The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-03-06


insisted that Congress was alone to blame for
the monstrous rate of duty collected on inn
ported merchandise, and that Grant was IRE
sponsible both in law and:fact. This defense
can, after the recent exposure in court avail
them no longer, since it is pr0Uen that large
part of these cruel rates are levied by execu-
tive construction, which not only the law for
bids, but Grant can and should prevent, and
would prevent were he not supple
agent of protective plunderers. He is not
ignorant of the Inonopolist extortions prac-
tised by the Treasury Department in the
name of law, for his attention has been re-
peatedly called thereto and to the significant
fact that his subordinate in that department
has intimated in writing to a committee of
Congress the necessity of altogether depriving
importers of the right to maintain suits at law
against collectors of customs to test the true
rates of duty and recover back money illegally
exacted We know that Grant, when remon-
strated with last spring for Boutwelrs absurd
regulations in respect to the luggage of pas
sengers arriving in the United States, replied
that he "did not believe in our people buying
things abroad, anyhow, " the ignoramus This
remark furnishes the key to his own policy
and that OF his administration respecting i'm
ported goods.
The full force of the extraordinary con-
duct of the Grant administration in constru-
ing the copper act of 1869 must be felt in
order to realize how thoroughly 1T is prosti-
tuted to the clique of protective swindlers,
and also to appreciate the tricks of the
after.
If it had been proposed in Congress at that
date to increase the rates of duty on Dntch
metal by 35 per centum, on bronze powders
by 20 per centum, on bronzes by 10 per CEN
tum, and on all manufactures of brass by 10
per centum, the scheme would have provoked
fierce opposition, and possibly q successful
resistance. Hence deceit was resorted to.
While pretending only to levy increased
duties on copper ore and articles visibly made
of copper, or OF which copper was palpably
component of chief value, like copper ket-
tie with an iron handle, the monopolists cum
niDgly inserted in the bill this clause: :-"On
all manufactures of which copper is compo-
nent of chief value, not otherwise herein pro-
vided for, 45 per centum of chief value.
On this clause Boutwell, issues this cir
cular:-
"All articles made OF the composition usually
known as brass-copper being the component OF
chief value in the goods imported as above-should
be subject 10 the duty OF As per centum ad valoren
The fact brass, and many other articles OF which
copper forms the principal part, have other dstinc
tive names, never known as manufactures OF copper
IN commerce, does not affect the question OF the
duty imposed by this act"
Now, every mans common sense, except
that of the Grant administration and the mo-
nopolists, to say nothing of his legal sense
revolts at such an Interpretation of the clause
of the act referred to. But yet this decision
was enforced by all of the collectors for two
years, and is to-day enforced, despite the re-
cent judgment of the court.
The defendants counsel ask ed the Judge TO
instruct the jury that
81 Brass Is an article well known to comm cree and
the revenue laws and if the jury shall find that
Dutch metal ts manufactured therefrom as a distinct
article then It is not liable to duty under the copper
act OF February, 1862"
And the court so ruled, and added
'This act OF 1869 must be read In connection with
the prior acts OF 1861 and 1862 wherein Congress had
placed a duty OF 35 per cent upon copper, brass,
and other metals, and had recognized brass as a
metal although it must contain copper and although
copper Is necessarily the component material OF
1860, took out copper alone from the operation Of
the acts OF 1861 and 1862 Congress took out no
other metal. They did not take out brass. They
took out every article which is manufacture or
copper, or (which copper shall be component OF
chief value, not otherwise herein provided for.
Under the acts of 1851, 1852 and 1859, Dutch metal
is not manufacture of which copper is the compo-
neDt OF chief value, II 1t is manufacture OF which
brass is the component of chief vaue that is II the
copper and the zinc which enter into the compost
ton OF Dutch metal do assume, in the Judgment OF
the jury upon the evidence in tho progress towards
Dutch metal from the raw copper and the raw zinc,
the condition OF brass, in the sense OF the brass Of
commerce, and 'brass' is used In the acts of 1861
and 1862, then the Dutch metal is manufacture Of
brass, and being thus manufacture OF brass it is
not manufacture OF copper within the meaning Of
the act OF 1859
The record of the trial of the case disclosed
that the administration, in increasing the
rate of duty on Dutch metal by 80 per centum
consulted with person in this city, and with
him alone, who was endeavoring to produce
the article in this country and could not
owing to the high price of labor. The enor-
NOUS increase of duty was made to enable
him and other experimenters to keep out
cheap Dutch metal for room paper and gene
raj ornamentation.
But this is not ALL 1t has repeatedly been
laid down as the true rule of statute con-
struction in this country and England that
tariff laws and tax laws are in cases of am
bIguity to be interpreted in favor of the citi-
zen. The reason is that taking the money
of citizen is a tremendous exercise of sove-
reignty, and the legislative warrant therefor
must be clear and explicit. The lawmakers
are bound to leave no ambiguity in that re-
spect on the statute book. Judge Blatchford
quoted the words of his judicial superior,
Judge Nelson, with great force:-'Duties
are never imposed upon a citizen in cases
of serious ambiguity in the language of an act,
or doubtful classification of articles, or vague
or doubtful Interpretation, and that in all
these cases the construction must be in favor
of the importer"
But the Treasury Department every day
runs in the face of this sound rule of inter-
probation. Its construction is constantly in
favor of the government, not the importer and
consumer. Everything is made to give way
to the monopolists, under the passionate
falsehood of desire to reduce the public
debt. How long, and yet how long, shall
these things be?
SPECIAL NOTICES.