0
PORTO RICAN DECISION.
Text of tbo Opinions DiivereJ by tho Several
Hcmber of the Supremo Court of
the United SUU.
MAJORITY OPINION".
(I3.irfl ty Justice Brown, Justices Gray,
f ttrms ss4 MrKeac concurring Justice White
jolrt"! n the conclusion, but read a separate. opin
ion.) Jutice Brown, after declaring that the ex
ception to the Jurisdiction was cot well taken,
"la tie cjums of Ie Lima ft Bidwell. Just de
cided, we fctii that u$m the ratification of the
treaty of peace with Spain. Porto Rico -ceased to "
b a fortlga country, and that duties were no long
er ooliectltle upon merchandise brought from that,
Itiand- We are now asked to bold that It became
a part of the United State within that provision
oX the constitution which declares that 'all duties,
lrepots. asd excisos shall be uniform throughout
the United State a. Article I., section 8.) If Porto .-.
JUco Is a part cf the United States, tne Foraker ,
act izapotinr duties upon its products Is uncon
stitctioal cot only by reason of a violation of the
uniformity clause, but because by section 9 'vessels
bound to or from one state cannot "be obliged to
ester, clear, or pay duties in another."
NO AN3WKR IN THE CONSTITUTION.
The case also involves the broader question
whether the revenue clauses of the constitution ex
tend of their own force to our newly acquired ter
ritories. The constitution itself does not answer,
the question. Its solution must be found In the
nature of the rovernnent created by that Instru
ment. In the opinion of its contemporaries. In the
practical construction put upon it by congress and
la the decisions of tais court.
-The federal rovernnent was created In 1777
by the union f thirteen colonies of Great Britain
ia 'certain articles of confederation and perpetual
union. the first one of which declared that the
style of this confederacy shall be the United States
of America. flsca member of the
confederacy was denominated a state.. Pro
vision as made for the representation of each
state by &ot Ies than two nor more than seven
delegates; but no mention was made of territories,
or other lands, except in Article XL, which au
thorised the admission of Canada, upon its 'acced
ing to this confederation. and of other colonies if
such admission were agreed to by nine states. At
this tima several state made claims to large tracts
cf land ia the unsettled west, which they. were at
Crtt indisposed to relinquish. Disputes over these
lands became so acrid as nearly to defeat the con
federacy before it was fairly put in operation. Sev
eral of the states refused to ratify the articles, be
cause the convention had taken no steps to settle
the titles to tfce lands upon principles of equity
and sound policy; but all of them, through fear of
beirg accused of disloyalty, finally, yielded -their
claims, though Maryland he-d out untill'Sl. '
WITHOUT DELEGATES FROM TERRITORIES.
"The confederacy, owing to" well-known .his
torical reasons, having proven a failure, a new
constitution was formed in 17S7 by the people'of
the Ucited States for the United States of Ameri
ca. as its preamble declares. All legislative pow
ers were tested la a congress consisting of repre
sentatives from the several states, but no provision
was made for the admission, of delegates from the
territories, and no mention was made of territories
as separate portions of the union, except that con
gress was empowered to dispose of and make all
needful rules and regulations respecting the terri
tory or other property belonging to the United ..
States. At this time all of the states had ceded
their unappropriated lands except North Carolina ,
and Georgia. s
It Is suSeient to observe in relation to these
fasdamental instruments that it can nowhere be
Inferred that the territories were considered a part
of the United States. 'The constitution was created
by the people of the "nited States, as a union of
states, lo be governed solely by representatives of
the states: and even the provision relied upon here
that ail duties, imposts and excises shall be uni
form throughout the Unitd States, is explained
by subsequent provisions of the constitution, th-t
xj. tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported
from any state. and 'no preference shall be given
by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the
ports of one state over those of another- nor shall
vessels bound to or from one state be obliged to
enter, clear, or pay duties in another.' In short,
the constitution deals with states, their people, and
their representatives.
The thirteenth amendment to the constitu
tion, prohibiting slavery and involuntry servi
tude 'within the United States or In any place sub
ject to their Jurisdiction. Is also significant as
shewing that there may be placed within the Juris
diction of the United States that are no part of
the union. To say that the phraseology of this
amendment was due to the fact that it was intend
ed to prohibit slavery la the seceded states, under
a possible Interpretation that those states were
ro longer a part cf the union. Is to confess the very
point la Issue, since it Involves an admission that
If these states were not a part of the union, they
were still subject to the Jurisdiction of the United
States.
