New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-01-23
tnx rrtrcRAPu TO TIE TRIBuXE.1

NahIl
g., ,aron for granted that Tie next Aiorney-Grn-
~. United States will be- southern man. ana
q - o.cc1l,e that oil most OF the Cabinet states
" q ,sd rfcs, DAYS Tie name Of cX'RcprcSeha'lVe
randolph Taclcr. of Virginia Is sc' down for
'V ' on,e Mr. Tucker Is man Of genial ana engag'
.,.onaiiy who In, hosts Of warm friends. ana 10
ws [ may be due Ia part at least. the perslstency
~ which his aspirations for cabinet appoint
"' hove been encouraged and urged, despite the
~ .,, the Democratic leaders OF the Old Dominion
" :. . uni, in his support. few weeks ago when
" n,nocratc Senators and Representatives from Nir-
~, zero asked to sign joint letter In favor '' MS
rO;rtmrnt Representative oFcrIall declined i" 40
=" ere ground that h. was anxious 10 have cN l on
-, Iohn GoOdc made solicitor General. the oil
~ % which he appointed by Mr.. cleveland IN
NV Nv. which appointment Republican senate refused
l'0' colonel OFcrrall remarked that Virginia
:" 90, cNpcct 70 receive tho Attorney, encralslip
V sonaior Gcnerashp and for that reason II for no
- he could not consistently recommend the APP
sr, Of Mr. Tucker to The former Office. ii Is Well
In 10 Mr.. Cleveland, as we'll rs TO Democrats gen
lie that except for The influence ana energetic ef
60 ~ Colonel OTerTall large majority Of the Nir
% delegation 10 the Chicago Convention, if not all
t wouh have voted for the nomination Of David
,rl In response 70 the influence and efforts OF sen
n.r,e, and other Democratic leaders I'm that
w.. II /, therefore believed that the desires of
,rel o,Ferrall In regard 10 Nirginias appointments
~ So consulted and regarded by Mr.. Cleveland so far
:. no NAV find it practicable TO do So
NJ Tucker is an old man. In his seventeen year.
.h,s ,,ct 1, sometimes mentioned as a reason WHY
So .,cnld no, BE- appointed TO one OF the most eN-
w. ons aborious Offices In the administration:
49,, friends declare that he is In fun enjoyment OF
-, nc well as mental vgor. and therefore That
E ,oc,ion is not valid in his case. other Objections
,0ysr are urged by lawyers 10 Mr.. fuckers ap-
LIN, mont In conversation With Tribune coTreS-
n0ndeDt Yesterday one of them said
-, cannot believe that Mr.. Cleveland VIII MAKE
..A q. mistake as 10 appoint Mr.. Tucker Attorney
c.norol when there are many other men IN the
.on.,ic Marty who are ADLER and better qualified
-, che ofbce and who would willingly accept II. 40
~, r,nk that Mr. Tucker is seriously regarded as
200, constitutional lawyer by members VI "'e priv
,sss,on who know him best. When he was Attorney
cnrr,l of Virginia before the War-an Once Nv 'ne
yry which he held nntil the R"b" state government
r.s snulIcd on In 1-63-he distinguished h'cii ~
M delivery Of an opinion to the effect that the state
.u,horities had the right 10 ranNack and rhe ,he
- states mails I'm order 20 prevent the senlinG
-, Ill % such .nccndary' publications as TIE New
yo-n Tribune ard Helpers Impending CnSi'' Ih"'
vas MIR. fuckers idea Of tIr authority OF 'n' 'oi'
.,,p,,on and laws Of the United states UNITY oau
vsacs AGO. in the Lth Congress another coisu'"-
,,o,a oueson arose and on Tint Ne TOOK grouhd ION
,.s-r 10 that taken b. Mr.. Cleveland who was 'heh
uonso Of Representative, and therefore the opinion
,i., no delivered is not to b. found In the published
Official records Of Congress. 1000,
ain the XIIXth Congress, Of WHEN lie was "'r'"
her the senate passed bill 10 refund Inc D'o' i'
NJ 1851 IN the states which paid H. and TO forgive ~
States Which had not paid IT. The senate bill WAS IT,
ferred 10 the House Committee on ne Juoic"'N' vi
which Mr.. Tucker Wa then chairman "'e'e u
manned until the expiration Of that Congress, when II
nd tOQd a
o,ber members o! the committee were equally divided
m The question Of reporting the bill back 10 u'e
uouse and that the chairman unable to make
I'D his mind which side he was on. subsequently, anu
a.ter Mr. Tucker had passed ont OF congress Ms
brother General Beverly Tucker was appointed as
understood. The agent attorney OF the STATE Oh
West Virginia. which WIS interested in having the
tax refunded and Mr. Tucker appears TO have devoted
more attention to the subject and reached conclusion
in regard TO the propeiy and conslituiOnay ol the
proposed legislation. OF do not wish 1t to be
inferred that the employment Of General 1rcher mn
any influence upon Mr.. Tucker except perhaps 10 IN
duCe him 10 give thought and study 10 'he
question than he did when he was a member OF the
House of Representatives and chairman OF the Judci-
cry Committee. which had the senate bill III lis
custody. In the Lth Congress a bill TO refund the
Direct Tax OF 1851 passed both branches OF congress
and was vetoed by President Cleveland on March :.
