Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-01-10
CUSTOMS COLLECTIONS.
Important Decision by the
Supreme Court.
SUGAR INTERESTS INVOLVED.
1.-The Laws Of q Country Must
Always Prevail Over Its
Treaties."

Always Prevail Over Its
lTreaties."
Associated Press dispatches to the HRsAxp1
WASHINGTON, January 9.-Decision
was rendered to-day in the case Of
James F. Whitney and others against
William A. Robertson, formerly Col
lector of the Port of New York. The
question raised was the scope and
force of certain provisions contained
in the treaties concluded between the
United States and the Republic Of
San Domingo and the Kingdom of
Hawaii, respectively. The plaintiffs
who appeared are New York mer-
chants who imported in 1882 from
San Domingo a large quantity Of
molasses and sugars similar in
kind to those imported from
the Sandwich Islands. The Collector
exacted duties on these San Domingo
sugars amounting to $22, 900, plaintiffs
paying the same under protest. They
then brought suit against the govern
ment to recover the amount exacted,
on the ground that by virtue of article
9 OF the treaty between the United
States and San Domingo, the United
States was debarred from imposing q
higher duty, or any other duty, upon
the products of San Domingo than
is imposed upon similar products Of
other countries with which the United
States might have commercial rela-
tions. Sugars similar to those IN
controversy were imported free of
duty from the Sandwich Islands under
the treaty provisions; therefore, it is
contended, they should be admitted
free from San Domingo.
THE COURT HOLDS
First, that the ninth article of tha
treaty between the United States and
San Domingo is merely a pledge of
the contracting parties that there
should be no discriminating legisla-
ton against imported articles of either
country. 1t was never designed to
prevent special concessions like those
granted Hawaii, and the clearest Ian
guage is necessary to justify the con-
clusion that the United States Gov
ernment intended to preclude itself
from such engagements with other
countries, which might become Of
highest importance to our interests.
Second: The act OF Congress un-
der which the duties in this case were
collected, authorized their exaction.
1t was Of general application, making
no exception in the favor of the goods
of any country, and passed after the
treaty with the Dominican Republic.
and if there is any conflict between
laws and treaties the former must pre-
vail. The country dissatisfied with the
action Of the legislature must address
its complaints to the executive head
Of the government, and take measures
which it deems essential to protect its
own interests. When the law is clear
It's validity cannot be assailed before
courts for want of conformity with
treaty stipulations.
The judgment of the United States
Circuit Court in favor Of the collec-
tion, is therefore affirmed.
A SIMILAR DECISION
Was rendered in the case OF Hugh
Kelly vs.. Edward L. Hedden. Had
these decisions been adverse to the
Government, the United States would
have had to pay out many millions
of dollars as refunds for duties ex-
acted, as the above suits were test
cases. Justice Field wrote the above
detailed decision.
THE DREyFUs CASE.
A decision was also rendered in the
patent case of Benjamin Daeyfus
against Sophia S. Earle. The execu-
tive appe aled from the Circuit Court
for the District of California. Suit
WAS brought for the alleged infringe
ment of patents granted July II,
1866, to John S. Earle for an i'm
proved process of imparting age to
wines by means of steam heating.
The court held that the application
of steam heat for this purpose was old
and no novelty in process, thus re-
versing the decree of the Circuit
Court with direction to dismiss the
bill.
PosTNIAsrERs' PAY.
A decision was also rendered
in the Postmaster's salary case,
of j. X. Mclean against VIII
liam J. Villas, Postmaster Gem
eral. This was suit for writ of
to compel the Postmaster
general to readjust the salaries of
postmasters Of, lower grades in ac-
cordance with the acts Of July LIST,
1864, June 18th, 1866 and March Sd,
1885. The Court agrees with the
Postmaster General in his construc-
ton Of them, holding that Congress
did not contemplate the readjustment
of salaries Of any of these officers
oftener than once in two years as the
Postmaster Generals legal duty and
the judgment of the Court Of the Dis
trict of Columbia denying the writ
was affirmed.
A MOTION FOR MAXWELL.
The Attorney-General Of Missouri
to-day submitted a motion to dismiss
for want of jurisdiction, the case of
Hugh Marion Brooks alias w. HI.
Maxwell, now in st. Louis prison
under sentence of death for the MUIR
der Of Charles A. Preller, maintain
ing that the case does not present q
federal question, and therefore the
Court has no Jurisdiction. The pris-
oner's counsel argue that the case
does present federal questions. Many
reasons were given similar to those
presented in the case of General
Prycr's motion in the Anarchist cases.
The Court adjourns on February
goth until March 10Th.
Evangelist Moody Coming.
SAN Francisco, January 9.-At q