Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-10-24
Secretary Window Win Enforce the Pro-
visions of the New Law.

NEW YORK, October 23d.-The Herald endeav-
ors to show that the Mckinley tariff bill is in
valid because of the alleged omission of a por-
ton of Section 80, relating to the tobacco tax.
The paper takes its cue from d passage in q let
ter sent very recently by Senator John +. Nc
Pherson to member of prominent importing
house in this city MePherson says: This
of eminent lawyers here, Senator Carlisle
among them, it vitiates the whole BILL 1t is
an internal revenue section, but being part of
the tariff bill as passed IL stands and falls to-
gether."
The opinions of lawyers are given to support
this view, but Special Deputy Collector Couch,
who is recognized authority at the Custom
house on all knotty tariff problems, said of the
alleged omission:
81 do not see how it could possibly affect i'm
port duties in any way. Even If the omission
has occurred do not see why a special Sc sion
it. Congress will meet early in December.
There would be plenty of time to correct the
mistake before the lst of January"
Deputy Collector Dudley Phelps of the law di-
vision OF the Custom-house took the same view
of the case as Mr.. Couch. II there had been
any omission OF the part of Section 50 it would
not in the least affect the law. He did not see
how any serious consequences could follow if
the provision given rebate to manufacturers
should be retained in the bill, as it was in the
Conference Committees report, and was omitted
by an error. 1t was a very simple matter for
Congress to remedy it at the coming session.
SECRETARY WINDOWS POSITION.
WASHINGTON, October 23d.-Secretary Window
said this morning that he knew nothing Off
cially about the protest against the legality of
the Mckinley tariff bill. Il do not, he said,
regard it as the province of an executive Off.
Ger to question the constitutionality OF the Acts
of Congress 1t for him to enforce the law as he
finds it, and not TO determine questions that affect
its legality. l am, therefore. executing the Nc
Kinley Tariff Act as l find it. and shall con-
tinue to do so, unless competent legal
tribunal, such as the Supreme Court, decides
the law unconstitutionai. II is not for me to
question the validity of any signatures to the
bill as enrolled. Neither is it fol me to deter
mine whether the bill signed by the President
did or did not. in fact, pass the lower House,
much less is it for me to determine whether the
omission of the tobacco drawback section or
any other provision of the bill invalidates the
law. As understand it, the Act of October l.
$780, is the law of the land. Ny duty, there
fore, is plain, and shall execute the provisions
of that law to the best of my ability. Its coz
stituionality is question tor the Courts, and
until they decide against it shall be governed
by it as it stands"
Attorney-General Miller positively declined to
discuss the question. saying it would be mani
festly improper to do SO unless it came TO him
in an official way.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue Mason
said: 'slt is not for me to say whether or not
the omission of the tobacco provision vitiates
tariffs Being merely an executive officer of the
Government, / must enforce it as find it. Any
how, the tobacco schedule does not take effect
until January lst, so if Congress desires to re-
fund two cents pound on all tobacco on hand
when the law takes effect, II has ample time to
legislate to that end"
No alarm whatever is felt here among the
fiends of the Mckinley bill as to the legality of
its enactment 'Precedents of unnumbered
years." an old and experienced employe of the
House said today, 'leaves no doubt that the
error, whether of omission or commission in
enrolment OF the bill rassed by Congress, does
not vtiate any part OF the measure except that
part to which the error relates.
Captain McGregor Chief of the Customs Di-
vision, recalls a somewhat similar case under
the Wool Act of 1867. The Tariff Act bore date of
the I'd of March, but Congress extended the ses.
sion of the I'd over to the Attn, so, as matter of
fact, the bill was not signed until about noon on
the 4th of March.
The question arose as to whether cargo that
arrived on the Sd would pay duty at the old
rate as the bill was not actually signed till
The case was carried into court, which
consented to go behind the public
record and take the testimony of Presi-
dent Johnson himself as to when the Act was
signed. A similar question will. of course, come
up in connection with the Mckinley bill. The
copy of the Act which went TO the President,
natures of the presiding officers of the two
houses of Congress, certifying to its correctness.
1t must now be settled whether it would be law
full to go behind this certiication and ascertain
what was really the bill passed by the two
houses.
EFFECT ON THE CUSTOM RECEIPTS.
NEW YORK October 23d.-A Philadelphia spe-
cial from Washington to the Public Ledger says:
The average monthly receipts from customs ex-
ceeded during four months $4,000, 900, which
was largely in excess of the average for any
similar period of the past fifteen or twenty
years The receipts for the current month will
go beyond this average, and are likely to reach
s2S ,0C00C0, which is equal to the receipts for
any two months of the preceding fifteen years.
For the first twenty days in October the receipts
were over sl9900,000. daily average for the
seventeen business days of the month of over
cf nnA