LIMITATIONS ON CITIZENSHIP.
""Upon the other hand, the fourteenth amend
ment, upon the subject of citizenship, declares only
that aU persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens cf the United States and of the,, state
wherein they reside. Here there is a limitation
. to persona born or naturalized, in the United States
which Is not extended to persons born in any place
'subject to their Jurisdiction. '
Justice Brown went exhaustively into the his
tory cf the purchase cf the Louisiana territory and
the subsequent legislation by congress, and drew
the conclusion that congress then believed "that
. territory may be lawfully acquired by treaty, with
a provision for its ultimate Incorporation Into the
union; and. second, that a discrimination in favor
cf certain foreign vessels trading with the ports of
newly acquired territory Is no violation of that
clause of the constitution (Art. L, sec. 9), that de
clares that no preference shall be given' to the
ports cf one state over those of another. -It Is evi
dent that the constitutionality of this discrimina
tion caa only be supported upon the theory that
forts of territories are not ports of states within
the meaning of the constitution.
The same construction was adhered to In the
treaty with Spain for the purchase of Florida."
added Justice Brown, "the sixth article of which
provided that the Inhabitants should 'be incor
porated into the union of the United States as
soon as may be consistent with the principles of
the federal constitution. and the fifteenth article
cf which agreed that Spanish vessels sailing di
rectly from Spanish ports and laden with produc
tions of Spanish growth or manufacture should be
admitted for the term of twelve years to the ports
f Pensacola and St. Augustine 'without paying
other or higher duties on their cargoes, or of
tonnage, than will be paid by the vessels of the
United States and that 'during the said term no
ether nation shall enjoy the same privileges within
the ceded territories.
PROVISION REGARDING HAWAII.
"So. too. In the act annexing the republic of
, Hawaii there was a provision continuing in effect
the customs relations of the Hawaiian islands with
the United States and other countries, the effect of
which was to compel the collection in those isl
ands of a duty upon certain articles.' whether com-
Ing from the United States or other countries,
much greater than the duty provided by the gen-
. eral tariS law then in force. This was a discrimi
nation against the Hawallaa ports wholly Incon
tinent with the revenue clauses of the constitution.
If such clauses were there operative.1.
The very treaty with Spain under discussion
la this case contains similar discriminative provl
. ilons, which, are apparently Irreconcilable with the
constitution If that, instrument be held to extend
to these Islands immediately upon their cession to
the United States. By Article IV. the United States r
agrees 'for the term of ten years from the date of
the exchange of the ratification .of .the present
treaty, to admit Spanish ships and merchandise to
the ports of the Philippine islands on the same
terms as ships and ' merchandise of the United
States" a privilege not extending to any other -ports.
It was a clear breach of the uniformity
clause Jn question, and a manifest excess of au
thority on the part of the commissioners, if ports
of the Philippine islands be ports of the .United
Slates.
"So, too, by Article XIII.,:'Spanish scientific,
literary, and artistic works shall be continued
.to.be admitted free of duty in such territories for
the, period of ten years, to be reckoned from the
- date of ' the exchange of the ratifications of this
treaty.. This is also a clear discrimination in
favor of Spanish literary productions into partic
ular ports. f
COURT DECISIONS AT VARIANCE. -"The
decisions of this court upon this subject
have ' no been altogether harmonious. Some of
- tl em; are -based upon the theory that the consti
tution does not apply to the territories without
legislation Other cases, arising from territories
where sucl' legislation ha3 been had, contain lan
guage which would Justify the inference that such
legislation was unnecessary, ad that, the consti
tution took effect immediately upon the cession,
of the territory to the United States. It may be
remarked, upon the threshold of an. analysis of
these . cases, that too much weight, must not be
given to " gfeneral : expressions found in several
opinions that the power of congress over terri
toi les Ik complete . and supreme, because these
words may be interpreted as meaning, only su
preme uacler.the constitution; .nor upon the other
hand, lo general statements that the constitution
covers tbe territories as well as the states, since
in such, .cases it will be found that acts of congress
had already extended the constitution to such ter
ritories, and that thereby it subordinated hot only
its own acts, but those of the territorial legisla
tes, to what had become the supreme law of the
land." '
Justice Brown cited the cases of Hepburn vs.