1880 one day before the expiration oil That congress
and two DAYS before he retired from Ohce. ON Apr
o 1889, only month afterward, Mr.. TucSeg had pre-
pared and signed legal opinion ia opposition 10 the
veto message. which opinion was soon aftcrwaid
printed In a pamphlet entitled: The tonstiuonaliiy
Of the Direct Tax Bill and Veto Message OF President
Cleveland Here is copy OF that pamphlet.
am frank TO admit that in this case. In my opinion
Mr. Tucker had rather the better Of Mr.. Cleveland III
the constitutional argument"
somewhat more than half Of The pamphlet OF twelve
4 In IA %
sututOnality Of III" Direct TaX bill, and the remainder
10 criticisms OF the veto message OF the President
which Mr. Tucker obs are made WIN gr''
respect for his motives. we'll rs for his understand
INK I.u, he hat not examined the question In the
aspects herein presented, he cOui not have come
10 the conclusion 10 NctO the bill
After applying this salce Nj. Tucker continued
In fme. the question Is i it-caa 1t be-u1'ols''
tuoDal TO restore taxes uncon-titutionaly coirct1
from the peOple7 j. 1t not unconstitutional to re
tain them! And is II not constitutional ouv "
return what has been eXacied III Violation "l the CON
sutulion If these questions be answered, aS h"'
been demonstrated they should lie, they show the JUS
tice and consutionality Of the bill ana III" lhJ"N
ice and unconsiitutlcnality Of Is r!'cuoh II
another place Mr.. Tucker writes; The i1''io'"
assumes as a basis OF his reasoning that the tax wa
properly laid and collected. AMI that It's repay
a bald grauiIy, neither for the common defence IL"
general welfare. This j. petiiio prInciph' IL "s
sumes the whole point in dispute"
ON the next page. after quoting paragraph ZION
the veto message, Mr. Tucker again accuses tn" Pres
dent Of begging the question. and says No woid'
when he assumes such posialat" without lli' con
shCaliOn Of the points presented IN tls pap'T' IL
came TO IN. conclusion that this bill proposed ga
tuity and not the obli,atJn to restore what was III
constituiionoly exnci,d' After quoting another lhf
sgaph from the message. Mr. Tucker observes una
"th. President would hay" approved thc piii ,"u
considered The constitutional reIulrcin, MS anu p,o
hiOons In regard to this tax. "hu III im.IoHu,,
another paragraph from the same message ar 49,
ienaras TIM the non consideration OF inns 1hlO"
mental question is apparent from another psSe';
There Democrats who helleN" tla' MI ''cN'i"u
knowing rs he doubtless does know The Opinions th
tertsined and deliberately expressed 10y Mr. inh''
IN regard 20 one OF his most important Nel" Wen"e'o
VIII not be inclined 10 choose that dstBulohcu s''''
man as one Of bis constitutional advisers ,,o
The friends of Representative Chbcrson OF ,rnnS
Who desire 10 see him succeed Attorney t'enerai 'er
are by no means discouraged although the p1sSen
boom for Mr. Tucker may have maze t'" ~
confident than they were Il few weeks "s" nro,nt