they deemed conducive to their rights.
“Presiding Judge Juan Morera Martínez rendered the following judgment:
“On April 12, 1900, the Senate and Congress of the United States enacted the law temporarily to provide revenues and a civil government for Porto Rico, which went into effect on May 1, 1900, section 8 whereof provided that the laws and ordinances of Porto Rico continued in force, except as amended, altered or modified by the same, or as altered or modified by military orders, until altered, amended or repealed by the legislative authority created by said act for Porto Rico, or by act of the Congress of the United States.
“On June 4, 1900, the Treasurer had no power, according to the foregoing reasoning, to make any addition to the taxes established by General Order of November 7, 1899, inasmuch as only the legislative authority created for the Island by said act of April 12, 1900, had power to modify or enlarge the same, or make any addition thereto, as was done by said legislative authority on January 31, 1901, through an ‘Act to provide revenues for the People of Porto Rico, and for other purposes.’
“The aforesaid circular of June 4 violated a right acquired by the claimants who had on hand imported alcoholic liquors, inasmuch as it imposed upon them a tax to which said liquors were not subject at the time of their importation; for the word ‘manufacturers,’ as used in paragraph 4 of General Order No. 176 of 1899, can not include foreign manufacturers for the.purposes of exacting an impost on alcoholic liquors manufactured outside of Porto Rico, as the laws and other provisions in the matter of imposts and revenues have no extra-territorial character, being circumscribed in their operation to the territorial limits of the state enacting them; and although the latter may indirectly tax foreign manufacturers, the appropriate manner of doing this is by compelling importers to pay the imposts through definite legal provisions, which are not to be found in the aforesaid General Order of November 7, 1899.
“We adjudge that we should sustain and do sustain the administrative complaint, and accordingly, circular No. 8, published in the Official Gazette No. 129, of June 15, 1900, is annulled in so far as liquors imported to the island mentioned therein are concerned, without special imposition of costs.
“Thus by this our decision, finally adjudging, do we hold, order and sign ”
Notice of the above judgment having been served upon the parties, counsel for the Attorney General took an appeal therefrom to the Supreme Court, which was allowed, the appellant and the respondent, Méndez, being cited respectively on the 12th and 13th of May, 1903.
The record of proceedings in first instance was forwarded to this court, the Fiscal appearing for the purpose of sustain ing the appeal on behalf of the Attorney General, and Jacinto Texidor, Esq., in representation of Antonio Méndez, as president of the ‘ ‘ Centro de Detallistas. ’ ’ Their appearance being duly entered, the proper memorandum was ordered to be drawn and exhibited to the parties, and a day was set for the hearing, which took place on December 3, 1903, when both the Fiscal and the respondent presented their arguments.
Mr. del Toro, Fiscal, for appellant.
Mr. Texidor, for respondent.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice MacLeary,
after making the above statement of facts, delivered the opinion of the court.
The findings of fact and conclusions of law on which the judgment appealed from is based are accepted.
The District Court of San Juan having committed no error in its decision of this case, as contained in the above judgment, we hold that we should affirm and do affirm the judgment rendered by the District Court of San Juan, on May 4,1903, without special imposition of costs.
Chief Justice Quiñones and Justices Hernández, Figueras and Sulzbacher concurred.