The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1891-12-02
THE m,x1v.rr ACT CASES.
Arguaeut BEFORE the ssprene Court on the
Question or Ccnstltutionniity.

Nneeu0n OF complimentary.
WASHINGTON. Dec. 1.-The United States su-
preme Court continued to-day the hearing Of
the three suits brought by New York and
Chicago importers to test the constitutionality
OF tho Mckinley tariff act John T. Wilson.
ropresenting Marshall Field d Co.. closed tho
opening argument for the importers. main
tanning that the whole not was vitiated by the
omission OF the tobacco rebate section. Hoil-
Illustrated his position by surprising thnt the
free sugar clause had been omitted and ask
Ing II the sugar bounty clause would in such
an event have been held to be legal He also
contended that the rate Of dutios had been af-
footed by the sugar bounty provision.
Justice Harlan asked how lie had asceT-
tained this fact. Mr.. Wilson replied that he
had ascertained 1t from the act itself. which
revenues OF the Gsvernment. Free sugar had
cut off 500. 0OO. 600. and the bountes to be paid
lection to the producers who had to compete
againat free sugar. . 49,
Justice Gray in1ured where was the differ
|cana ths difference ID The isss thas Erotss.
eommefeo With foreign patfons while the only
bounty system was the general welfare clause s
There was a cross.iirc OF questions and an.
,ssh In weight s shSad no be H
Been made desray tss
goldfish act passed for the benefit Of New Eng
wR shs fens ss ed Ensn Ssa
tics HasIan cited the resent iortications
Gnsd STATES and TASK asked Gonsress u eous
to sugar prsdueers. Mr. Wilson. howe @ d did
not admit That these CAGES wero analogous to
tE oa 81 airs srsy for the simple produce
I; TOR Taft then followed be.
section. aud his line Of argument was that It
would not DO i2r tiIs court t9 g9 behind thss
they Would na no record q the act SIX ts'e ft and
the court would have to supplement the
record by parol evidence. which was conflict
attorney; General Miller argued on tho
bounty and .reriproeity features. He main
general welfare clause to pass q bounty act.
It was the duty Of Congress in his opinion to
e the world IN time oi need. In time Of peace
the Goyernment could get everything. but in
Of 70 soS OF cd h
South found that Il would have been t. its
that 1t would not have been, compelled to buy
abroad. The power granted to Congress under
ths wS Sy tSs s tbaa apa
any. other tribunal on earth. The general
welfare power was as absolute as that of the
Congress directed the building Of an ancient
Greek Trreme. would nybody says this court
could review and nullify that determination
means were certainly in the discretion Of Con.
gress. unless 1t used means which this court
could say; asa judicial matter. were not means
in which the court could interpose. Congress
might. under the genera! welfare clause. APP
ts city, IKE court
perhaps. say that was not u means designed to
the ena.the general welfare
stead. depreciation. and other laws passed
under the general welfare" authority. and
added that the last Congress had passed a law |
say would call for an enormous appropriation |
on account Of Indian depredations.
The Attorney General devoted his review OF
through almost q century IN, which had been |
ates Ae should BE-
Stephen G. Clark Of New York argued that
not tho bin signed by the President was the |
passed: Re said It was not necessary to take
been omitted, and he produced book con-
tain9g record t o. bills passed Kept in the
Httorney- General Miller asked there was
MIR: Clark said he was not informed on that |
less there was such law the book had no |
Mr.. Clark.