Elljey, Loughborough vs. Blake, and others to
shew the power of congress over territory not in
cluded in the states. Loughborough vs. Blake
tested the' right to impose direct taxes in the Dis-!
trict of Columbia. It was held that, such taxes
could be Imposed here, and Justice Brown's com
ment, which follows, is interesting, as compar
ing the local status with that of Porto Iticans.:
"There could be no doubt as to the correctness
of this conclusion, so far, at least, as it applied to
the District of, Columbia. This district had been a
part of the states of Maryland and Virginia. It
had been subject to the constitution, and was a '
part of the United States. The constitution had
attached to it irrevocably. There are steps which
can i.ever be taken backward. The tie that bound
the states of Maryland and Virginia to the con
stitution could not be dissolved, without at least
the consent of the federal and state governments
to a formal separation. The mere cession of the
District of Columbia to the federal government
relinquished the authority of the states, but it did
not take it out of the United States to from under
the aegis of the constitution. Neither party had
ever consented to that construction of the ces
sion. If, before the district was set off, congress
had passed an' unconstitutional act affecting its
inhabitants, It would have been void. If done
after the district was created, it would have been
equally void; in other words, congress could not
do indirectly '"by -carving out the district what it
could not do directly. The district still remained
- a part of the United State3, protected by the con
stitution. Indeed, it would have been a fanciful
construction to hold that territory which had been
, once a part of the United States ceased to be such
being clderd!fecfly to thft federal government
REPUBLIC? OF ' STATUES AND TERRITORIES.
"In delivering the opinion, however, the chief
Justice made certain observations which have
occasioned f some embarrassment in other cases.
'The power.Vhe said, 'to lay and collect duties, im
posts, and excises may be exercised, and must
be exercised, throughout the United States. Does
this term designate the whole, or any particular
portion of the American empire? Certainly this
question, can admit but of one answer. It is the
name given to our great republic, which is com
posed of states and territories. The District of
Columbia, or the territory west of the Missouri,
is not less within the United States than Mary-
- land and Pennsylvania; and it is not less neces
sary, on the principles of our constitution, that
uniformity in the imposition of imposts, duties,
and excises should be observed in the one than in
the other. Since, then, the power to lay and collect-taxes,
which includes direct taxes, is ob
viously coextensive with the power to lay and
collect duties, imposts, and excises, and since the
latter extends throughout the United States, it
follows that the power to impose direct taxes
also extends throughout the United States.' So
far as applicable to the District of Columbia,
these observations are entirely sound. So far as
they apply to the territories, they were not called
for by the exigencies of the case.
"This case of Loughborough vs. Blake may be
considered as establishing the principle that in
dealing 'with foreign sovereignties the term 'Unit
ed States has a broader meaning than when used
in the constitution, and includes all territories
subject to the jurisdiction of the federal govern
ment, wherever located. In its treaties and con
ventions with foreign nations this government is a
unit. This is so -not because the territories com
prised a part-of' the government established . by
the people of the states in their constitution, but
because the federal government is the only author
ized organ of the territories, as well-as of the
states, in theirj foreign relations.
, . CONSTITUTION IN THIS DISTRICT. -'
s 1 "It may be added in this connection that, to
put at rest -all doubts regarding the applicability
of the constitution to the District of Columbia,
! congress by the act-of February 21, 1871, speci-
- fically extended the constitution and laws of the
' United States to this district."
After citing many other similar cases Justice
Brown says: - .
"Eliminating," then, from the opinions of this
court all expressions unnecessary to the disposi
tion of. the particular case, and gleaning there
j from the exact point decided in each, the follow-
- ing propositions may be considered as established:
. ' That, the District of Columbia and the
' territories are not states, within the judicial clause
cf"the: constitution giving jurisdiction in cases
t between citizens -of ; different states.
"2. That territories are not states, within the
meaning of revised statutes, section 709, permitting
writs of error from this court in cases where
the validity of a state statute is drawn in ques
tion. "3. That the District of Columbia and the
. territories are states,- as Liat word is -used in
treaties with foreign powers, with respect to the
ownership, disposition and Inheritance of property.
"4. That the territories are not within the
clause of the constitution providing for the crea
tion of a supreme court and such inferior courts
as congress may c-je fit to establish.
"5. That the constitution does not apply to
foreign countries or to trials therein conducted,
and that congress may lawfully provide for such
trials before consular tribunals, without the in
tervention of a grand or petit jury.
"6. That where the constitution has been
once formally extended by congress to territories,
neither congress , nor the territorial legislature
caa enact laws inconsistent therewith.
