The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, December 3, 1901, Page 3

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, TUESDAY,'DECEMBEB 3, 1901. 3 INSULAR TEST CASES ARE DECIDED CONGRESS HAS POWER TO IMPOSE DUTY ON PORTO RICAN EXPORTS United States Supreme Court Sustains the Constitutionality of the Law In- volved in Dooley Case. ASHINGTON, Deec. United States Supreme Court the Dooley cases, the constitutionality of the law of April 12, providing for the collec- n of duty on articles shipped from the ed States into Porto Rico. The de- n was rendered by Justice Brown. ment is sustained in the sec- case. The Chief Justice and Harlan, Brewer and Peckham enting opinion. They hold imposed was export in cter and the fact that it was levied he benefit of Porto Rico did not nge its character. The Dooley case grows out of the im- sition of tariff duties on goods shipped m New York to Porto Rico May 1 #00, to October 28 of the same year under e act of April 12, 190, providing reve- nd 2 civil government for Porto involved being $1433. This N collected at Porto Rico on hipped to that port by Dooley, i & Co. to their agent in San Juan 1e_coliections were imposed under that ction of law in question which provides all merchandise coming into Porto ¥ from the Uunted States shall be entered at the severai ports of entry ent of the 15 per cent duties to be levied, collected of merchandise n countries into the the Dingley tariff s that Congress r the constitution to impose ich as were levied under on articles taken into 1 Porto Rico Not Foreign Territory. Justice Brown heid that as Porto Rico tory the goods shipped not exports, but imports, the wide ess in the matter of tax- icient for a contingency of At best, he said, the duty y expedient, and as it was vided in the Foraker act Rican Legislature could ter of the enactment Foraker act was e interest of Por- act was sustained down in the Downs the insular cases decided n he decision of the ice Brown opinion was not stification of ex- said that the duties levied the ground that they | se of the constitution de- ) tax or duty shall be laid »orted from any State.” in the case of Wood- 1ad held that the word ction with the provis- , “that no State or duties on im- to articles ase Justice Miller, on of the court, t too much to say so far as research neither the words ‘“export” mnor mposts” are to be found in the c without _some words to show that foreign meant. Whether we look, terms of the clause of the con- fons to other to the history of or to the com- r who took part in we are forced to the con- tion existed to prohibit the word “‘imposts” approved in the case by a majority of t goods carried from Rico can be con- from New f that clause of the | iey are neither exports are still liable to be ess under the ample and r a a laid by ~ arriving at Porto v York is a duty ypon an York or upon an import was not free from which and the in Justice Brown con- is entirely clear. ported to Portn v the Collector of Juan after the arrival of the < of that port. From became “pavable as ise. Now, while an most neccssarily in om_another, of the tax imposed, er whether the duty )t adding to the reve- from which the export he benefit of the territory are imported. By the third Foraker act The ted States it is declared that “when- Legisiative Assembly at Porto Rico WORK WILL CONTINUE ON PENNSYLVANIA MINE Bupreme Court Decides Adversely to the Boston and Montana Mining Company. HELENA, Mont., Dec. 2—The Supreme Court to-8ay handed down an important decision in the litigation between the Bos- ton and Montana Mining Company and the Montana Ore Purchasing Company. Eome time ago Judge Clancy of Butte de- nied & motion of the Boston and Mon- tana Company for an injunction to re- strain the Montana Ore Purchasing Company from working the Pennsylvania mine pending a decision on the ownership of the mine by the Supreme Court. The Boston _and Montana appealed from Judge Clancy to the Supreme Court and the latter to-day affirmed the lower court. There is now a provisional injunc- tion in force, under the terms of which the Montana Ore Purchasing Company is operating the Pennsylvania, but it is not beileved there will be any further at- tempts by the Boston and Montana to evjoin the rival company until the Su- preme Court hands down its opinion in the main case. —_—— Imports Into the Philippines. WASHINGTON, Dec. 2—Secretary Root to-day declined to express an opinion as to the effect of the insular decisions in the Supreme Court to-day until he has had an opportunity to read them in full. Figures obtained at the War Department end Treasury Bureau of Statistics rela- tive to the trade affected show that from the beginning of United States occupancy gf the Philippines, August 22, 1898, up to June 30 last, the total imports into the Pnn!p{rmf-‘s from the United States were valued at $1,607,486, while during the same period the imports from Spain were val- ued at $1,992,9%. On the other hand, the imports into the United States from the Philippines from September 1, 1888, to De- cember 1, 1901, aggregated 315,448,600 But of this large total only $1,894,5623 consisted of dutiable goods, so that the refund on A these would not be large. WASHINGTON, Dee. 2—Chief ler snnounced to-day that after the ©f the court on Monday Dext & recess be taken for four weeks, the court to recon- vene Junuary &, f Proceeding, Jus- | | to tax *articles exported from any State.’ ountry under the | York | rity conferred by the | tax is levied being of | 2.—The | to-day decided the second of[ | still, in | imposing duties | andise coming into Porto Rico from | shall have enacted and put into operation a system of local taxation to_meet the necessi- ties of the Government of Porto Rico by this act established and shall by resolution duly involving | passed so notify the President, he shall make proclamation thereof and thereupon all tariff dutles on mercnandjse and articles goinz into Porto Rico shall cease, and from and after guch date all such merchandise and articles shall be entered at the several ports of entry free of duty.” And by section 4 “‘the duties and taxes col- lected in Porto Rico in pursuance of this act IR covered into the gen- but shall be held as a separate fund and shall be placed at the disposal to be used for the government and benefit of Porto Rico until the Government of Porto Rico, herein provided for, shall have been organized, when all moneys theretofore collected under the provisions hereof then un- expended shall be transferred to the local treasury of Porto Rico.” Now, there can be no doubt whatever that if the Legislative Assembly of Porto Rico should with the consent of Congress lay a tax upon goods arriving from ports of the United States such tax if legally imposed would be a duty upon imports to Porto Rico and not upon ex- vorts from the United States, and we think the same result must follow If the duty be laid by Congress in the interest and for the benefit of Porto Rico. Only Temporary Legislation. The truth is that in imposing the duty as a temporary expedient with a proviso that it may bBe abolished by the Legislative Assem- bly of Porto Rico at its will, Congress there- by shows that it is undertaking to legislate for the island temporarily and only until the local government is put into operation. The mere fact that the duty passes through the hands of the revenue officers of the United States is immaterial in view of the require- ment that it shall not be covered into the general fund of the Treasury, but held as a separate fund for the government and benefit of Porto Rico. The exaction is really correlative to that of Downs ve. Bidwell, in which we held that Congress could lawfully impose a duty on im- from Porto Rico, nothwithstanding the fon of the constitution that all dutles, and excises shall be uniform through- posts out the United States. 1t is true that this conclusion was reached by a majority of the court by different pro- cesses of re: ning, but it is not the less true that the conclusion that certain provisions of the constitution did apply to Porto Rico and that certain others did not, there was no dif- Terence of opinion. It is not intended by this opinion to inti- mate that Congress may lay an export tax upon merchandise carried from one State to another. While this does not seem to be for- bidden by the express words of the constitu- tion, it would be extremely difficult if not <ible to lay such a tax without a viola- Of the first paragraph of article 1 sec- tion 8, that “all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.’” There s a wide difference between the full and paramount power of Congress in legislat- ing for a Terrifory in the condition of Porto Rico and its power with respect to the States, which is merely incidental to its right to regu- late interstate commerce. The question, how- ever, is not involved in this case, and we do not desire to express an opinion upon it. There dutles were properly collected and the action of the Circuit Court in sustaining the de- mgurrer to the complaint was correct, and it s therefore affirmed. Chief Justice Fuller Dissents. Chief Justice Fuller and Justices Brewer, Harland and Peckham unite in a dissent- ing opinion in the case. The opinion was read by the Chief Justice and was based largely on the constitutional provisions con impo: tion rcerning the regulation of commerce. He said in part: The power to regulate interstate commerce was granted in order that trade between the States might be left free from discriminating legislation and not impart the power to create antagonistic commercial relations between them. The prohibition of preference of ports was coupled with the prohibition of taxation on articles exported. The citizens of each State were declared “‘entitled to all privileges and fmmunities of citizens Jn the several States’ and that included the right of ingress and egress and the enjoyment of the priviieges of trade and commerce. The prohibition on Congress is explicit and noticeably different from the prohibition of the States. The State is forbidden to ‘“‘lay any im- posts or duties;” Congress is forbiiden to lay “any tax or duty.” The State is forbldden from laying imposts or duties on ‘‘imports or ex- that is, articles coming into or going e United States. Congress is forbidden Taking up the plea that the duties in 3 | this case were lald not on articles ex- 2 vs. Bldwell, it s | ported from the State of New York, but on articles imported into Porto Rico, the Chi=f Justice said the