San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1889-10-22


very nature of things 1t was certain
he would do when he came to a final
deliyerance on the much mixed Mex
lean ore question. Since the report
of the United States senate's judi
ciary committee, July 5, 1888, there
has been no question, among those
who have kept themselves informed
in the premises, what the status of
those ores was. Had there been no
change in the political headship Of
the nation last March there would
have been no question raised. The
law upon the United States statute
book was plain and could have but
one Interpretation. The report of the
senate's Judiciary committee was in
full accord with the law, and the ore
importations which had been freely
admitted under the law up to March
last would have continued to enter
the United States had not the custom
house officers along the border at
tempted to make law, instead of ex-
ecuting it, and thereby create a feel
ing all along the border against the
The secretary of the
treasury has been made the scape-
goat for the sins of the democratic GUS
tom officials along the bor-
der, who have assumed to in
terpret his instructions not in
the light Of existing laws. but
in the light of what they arrogantly
assume the law to have been. Secre-
tary WINDOWS instructions have
been grossly misrepresented as we'll
as the law, and this misrepresenta-
ton has no excuse. The LIGHT will
lay before its readers in a very few
days an exhaustive reply to the GUS
toms official who has attempted de-
Tense of his own indefensible course
and an arraignment of Mr.. Wilson of
Laredo for his explanation of the
treasury circular over which all this
fuss has been so needlessly made.
Mr.. WINDOWS conclusion is that there
can be no change in the classification
of these ores without congressional
action, and that it never was intend
ed to levy duty upon the lead in the
ores as it is levied upon the copper
and nickel contained in the Mexican
ores, an entirely different form of ex-
preston being used in speaking of
the lead ores than is used in speaking
of the copper and nickel ores. The
language of the secretary is too ex-
plicit to be mistaken, he says:
1t mnst be held that the designa-
ton of lead ore and silver ore in the
tariff, in the absence of legislative
definition, was that of existing deci-
sions that congress intended the
classification should turn on the ques-
ton of value and not of quantity. 1t
is therefore considered that this de-
partment Is without authority to
change the departmental and con-
gressional definition of these ores,
and in faith of which large business
interests have been established.
That congress did not intend to i'm
pose duty upon the lead which might
be found in the different ores, but
only upon such ores as were then
recognized under the decisions of the
department as lead ores is gathered
from other parts of the tariff act, for
in paragraph 1856 copper is made duti-
able whenever found in ore, and in
paragraph 1911, nickel is also made
dutiable whenever found in ore or
other crude form. From these cases
it is clearly the metal con talned IN
ore which is made subject Of duty,
and had the same form of expression
been used in reference to lead
that metal would have been duti-
able at the rate prescribed whenever
found in ore. According to well settled
rules of statutory construction, this
difference in the form of expression
must be deemed toindicate a different
legislative intent, and to limit the au-
thority of the department to inn
pose duty in such shape to
the ore itself under existing
rules of classification. l consider
therefore, that the present classified
ton has attained the force of the con
gressional enactment, and that q
change if desired, must be sought il
congressional Intervention"
1t is quality not quantity, value no
weight, which determines whether
the ore is to be classed as lead or sill
yer and that valuation, so says thu
United States statute, is at the plac,
of importation, and this accepta