; , Minority Opinion.
(Delivered by Chief Justice Fuller, Justices
Pcckham and Brewer
concurring Justice
f . . . ... ...... , .m . - . 1
Harlan concurred in the conclusions reached ;
by the minority but read a separate opinion).
Chief Justice Fuller said: VI ; " N
"The inquiry is whether the act of April 12,
1900, so far as It requires the payment of import
duties on merchandise brought from a port of Por
to Rico as a condition of entry into' other ports of
the United States, is consistent with the federal
constitution. ....... : . v.;
'.'The act creates a civil government for Porto
Rico, with a governor, secretary, attorney general,
and other officers appointed by . the-president, by
and with the advice and consent of the senate, who,
together with five other . persons," likewise so apt
pointed and confirmed, are constituted an executive ,
council; local legislative powers are vested in '.a ;
legislative assembly, consisting" of the executive ;
council and a house " of ; delegates, tb . be elected ;
courts are provided for, and, among, other things,
Porto Rico is constituted a judicial "district, with j
a district judge, attorney, and marshal, to be ap
pointed by the president for the term of four
years. All officials authorized by the act are re-;
quired to 'before entering upon the duties of their j
respective offices take an oath, to support the con- j
stitution of the United States and the laws of Porto
Rico.' ' ' v . . :i ; " . !
GEOGRAPHICAL UNIFORMITY REQUIRED. j
"The uniformity of taxation' required by the
constitution is a geographical uniformity, and is :
only attained when the tax operates with the same
force and effect in every place where the subject
of it is found. 'But it is said that congress in at
tempting, fo levy these duties, was not exercising
power derived from the first clause of section 8, or
restricted by it, because in dealing with the terri
tories, congress exercises unlimited powers of gov
ernment, - and,- moreover, that : these duties- are
merely local taxes."- :
: The chief justice referred at this point to the
case of Loughborough vs. Blake and to Chief Jus
tice Marshall's opinion, delivered thereon in 1820,
and added: .
"It is said in one of the opinions of the ma
jority that the chief justice 'made certain observa
tions which have occasioned some embarrassment
in other cases.' -1 agree that the opinion of the
court delivered by him must be embarrassing in
this case, for it is necessary to overrule that de
cision in order to reach the result herein an
nounced. '
"It is wholly inadmissible to reject the process
of reasoning by which the chief justice reached and
tested the soundness of his conclusion as merely
obiter. Nor is there any intimation that the ruling
turned on the singular theory that the constitution
irrevocably adhered to the soil of Maryland and
Virginia, and, therefore, accompanied the parts
which were ceded to form the District, or that 'the
tie' between those states and the constitution 'could
not be dissolved without at least the consent of
the federal and state governments to a formal sep
aration; and that this was not given by the ces
'sion and its acceptance in accordance with the
constitutional provision itself, and hence that con
gress was restricted in the exercise of its powers
in the. District, while not sd in the teritories.
PURPOSES OF. NATIONAL TAXATION.'
"On the contrary, the. chief justice held the
territories as . well as the District to be part of
the United States for the purposes of national tax
ation," and repeated, in effect what he had already
said in McCulloch- vs. .Maryland: 'Throughout this
vast republic, fromvthe St Croix to the Gulf of
Mexico, from the Atlantic-, to" the Pacific, revenue
is to' be collected and1" expended, armies are to be
marched and supported.' ".
"Conceding that the-power to tax for.the pur
pose of territorial government js implied from the
power to govern territory,. wheth'er the latter power
is attributed to the powerito acquire or the power
to make needful rules and,, regulations, these par
ticular duties are nevertheLzjs flnot local in their
nature, but are Imposed as . in the exercise of na
tional powers. . The leyyis"jclearly a regulation of
commerce, and a regulation affectjngth'eistates'
and their people as weiras,this territory and" .its
people. The power of congress to act directly on
the rights and interests of the people of the states'
can only exist if and as granted by the constitu
tion. And by the constitution congress is vested
with power 'to regulate commerce with foreign na
tions, and among the several states, and with the
Indian tribes.' The territories are, indeed, not
mentioned by name, nd yet commerce between
the territories and foreign nations is covered by
the clause, which would, seem to have been in
tended to embrace the entire internal as weir as
foreign commerce of the country.
REGULATION OF COMMERCE.
