File:The Supreme Court in United States history (1922) (14586839260).jpg

Identifier: supremecourtinun03warr (find matches)
Title: The Supreme Court in United States history
Year: 1922 (1920s)
Authors: Warren, Charles, 1868-1954
Subjects: United States. Supreme Court Law
Publisher: Boston : Little, Brown
Contributing Library: The Library of Congress
Digitizing Sponsor: The Library of Congress

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
. 521, and Rasmussen v. United States (1905), 197U. S. 516; Porto Rico v. Tapia (1918), 245 U. S. 639. The tremendous interesttaken in the decision by the Court as to the status of the new territories is illus-trated by the enormous number of articles in the law journals, 1899-1905,citation of which is not practicable; but see The Causes and Results of our Warloith Spain from a Legal Standpoint, by Judge Elmer B. Adams, Yale Law Journ.(Dec, 1898), VIII; The Final Phase of the Insular Tariff Controversies, by HenryM. Hoyt, ihid. (1905), XIV; The Legal Status of the Philippines, by Lebbeus R.Wilfrey, ibid.; The Hawaiian Case, by Emlin McClain, Harv. Law Rev. (1904),VII; The Decisions of the Supreme Court in the Insular Cases, by John W. Burgess,Pol. Sci. Qu. (1901), XVI; The Insular Cases, by Carman F. Randolph, ColumbiaLaw Rev. (1901), I; The Insular Decisions of 1901, by Edward B. Whitney, ibid.(1902), II. ^ See Edward Douglass White, by John W. Davis, Amer. Bar Ass. Journ. (1921),VIL
Text Appearing After Image:
o 00 03, ^ w pq CHIEF JUSTICES FULLER AND WHITE 431 ceased to be * foreign country, within the meaning ofthe existing tariff laws of the United States; and sec-ondly, to what extent, if at all, the island fell within therevenue clauses of the Constitution, and the require-ment that duties, imposts and excises should be uni-form throughout the United States. The division ofopinion on the Court was sharp and pronounced. Thefirst view was that of Mr. Justice Brown, alone. Heplowed a lonely furrow and held that, while Porto Ricohad ceased to be foreign country within the meaningof the Dingley Act, yet, as to future legislation (theForaker Act of April 12, 1900), the uniform clause didnot apply; that Porto Rico became by the cession terri-tory appurtenant to the United States, but not a part ofit; and that even over continental and contiguousterritory, the Constitution went only as the result ofexpress Congressional action. As against this. ChiefJustice Fuller and Justices Harlan, Brewer,

Note About Images