language used pre- cludes this contention. The geographical origin of the shipments controls, and it is not material whether the duties were col- lected at the place of exportation or at Porto Rico. They were imposed on arti- cles cxported from the State of New York and before the articles had reached their | uitimate destination and had been min- gled with the common mass of property on_the island. The dissenting opinion concludes as fol- | lows: The gress, and were therefore lawful, will xot bear exandination. Songress may- lay local taxes in the terri- tnries, affecting persons and property therein, or authorize territorial legislatures to do so, Put it cannot lay tariff duties on articles ex- ported from one State to another, or from any State to the territories or from any State to foreign countries. or grant a power in that regard which it does not possess. But the de- cision now made recognizes such powers in Congress as will enable it, by means of tax- ation, t» exclude the products of Porto Rico fiom the States as well as the products of the States from Porto Rico: and this, notwith- standing it was held in De Lima vs. Bidwell, that Porto Rico after the ratification of the treaty with Spain ceased to be foreign and be- came domestic territory, We think it clear on this record that plain- tiffs were entitled to recover and that the Judgment should be reversed. THE DANISH TREATY Is STILL PENDING Two Important Matters Cause a Hitch in the Negotia- tions. CALL BUREAU, 146 G STREET, N. W., WASHINGTON, Dec. 2.—Difficulty is being experienced by the United States in reaching an agreement with Denmark for the transfer to this Government _cf the Danish West Indles. Secretary Hay and Minister Brun, Danish Minister, have been endeavoring to settle two important points—the price and the relations resi- dents of the islands shall bear to this Government when the sale is made. The report from Copenhagen that an agree- ment has been reached and the price de- termined upon is untrue. No decision as to price has been fixed. States is willing to pngdabggf szuogé‘f% but no more. The question of the Status of the residents of the islands after American sovereignty has been extend- ed over the territory is on the eve of settlement. They will not b as full-fledged citizens. i e Switchmen’s Strike Fails. PITTSBURG, Pa., Dec. Z—The strike begun by the members of the Swithmen’s Union a week ago is practically over, ai- though the switchmen say their ranks are holding firm and none of their num- ber have gone back, while there nave been a number of accessions during the week. The strike, however, has failed to tie up any of the railroads and all the lines are now receiving freight, while the ¥ are being cleared up. The tied-up plants are resuming operations. ———— Big Copper Incorporation. TRENTON, N. J., Dec. 2—The Copper Range Consolidated Company was incor- zmhe’?h to-day, with a capital of ,000. e company is f mine, smelt and deu.lp y o it ores. Herbert 1. Foster, D. A. Childs, Draper, Michael Sapri, all of Boston; Au- nutul 8. Meeker, Louls B. Dalley, K. K. c’:’h.ren. Clifford Perkins, all of Jersey proposition that because the proceeds of | these duties were to be used for the benefit of | Porto Rico they might be regarded as if laid | by Porto Rico itself, with the consent of Con- | — wdl P e [Umumunlnlmlmnuul {l T b a5 Ay ) NI UNCLE SAM—Gentlemen, Walk In and Do Your Best. ALL BUREAU, 1406 G STREET, N. W., WASHINGTON, Dec. 2.—An- ti-anarchist bills are coming to the front thick and fast, and it is now prcbable that some legisla- tion in this connection will be among the early acts of Congress. Among the first of bills will be that of Representative Graham of Pennsylvania, which will be presented to-morrow in the House. It provides: First—That any person belonging to a society which countenances in writing the taking of human life shall be deemed an anarchist, and. - Second—That any anarchist, as thus de- fined, who shall attempt the life of any person holding a United States office, ex- ecutive or appointive, shall, on conviction in the United States, be sentenced to death by hanging. It was estimated by officials of the House that over 3000 bills had been intro- duced before 12 o’clock to-day. There was much rivalry for the honor of having bill No. no less than fifteen members having asked for this precedence. The indications are that the bill of Mc- Cleary, restricting the sale of oleomar- garine, will be so designated when the 1ecords are made up. The bills took a wide range. Three Pacific cable bills, by Representa- tives Sherman of New York, Corliss of Michigan and Jones of Washington, gave varying phases of this project, Jones pro- posing the northern raute via Puget Sound, with an appropriation of $8,000,000, and Corliss proposing o Government bill, while Sherman offered the plan allowing private corporation in the enterprise. Am®ng other measures introduced were the following: By Sulzer of New York—Protesting against the conduct of the war in South Africa. BY Thayer of Massachusetts and Brom- Fgll of Ohlo—Removing the duty on es. By Otey of Virginia—Giving a tobacce ratio to series. By Cousins of Towa—To repeal the bank- ruptey laws. y Davidson of Wisconsin—To make oleomargarine subject to State laws. By Flynn of Oklahoma—Granting state- hood to Oklahoma. By Brownlow of Tennessee—A Depart- ment of Commerce, Labor and Manufac- tures; also amending the constitution so as to define assaults on the President, Vice President, members of the Cabinet and Justices, and giving Congress power to fix penalties. By Jones of Washington—For a commis- slon to investigate the Japanese. Street Given a Hearing. PHOENIX, Ariz, Dec. 2.