"It is evident that congress cannot regulate
commerce between a territory and the states and
other territories in the exercise of the bare power
to govern the particular territory, and as this act
was framed to operate and does operate on the
people of the states, the power to so legislate is
apparently rested on the assumption that the right
to regulate commerce between the states and ter
ritories comes within tne commerce clause by nec
essary implication.
"Accordingly, the act of congress of August 8,
1890, entitled 'An act to limit the effect of the reg
ulations of commerce between the several states
and with foreign countries in certain cases, ap
plied in terms to the territories as well as to the
states. In any point of view; the imposition of du-
x ties on commerce operates to regulate commerce,
and is not a matter of local legislation; and it
follows that the levy of these duties was In the
exercise of the national power to do so, and sub
ject to the requirement of geographical uniformity.
"The fact that the proceeds of these duties are
devoted by the act to the use of the territory does
not make national taxes local. Nobody disputes
the power of congress to lay and collect duties,
geographically uniform, and-, apply the proceeds
by a proper appropriation; act to the relief of a
particular territory,. . but the destination of the
proceeds would not change the source of the power
to lay and collect And that suggestion certainly
is not strengthened when based on the diversion of
duties collected from all parts of the United States
to a territorial treasury before reaching the treas
ury of the United States. Clause 7 of section. 9 of
. Article I. provides that 'no money shall be drawn
from the treasury but In consequence of appropria
tions made by law, and thes proposition that this
may be rendered inapplicable if the money is not
permitted to be paid in so as to be susceptible of
being drawn out Is somewhat startling.
APPLIES TO TERRITORIES AND STATES.
"Other parts of the constitution furnish illus
trations of the correctness of .this view. Thus, the
constitution vests congress with the power to es
tablish an uniform rule of naturalizations, and uni
form laws on the subject of bankruptcies through
out the United States. Thi& applies to the terri
tories as well as the states, and has always been
recognized In legislation as binding.
"Aliens -in the territories are made citizens of
the United States, and bankrupts residing in the
territories are discharged from debts owing citizens
of the states pursuant to uniform rules and. laws
enacted by congress in theexercise of this power.
"The fourteenth amendment provides that 'all
persons born or naturalized in the United States,
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens
of the United States and of the states wherein they
reside. - - 4
"No person is eligible to the office of president
unless he has 'attained to the age of thirty-five
years and been fourteen years a resident within the
United States.' (Clause 5, sect. 1, Art. II.)
"Would a native-born citizen of Massachusetts
be ineligible if he had taken up his residence and
resided in one of the territories for so many years
that he had not resided altogether fourteen years
in the states? When voted for he must be a citizen
of one of the states (clause 3, sect. 1, Art. II.; Art
XII.) , but as to length of time must residence in
the territories be counted against him? .
"The fifteenth amendment declares that 'the
right of citizens of the United States to vote shall
X?
i
All ffbods on hand must be sold to
No goods carried over from one season to another. A rare oppor
tunity to those who have money to buy at this time. ;
. .- ': Our first annual inventory sale. iVe believe in always keeping the newest and
latest goods in stock and in order to do this we will once each year offer our entire stock-
nothing excepted for sale at cost. .
CARRIAGES
This is a chance that occurs only once in a year, . to get one of our handsome car
riages formerly sold at $115 now at $100; our $105 carriage at 95. Our $70 and $75
spring wagons at $60.00; our 70 and 75 dollar top buggies at 60 dollars; our 50 and 55
dollar top buggies at 48 and 50 dollars. Good, stylish road .wagons, at correspondingly
low prices.
GASOLINE STOVES
Large Gasoline Range sold everywhere
dollars. Smaller sizes at from $2.25 up to
COOK
We quote a few prices on cook stoves, cast ranges and steel ranges: Four hole
cook stove 9 dollars, with reservoir 14 dollars. Six hole cast range with, reservoir dur
ing this sale 25 dollars. Steel ranges,; best on earth varying in size from 22 dollars up
to 40 dollars for largest size. v ' .
HAMMOCKS, LAWN SWINGS, ETC.
We have the latest thing out in this line. Galvanized wire hammocks as soft and
pliable as cotton. It is" not necessary to take them in every time it rains. They will
last a life time. 9 foot size $2.25, 10 foot size $2.50 while they last.
We also have a full line of cotton hammocks at from 60c to $3.00.
