The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1890-10-30
A BIG TARIFF SCARE
Talk about Fighting tho Mckinley Ao,,n

contest the legality Of the Mckinley
tarl1l upon various grounds, one being
clerical errors and missions IN the Ell.
rolment of the bill with the conference
| committee changes.
Concerning these publications Secre-
tary Window said this morning he
knew nothing officially about protests
against the legality of the Mckinley
tariff bill. 81 do not" he said "regard
it as the province of an executive otli-
Ger TO question the cOnstitutionality of
ActS OF Congress. 1t Is for him to en-
lorcc the law as he finds 1t and not to-
determine questions affecting its legali-
~. am therefore executing the Nc
kinlcy Tariff Act as find it-appr0y-
ed by the President Of the United
states and certified as correct by the
PRESIDENT Of the Senate and Speaker of
the House Of Representatives, and
Shail continue to do SO unless a compe-
TENT legal tribune, such as the Supreme
! Court, decides that the law is uucon-
Stltutlonal. 1t is not for me to 1ues
| ton the validity of any of the sigma
lures TO the bill rs enrolled, neither is
II lor me to determine whether the bill
signed by the President did or not. in
| TACT, pass the lower house. Much less
IL 1T Tor mo to determine whether omis
SION or the tobacco drawback section or
any other provision Of tho bill invali-
dates the law as whole. AS | under
stand it the Act Of October 1, 1890, is
The law Of the land. MY duty, there
fore, Is plain and | shall execute its
provisions to the best OF my ability.
It's constltutionality is a question for
lhe Courts and until they decide
against it shall be governed by it as
it stands"
Attorney General Miller positively
decllnrd to discuss the question in any
OF ITS bearings, saying it would be
m2nlfeStly improper for him to do so
unless 1t came to him in an official way.
Inc commissioner of internal revenue.
Mr. Mason, who is specially charged
WIN the execution Of the tobacco pro
Visions OF the law, confined his remarks
IN regard to the alleged illcgality of
the law to the following:
Il Will obey the law as certified by
tho Srcretary of State. 1t is not for me
10 say whether OrnOt the omission of
the tobacco rebate provisions vitiates
the law. Being merely an executive
officer Of the Government | must en-
iorce 1T as find it. Anyhow, tho to-
nacco schedule does not take effect un-
I'll January l, 80 that if Congress de-
Slres TO refund the two cents pound
on all tobacco on hand when tho law
takes effect it has ample time to lcQis-
late to that end"
NO alarm is felt here among the
trends of the Mckinley bill as to the
legality of its enactment. An old and
| experienced employee of the House
said to-day:
"Precedents OF unnumbcred wears
| leave no doubt that an error, whether
OF omission or commission, in the en-
| rolment OF bill passed by Congress
does not vltate any part of the measure
except that part to which the error re-
| lateS. Errors off some kind occur at
| every session Of Congress in at least
| one or more important bills, and to
hold that the omission or insertion of
any paragraph, word or punctuation
marx lnvalldatcS not only the part of
the bill to which the error is relevant,
put the entire measure, would estnb
llSh chaos In the affairs Of the Govern
mont and compel Congress to remain
constantly IN session to correct i'm
medlatcly on discovery errors in bills
signed by the President in order that
the operations of the Government
might be carried on. 1t is safe to say
that an error occurs In at least one ap-
preparation bill during each Congress.
ana yet there has never been any doubt
entertained hy the accounting officers
OF the Government, or by any one else,
rs to the validity Of all the appropria-
lions except the particular one affected
10y such error In the enrolment ofthe
Tariff Act Of 1888 q comma was i'm
properly used in the fruit plant para
graph, and the manifest intention of
Congress thereby defeated to the great |
loss OF the customs revenues, but there |
was no question as to the validity of |
other provisions Of the law when it |
was passed upon by the Suprs me Court. |
During the very last session Of Con-
greSS an error was made in the enrol |
mrnt of the river and harbOr approplia
ton bill by the omission Of two ciphcrs |
In the amount appropriated for the i'm
provcment of the Illinois River, so that |
$1,000 instead Of $lUO,OOO was appro-
prlatcd. n week or more after the bill |
became law the error was discovered
and Congress promptly passed a Joint
resolution to correct it. The fact that |
IN this joint resolution, as in numer-
uuS others passed for the correction of
similar errors, Congress enacted no pro-
vision to give legal effect to the re-
maindcr of the bill shows concluslvely
that III the opinion of the legislative
branch OF the Government an error in
one part Of the measure does not Wit
late 1T aS q WHOLE"