—A special dis- patch received here to-day from Wash- ington announces that the Chief Justice of Arizona, Webster Street, against whom charges had been filed, has been given the hearing he requested and granted until January 1 in which to file an answer. Among the charges were those of bribery in several cases, all of which have been dismissed. The hearing was continued at the re«auen of Judge Street, who desired to produce documents for the full satis- faction of the, Department of Justice. DENVE! Dec. 2.—The Republic morrow print an interview. with A. Packard, son, in e says it se connection With the team, feedsphn sarrived at Manila to-day, BILLS AGAINST ANARCHY ARE COMING TO THE FRONT BY C.C. CARLTON. Special Dispatch to The Call. By Cushman of Washington—For elec- tion of United States Senators by popula- tion vote. By Rodney of New Mexico—Admitting New Mexico to statehood. By Cushman of Washington—Prohibit- ing the location of mining claims in Alas- ka by power of attorney. By Kahn of California—For the designa- tion of certain points on the boundary. By Curtis of Kansas—For the punish- ment of persons assaulting or killing the By Newlands of Nevada—For the re lamation of lands by the use of all mon- eys received from the sale of public lands in the arid and semi-arid States. CONFER WITH THE PRESIDENT. Berd and Grant Have a Conference on Offices in California. CALL BUREAU, 1406 G STREET, N. W., WASHINGTON,, Dec. 2.—Senator Bard and U. 8. Grant conferred with President Roosevelt to-day regarding Federal offices in California. Their visit is understood to have special reference to| the Collectorship of Internal Revenue for the First district, now held by J. C. Lynch. The conference was brief and of a gen- eral character and no decision in the mat- ters under discussion was reached. It is understood that the California del- egation will soon confer regarding the In- ternal Revenue Collectorship, and that the President's action in the matter of retaining Lynch or appointing a new man :;Il{ll largely depend upon their recommen- ation. Referring to the appointment of a Sur- veyor General, in place of J. M. Gleaves, deceased, Senator Perkins said to-day that he wo gladly indorse any good man whom Senator Bard would recom- mend for the place. Senator Perkins will soon introduce a bill for a public building in San Fran- cisco, and has assurance that in the present Congress the measure will be en- acted. In drawing for seats in the House to- day Representative Needham was the first of the California delegation to have his name called and he selected a very desirable desk, as also did Loud and Kahn. Their seats are among the best on the Republican side. Metcalf, Coombs, McLachlan and Woods were called quits late after the best seats were all taken, but under the new arrangement of desks in the House no seat is undesirably lo- cated. Senators Perkins and Bard have taken L 3 20 2 22 e 2 2 ) Democratic Caucus Committee. WASHINGTON, Dec. 2—Representa- tive Hay of Virginia, chairman of the House Democratic caucus, to-day an- nounced the following committee, as called for by the Demccratic caucus last Saturday, to consider a number of reso- lutions relative to the policy of the Dem- ocratic members of the House: Richardson, De Armond, ‘Williams of Mississippi, Robertson, Swanson, New- lands of Nevada, Underwood, Willlams, Henry, Howard and Thayer. The com- mittee is to report to a House caucus on January 10. ‘WASHINGTON, Dec. 2.—The &5 eral_has received a telegram r'r?n‘:‘mccu‘?h Chaffee saying that the transport Kilpatrick ters at the respectively. land avenue, N. E. Senator Perkins will be the guest evening. PEACE TREATY Chief Justice Fuller ASHINGTON, Dec. 2.—Opin- jons were rendered in the Su- preme Court to-day in the last two of the insular test cases. One of them, the case of Emil J. Pepke against the United States, is better known as the “fourtcen diamond ring case,” and involved the re- lationship of the United States to the Philippine Islands from a tariff point of view. The other case, known as the Dooley case No. 2, involved the constitu- tionality of the collection of duty on goods shipped from New York to Porto Rico. In the former case the court, through Chief Justice Fuller, held that the dia- mond rings brought in from the Philip- pines and over which the case arose should have been exempt from duty un- der the Paris treaty of peace, as that treaty made the Pnilippines American territory. The decision in the Philippine case followed closely that of the first Porto Rican case in the last term. In the Dooley case decided to-day it was held that the duty collected on goods carried from New York to Porto Rico was permissible, but that it was in reality a tax for the benefit of the Porto Ricans themselves, rather than an export duty, as was claimed by the merchants who antagonized the