HARNESS
Our. harness line is complete. 1 Everything in single and double buggy and heavy
farm harness at prices that will save you money. V ;-
This is the time of year when you ought to clean , and; .oil your harness. We have
the soap and dressing that will make it lo k
Fiebing's Harness Soap Dressing, I lb. can. . . . v ... ... rvV .' .. . . . . , - v 20c
Fiebing's Harness Soap Dressing 2 lb can. . ... ..... . , ... . ... . .40c
Fiebing's Harness Oil Dressing 1 qt can.. . . . .30c
Fiebing's Harness Oil Dressing gallon can. . . . . . .v. i . . . . . 50c
Fiebing's Harness Oil Dressing 1 gallon can. .... . . . .. . i . . . . . . , ... . . . .. . . , . . ,90c
Hoof oil guaranteed to cure all diseases of the hoof, per quart .T ... . . . . . ..... ....... . . 00c
Full lmVpf carriage top dressing, axle oil and metal; polish.
HARDWARE
Everything in the line of hardware, tinware, wire cloth, screen doors and windows,
garden tools, wheel barrows, hay tools, sewing machines, churns, washing machines,
trunks valises, telescopes, traveling bags and many other things which for lack of space we
cannot mention will go at the sale at from 1 5 to 25 per cent off. . ; .
ICE CHESTS,
Come in or. send for one of our elegant-mineral wool filled galvanized steel lined re
frigerators. We have them with ice capacity from 45 pounds to 1 25 pounds. Rang
j j . Kn ffil K ' f : .
mg m price UUIlUg luia aaic ai uum
FURNITURE
We have a full line of the latest and , most stylish things in furniture and can ' save :
you from 25 to 50 per cent-during this sale on anything in this line. v;; ' .
Everything in paints both for inside and outside use.' If you cannot call, send for
color card. Best ready mixed house paints f6r outside use $1. 25 per gallon. All paints
mirantppn. i - ..... 1 t . ,-. ;. .
We have the choicest patterns in all wool and union ingrain carpets at' from 35 to 70c
per yard,' also full line of brussels, velvets, moquets and "axministers, stair carpets, rugs etc!
t If you: cannot call and examine our stockwrite for. what you want giving details as
complete as you can. Your letter will receive careful atleKti6n Mail orders are a srec-
laity at tnis nouse. . oausiacuou guaranieeu
Mr. Justice Brown
nected with the Porto Rico decision,
according to the Washington Times,
is undoubtedly Mr. Justice Brown, the
profound and incorruptible jurist who,
have argued himself to a standstill. In
defense of the Constitution in the De
Lima case, immediately backed water
and argued himself to another stand
still in the Downes case. . Or as the
old song has. it:
.There was a man in our town,
And he was wondrous wise ;
He jumped into a bramble bush
. And scratched out both his eyes.
. Farmers Supply Ass5 p -
A v 126-128-130 North 13th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska
FIVE STORIES AND BASEMENT - WHERE YOUR DdfiLARS BUY THE MOST
'1 n . -:" ' . r. - . .- - 1 , I ' ' j ,
. , Mf. JUSIICg DrDWn An ne round nis eyes-wereut
vvun an ms mignt and main : :
He jumped into another bush s ; .;c
And scratched them In again! - '
The Sams Breed v
Republicanism in Vermont seems .to
have been, bred from the same stock
that has furnished the office-holders
for that party in Nebraska, A dis
patch of May 27th says: : a
"Lieutenant-Governor M. F 2 Allen
and State Representative J. W; Ketch-'
am were arrested by federal Officers tm
day under Indictments charging them
with complicity with Cashier D Q
Lewis in, wrecking the Farmers' Na
inventory!
CLEARING.
make room for enormous new stock
AND VEHICLES
at 29- dollars, our price during this sale 22
20 dollars. . s ,
STOVES
like new and wear again as long if used occa-
REFRIGERATORS
,yj vA",u
PAINTS
in every case or money refunded.
tional bank of
- nuivu A ctrui . .
suspended. The ' lieutenant-goverr.o-was
.vice president and a director of
toe bank and Mr. Ketcham was teller.
The- latter was taken to Burlington,
wnere he pleaded not guilty, and: bail
was fixed at $5,000. Mr. Allen w.:;
oe given a hearing at Lewisburg. ns
nome. . :
"The indictments were returned
Wik. by .tneUnlted States grand - Jar . .
ana are in two counts charging eon
?i,rtin''embeMUn the oank fuc is
v 6 iuo accounts.
THK FARMERS fSUPPLT ASSOCIAT1 'N
128130.138 North 13th St., I.liboln,
Jtoatioa The Indpeadat.'