Show 9 AS IU IE ISLANDERS Argument on Porto Rican Case Not Concluded J GRI6GS WILL FINISH TODAY AttorneyGeneral Contended That thc United States Hns tihc Power to Acquire Territory That Having Acquired Ac-quired It It Has the Right to Govern It He Cited Innumerable Authorities in Support of the Latter Contention Among Others Decision < of Supreme Court in Mormon Case Washington Dcc Arguments In thfi porto RScoPhlllpplnes cases In voivlnfcr the status of those c countries I to the United States was resumed in the Supreme court today I Mr Perkins on resuming his argument argu-ment took up the DC Dred Scott and other cases elating to the extension of the Constitution over territory Mr Perkins summed up the arguments for the appellant in part as follows The people of the United States In and uy Constitution organized and erctd one and the same Government of dellned and limited powers for all people who might inhabit within the dominion of ths Nation The whole puiposs and the aim of the Constitution Constitu-tion Js the establishment in a pennant penna-nt in form unalterable except by the I people themselves of fundamental principles of Government applicable in all time and in every place The power to govern the people Inhabiting In-habiting the territory of the Nation which is delegated by the Constitution Constitu-tion to Congress is i limited and defined by the Constitution and Congress cannot can-not transcend these limits Imposed The Constitution Jhnits the powers of Congress to impose taxation by the mandate that all duties Imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the entire domain of the United States I When counsel referred at one point to the need of applying general Constitutional Con-stitutional principles to the new domain do-main instead of considering mere coin niprclal or practical features TURticc Drown asled It the court could not consider con-sider the practical effect of extending to the Philippines the requirement for trial by jury in every case Mr PerkliiB said that If the Constitution Consti-tution provided that trial by jury should not be withheld he doubted whether the court would consider the I practical inconveniences of giving that right to particular localities Mr Harmon of counsel for appellant in the Philippines case followed Mr Perkins The chief points urged In his argument were By the treaty ot peace between the United Stales and Spain the Philippines became apart a-part of the United States the Government Govern-ment and the citizens of the United States both entered said Islands under the authority from the Constitution with their respective rights defined and marked out the former can exercise no power over the person or property of a citizen of the United Slates beyond what that instrument confers nor lawfully law-fully deny any right which It has reserved re-served Being a part of the United States the Philippine Islands are subject to the provisions of clause 1 se ± i1du I S article ar-ticle 1 and of clauses 5 and G section 9 article 1 oC the Constitution ot the United States And as there Is noth ing differently stipulated in the treaty with respect to commerce it became instantly bound and privileged by the laws which Congress had passed to raise a revenue from duties on Imports and tonnage The President of the United States has no legislative power The Imposition Imposi-tion of custom duties upon commerce between these Islands and other parts of the United States after the treaty of peace and exchange of ratifications by executive order is without lawful authority and the seizure of the prop erty of the plaintiff in error a citizen of the United States under said authority au-thority constitute a taxing of his property without due process of law Mr Harmon elaborated these main points citing and discussing many decisions de-cisions In support of Uicm AttorneyGeneral Grlggs followed presenting the Governments position in the case He contended that the United States has the power to acquire territory that having acquired It It has the right to govern it that administrative ad-ministrative construction Congres Ilonal action and Judicial precedent af I llrm that every port In a ceded country I Js properly regarded as foreign until laws are extended by Congress to the new possessions that the clause of the Constitution of the United States declaring duties uniform through the United States is not applicable to new possessions and that the Constitution does not extend of Its force over acquired ac-quired territory Mr Griggs contended that the right of the United Slates to acquire terri tory has been asserted in the Declara tion of Independence and paid that such acquisition could be made either by conquest by treaty by annexation or by discovery Ho quoted a rumoer of Supreme court decisions in support of this contention A great deal of attention was ziven to the light to govern territory when once acquired and Innumerable au thorities were adduced in support of this position among others the dedl l con of th Supreme court in the Mormon Mor-mon church case in which the court said that rtH would be absurd to hold that the United States has power to acquire territory and no power to govern gov-ern it i when acquired In this case the court aaid further on that the United States having acquired ac-quired the Territory of Louisiana and the Territories west of the Rocky mountains the United States Government Govern-ment was the only one which could impose Im-pose laws upon them and Its sovereignty sover-eignty over them was complete In the course of his argument In this connection Mr Grlggs asserted that international law declares that the new sovereign may deal with the Inhabitants of conquered or coded territory ter-ritory and give them such laws us it r pjz i S Referring to the legal aspect of the case he asserted that the DlrigJcy act applied to merchandise imported from Porto Rico and tho Philippines after their cession to the United States J the same ns it did before and hat lit view of the fact that the tariff laws aro in rem there is no principle or Justice much less of Constitutional restriction Which forbids Congress from taxing In this way the merchandise of outlying possessions of the United States when brought Into the ports of the Union Taking up the Constitutional question ques-tion the AttorneyGeneral declares that there was no doubt that It wau tho Intention of the Paris treaty not to make the ceded Islands a part of the United States and also that it was In tended to make the Inhabitants of those islands citizens Justice Brewer Inquired of the Attor neyGeneral soon after he had begun If he maintained that Arizona and New Mexico came Into tho same category cat-egory with the new possessions in tho limitations that could be placed upon them Mr Grlgga mid he would later consider how far the Territories in this country and those beyond the sea I ted on the Game basis His argument i4 was not concluded when at I 30p m 1 he cpurj t adjoune4 f > uptil tproojroy when Mr Grlsrgswill conclude and Mr I I Aldrich plaintiffs will close the cases for the I |