Government. In both cases there were dissenting opinions concurred in by four of the nine Justices of the court. The decisions were rendered in the rocm of the Senate Committee on Ju- diclary, where the court is sitting tem- porarily, and owing to the limited space there were comparatively few persons present. The delivery of the opinions in chief, with the reading of the dissenting opin- jons, consumed a little more than an hour, and it was listened to with the closest attention. It is generally belleved that the find- ing in the Philippine case will lead to early efforts to secure legislation for the regulation of our commercial rela- tions with those islands. As the Porto Rican opinion sustains the constitution- ality of the Foraker act, no such neces- sity will arise with reference to Porto Rico. History of the Pepke Case. The record in the Pepke case shows that Pepke, who was the respondent in the court below, was a soldier In the army of the United States in the island of Luzon; that while there and after the tion of the peace treaty he pur- :::‘sflecdn the fourteen diamond rings which are involved in the case. He afterward brought the rings, while still in the ser- vice of the United States, aboard a United States vessel transporting his regiment to San Francisco, where he was mustered out. Later he went with the rings to Chicago, where the rings were seized by the customs officials under the claim that the Philippines were foreign terri- tory and merchandise brought from those islands was subject to duties. Pepke set up the claim that customs duties on mer- chandise under the circumstances were contrary to the United States laws and in violation of his Tights as a citizen. "The case came to_the Supreme Court States for the Northern Division of Iili- nois. In that court the facts set up in Pepke's plea were admitted by a demur- Ter §led by the United States, and that T ¥ etained the demurrer, overruling the plea and entering judgment against up their residence in their former quar- Albany and the Normandie, Loud is at the Cairo, Kahn at the Ham- {lton, Metcalf at the Arlington, Coombs at the Raleigh, McLachlan at 1302 Roan- oke avenue, and Needham at 107 Mary- of President Roosevelt at dinner to-morrow {he merchandise seized and directing that it be sold in accordance with the law, and from this decision the present writ of er- ror was prosecuted. In his opinion in the case, Chief Jus- tice Fuller sald that the Philippine Isl- ands ceased to be foreign territory as soon as the Paris treaty of peace was signed and the resolution to which he referred as being ineffective was the res- olution adopted by the Senate soon after the ratification of the treaty. ‘After stating the case at some length, Chief Justice Fuller quoted somewhat ex- tensively from the opinion of this court in the case of De Lima vs. Bidwell. His principal quotation from that case was the paragraph setting forth the theory that a country remains foreign with re- spect to the tariff laws until Congress has acted by embracing it within the The opinion then continued as No reason is perceived for any different rul- ing as to the Philippines. By the third article of the treaty, Spain ceded to the United States “the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands,”” and the United States axreed to pay to Spain the sum of $20,000,000 within three months. The treaty was ratified; Congress ap- propriated the money; the ratification was pro- ments. from the District Court of the United | MAKES PHILIPPINE ISLANDS DOMESTIC TERRITORY Decides the Diamond Ring Cases Against the United States Government. claimed. The treaty-making power, the execu- tive power, the legisiative power, concurred In the completion of the transaction. The Philiopines thereby ceased in the lan- guage of the treaty to be ‘‘Spanish.” Ceasing to be Spanish, they cease to be foreign coun- try. They came under the complete and abso- lute sovereignty and dominion of the United States and so became territory of the United States, over which civil government could be exercised. The result was the same, although there was no stipulation that the native in- habi*ants should be incorporated into the body politic and none securing to them the right to Chooss their nationality. Their allexiance be- came due to the United States and they be- came entitled to its protection. But it Is sald the case of the Phillppines is to be distinguished from that of Porto Ricy because on February 14, 1899, after the rati- fication of that treaty the Senate resolved that by the ratification of the treaty of peace with Spain 1t is not intended to incorporate the in- habitants of the Philippine Islands into the citizenship of the United States nor to per- manently annex those islands. ‘We need not_consider the force and effect of a resolution of this sort. if adopted by Con- gress, not like that of April 20, 1398, in respect to Cuba, preliminary to the declaration of war, but after title had been passed by ratified ces- sion. It Is enough that this was a joint reso- luticn; that it was adopted by the Senate by a vote of 26 to 22, not two-thirds of a quorum, and that it is absolutely without legal signi- ficance on the question before us. The mean- ing of the treaty canmot be controlled by