The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-10-24
A VERY NICE POINT.
A Question Whether the McKin-
ley Bill is the Law.
MCPHERSON AND CARLISLE
Think Not-The President Said to Have Signed
aBill that Did not Pass Both Houses
Fatal Section Thirty.

4 loPNoAUA H.
| NEW YORK, Oct. 23.-The Herald has a
three column story beginning: II beg to
COLL your attention to the conference report
on the tariff bill sent you about ten days or
Two weeks ago, quarto pamphlet of PA
pages. On page IT'S you will find amend
ment 449 and section 80, the reading matter
relating to drawbacks On tobacco, stricken
out. Turning over to page 176, the sixth
line from the top, you will find the follow
ing: Conference restores section 3d. Now
IN the tariff bill find: Section 80 That on
and after the first day of January, etc. ,
ending with, Is cents per pound, leaving
all the rest of the original section 30 out al
together. This omission is fatal to the bill,
and In the opinion of eminent lawyers here,
Senator Carlisle among them, it vitiates
the Whole Dill. 1t is an internal revenue
section, but being part of the tariff bill
passed it stands and falls together
This passage faom a letter sent very re-
Gently from Washington by Senator John
II. MCPHERSON 10 member of prominent
Importing house in this city, and now for
the hrst time published, will create a SEN
sation in commercial circles all over the
world. II eminent authorities are correct
the merchants of New York will realize
mat they have been emancipated from the
intended expressions of the inquitous Nc
Kinley bill. The President, if the Senator
Is right, has signed bill which never
passed the two houses of Congress. The bill
which did pass the two houses of Congress
has not been signed by the President.
therefore the alleged bill under which the
government officials have levied imports
since October =, not having passed Con-
gress, is not the law of the land and only a
revenue bill. The law by which importers
can be finally bound is that known as the
act OF March 3, 1888. In accordance with
this discovery copies of form for protest
tgainst Collector Erhardt's official action
under the Mckinley bill were forwarded to
the leading importers in this city.
Daniel McKeever, secretary of the I'm
porters' organization of this city, said that
any one OF common sense would see that
the President could not lawfully add to or
strike out any portion of the bill after its
passing the two houses, any more than the
Senate could amend bill after it had re-
ceived the Presidents signature. The
error, whether intentional or otherwise.
In his opinion, amounts to veritable strik-
ing out of section 30 by the President.
This, in the opinion of eminent lawyers,
Senators Carlisle and Mcpherson among
them, vitiates the whole bill and renders it
unconstitutional.
Mr.. Mckeever said he had sent to the
state department for certificate and for
certified copy of the law, and said
printed copy was sent him, but without
certification of the blunder. He further
expressed the conviction that the talk
about calling special session to pass the
force bill was only blind as according to
his information Senator Aldrich and other
members of the Senate conference commit
mlttee had got wind of the blunder and
were afraid to face the result Mr.. Nc
Keever added he had paid all his duties
under the new law so called, under pro-
test, confidently expecting that they would
be eventually pronounced illegal.
Senator Mcpherson was seen on the mat
ter and he said: Il have been of the i'm
preston all along that there was some
thing the matter with that tariff bill. en-
deavored during its progress to induce the
committee to have it take effect not sooner
than JanuaIy next so that if any errors
were found, as was quite likely in big
measure Of that kind, the proper correco
tions might be made at the adjourned SEES
sion of Congress. My impression was
strengthened whan talk of an extra session
Immediately after the elections was sent
abroad. could not believe that the. Re-
publlcans really desired to call an extra
session merely to pass the elections bill.
and L had quite made up my mind that
which the Washington people knew about.
but which was not known to the entire re.
public: The supreme court might decide
that the omission affected merely the re-
bate which 1t is intended to allow holders
of original packages of tobacco, who had
bought internal revenue stamps pre-
vious to the passage of the bill. 1t might
declare the entire law vitiated by the
error committed i'll engrossing the bill.
Of course, before test case could well be
made up and reach the supreme court, Con
gress would have corrected the error. In
that event it would become necessary for
the government to repay the importers who
had paid the tax under protest the differ
ence between the duty under this Mckinley
bill and the duty under the bill in force
previous to its enactment, under which.
having been declared unconstitutional. the
duties would of course be assessed. This
would result, as you can see, in voluminous
legislation and very great amount of
trouble, not to speak of the expense to the
government. OF course, even if the bill
were declared unconstitutional, this omis-
sion is not vital matter, and quite
naturally Congress at its next session VIII
rectify its error"