The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1891-11-28
REEDS RULINGS.
Will Be Ruled Upon by
the Supreme Court.
The Speakers Course and
the Tariff Bill.
The Government Counsel
Make Out a Strong Case.

WASHINGTON, November 27.-Attorney
ueneral Miller and Solicitor General Taft
nave prepared a brief on behalf Of the
United States In the case Of United States
W. BALM, Joseph & Co., importers, who
complain that the collector at New York
collected an excessive duty upon worsted
cloths imported by them and seek TO abtaIn
refund of the excess. The United States
General Appraiser sustained the collector.
Dut the Circuit Court, on appeal, gave
Judgment against the United States.
From the Circuit Courts decision the
government appealed. The question
Is whether the act Of Congress approved
May 8. 1890. providing for a classification
Of worsted cloths as woolens made the duty
on worsted cloths equal to that
which the tariff act Of March
8, 1883. imposed upon wolens,
BalllD, Joseph q Co.. maintaining that the
act Of May 8, 1890. never acquired the va.
lidity of law because there was not a con-
stitutlonal quorum In the House Of Repre-
sentatives when the bill passed that House,
and II the act was invalid. 1t could not be
SonoL oa uou W hIuonu sHo sdHiH act OF march,
1858. because 1t did not purp0rt to repeal
any act imposing pre-existing duty on
worsted cloths or to impose any new duty
thereon. The firm declare that II the act
OF May 9, 1890. amended the act Of 1888, it
did so only with respect to such worsted
cloths as the Secretary of the Treasury
should classify and. as the Secretary did
pot classify the importations in question,
the duties therein were unaffected by the
latter act.
The counsel for the government say that
duly engrossed act, signed by the presid-
Ing officers Of both houses and approved
by the President, deposited with the Sec
retary Of State and published among the
laws Of the United States is the ultimate
record OF law and the best evidence Of
It's passage. The Congressional Record
shows that the Speaker Of the House stated
that the members present and refusing to
vote. "a In number, with those recorded as
voting, l30 In number, showed tai Of
2l2 members present constituting a quo
rum. the yeas being 13S aHd the nays none.
The bill passed.
As to the contention that every member
OF the quorum shall vote when his name
Is called or else does not make one OF the
quorum ITO Go business" the brief says
the power 10 compel the attendance of
members would be futile and nugatOry II
after they were brought In by process
OF the House, they could, by refusing to
vote, as etfectually break quorum as II
the sergeant-at-arms never found them
The brief shows that IL the members could
break quorum by remaining silent, the
House might be unable to exercise its pow
or TO punish members. The history OF the
clause fixing the number of q quorum in
the constitutional convention, says the,
brief. emphasizes what Is so plain ON the
face OF the constitution itself, that to make
one Of a quorum the presence of member
Is all thar is necessary. No question was
raised as TO the passage Of the bill by the
Senate and its approval by the President.
The counsel claim the bill daily became
law. The counsel further say the
act implied an amendment of the act Of
1888, and the wOrsted clause thereof to the
extent OF imposing the same duty upon
imported worsted cloths as upon wooden
cloths. They argue that 1t Is absurd to
claim that only worsteds classified by the
Secretary are to bear duty equal to that
on woolens, for In that case
the duty would vary accord.
as the Secretary did or did not,
classify worsted5. The brief asserts that
the conditions existing when the act
passed and leadingto its passage, leave
no doubt OF the intention Of Congress to
impose the same duty upon all wOrsted
cloths as was imposed by the act Of 1888
upon wOOlen cloths.