sub- sequent explanations of some of those who may have. voted to ratify it. What view the House might have taken as to th3 intention of the Senate in ratifying the treaty we are not informed, nor is it material, and it any imolication from the action referred to could nroperly ®e indulged, it would seem to be that two-thirds of a quorum of the Sen- ate did mot consent to the ratification on the grounds indicated. Sovereignty of Spain Ceases. It 1s further contended that a distinction ex- ists in that, while complete possession of Porto Rico was taken by the United States. this was Dot so as to the Philippines, because of the armed resistance of the native inhabitants to a greater or less extent. We must decline to assume that the Govern- ment wishes thus to disparage the title of the United States or to place itself in the position of waging a war of corquest. The sovereignty of Spain over the Philippines and possession under claim of title had existed for a long series of years prior to the war with the United States. The fact that there were insurrections against her or that uncivilized tribes may have defled her will did not affect the validityhof her title. She grantéd the isl- ands 1o the United States and the grantes, in accepting them. took nothing less than the whole grant. If those in insurrection against Spain continued In insurrection against the United States the legal title and possession of the latter remained unaffected. We do not understand that it is claimed that in carrying on the pending hostilities the Gov- ernment is seking to subjugate the people of & foreign country, but on the contrary that it is preserving order and suppressing ins 1on in territory of the United States. It follows that the jurisdiction of the United States is ade- quate and this cannot be admitted for one pur- pose and denied for another. It is sought to detract from the weight of the ruling in De Lima versus Bidwell because one of the five Justices concurring in the judgment in the case Comcurred in the judgment in Downs versus Bidwell. In De Lima versus Bidwell Porto Rico was held not to be a foreign country, after cession, and that a prior act exclusively applicable to forelgn countries became inapplicable. In Downs versus Bidwell the conclusion of a majority of the court was that an act of Congress levying dutles on goods imported from Porto Rico into New York not in conformity with the provisions of the constitution in re- spect to the imposition of duties, imposts and excises was valld. Four of the members of the court dissented from and five concurred in the decision, though not on the same grounds. The Justice Who delivered the opinion in De Lima's case was one of the majority and was of opin- fon that although by the concession Porto Rico ceased to be a forelgun country and became territory of the United States and domestie, yet that it was merely ‘“appurtenant” terri- tory and not a part of the United States with- in the revenue clauses of the constitution. Court Orders the Decree Reversed. This view placed the territory, though not foreign, outside of the restrictions applicable to interstate commerce and treated the power of Congress when affirmatively exercised over a territory, situated as supposed and uncontrolled by the provisions of the comstitution in re- spect of national taxation. The distinction was drawn between a special act In respect of the particular country and a general and prior act only applicable to countries forelgn to ours in every sense. The latter was obliged to con- form to the rule of uniformity, which was whol- ly disregarded In the former. The ruling in the case of De Lima remained unaffected and controls that under considera- tion. And this is so notwithstanding four mem- bers of the majority in the De Lima case were of the opinion that Porto Rico did not become by the cession subjected to the exercise of gov- ernmental power in the levy of duty unre- stricted by constitutional limitations. Decree reversed and case remanded with di- rections to quash the information. Justices Gray, White, Shiras and Mec- Kenna united in dissenting from the court’s opinion in the Philippine case, but they filed no written statement beyond a mere note in which they said that they “‘dissented for the reasons stated in their opinions in the case of De Lima vs. Bid- well, Dooley vs. the United States and Dow{n‘s_ vs. Bidwell in the last term of the court. There are a good many ways to test goods. The first and foremost way is to wear them. The next is a chemical test by experts. no doubt is your judgment after feeling the material and being satisfied as to the quality of the cloth. Of the three tests two are to be made by you—one, the second, has already been mtade by us. This is why you can afford to test the materials in our made to measure gar- If you find your tests satisfactory you have a good wearing, durable suit that will please you. If your test reveals an inferior cloth you can have your money back and you have had the wear of the suit for a while. in making a test of this kind. We would like to have you subject to these tests our Made-to-order suits at $10 The next You ought to be interested . Call and we will give you the samples. SNWO00D 718 Market Street and Cor. Powell and Eddy.