The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-09-06

WASHINGTON, Sept. 5.-R. 8. Bowler,
the comptroller of the treasury, today
rendered an opinion in the now celebrated
OXnard sugar bounty claims, in which
he holds, in effect, first that he, as comp
troller, has jurisdiction of the case and,
second, in his opinion the act of March
2, 1888, making the sugar bounty appro
prlatlon is unconstitutional. He, however,
decided that the papers in the case be
sent to the court of claims for the rem
ditfon of a judgment in order that there
may be furnished "a precedent for the
future action of the executive department
in the adjustment of the class Of cases
involved in these sugar bounties."
The particular claim decided today is
substantially on the same footing as all
other sugar bounty claims for the sat
lsfacCon OF which Congress at its last
session appropriated S., 23S, 2S9. The comp
troller answers, at great length, the ar
gument presented by counsel at the hear
ing, in which his jurisdiction was at
tackled, and in the course of his reply he
says statutes which do not conform to
the constitution are not law and, there
fore, when a statute is in apparent con-
f1ict with the constitution it becomes the
duty of the executive officer to determine
for himself as between the statute and
the constitution whether the statute is
the law. 1t is true that the statute IS TO
be considered prima facie constitutional.
1t is also true that the officer acts at
his peril If he does not execute a. con-
stitutional statute, but 1t is none the
less true that he acts at his peril IL he
executes an unconstitutional statute.
AS the comptroller does not act under
the directions of the secretary OF the
within the sphere of his jurisdiction is
final and conclusive upon the executive
branch of the government, and it fol-
lowed that the power to resist the eXecu-
~ c-fo trttn
denied to any executive officer what
ever.i 1t was claimed that no executive
officer had the right to raise the point OF
unconstitutionality of a statute even IN
termine it's validity by the only branch
of the government conceded to have the
power to settle such question. rms
contention cannot be sound, as SHOWN py
the decisions of the supreme court OF tne
United States and those of the state
courts. Applied to the question OF the
payment of money from the treasury OF
the United States by an o1hcer sworn
without power to protect the treasury
against such unlawful claims for the
largest possible amount.
AS to the constitutionality of the act,
the COMPTROLLER says in part that the
principle has long been tdecided that tax
alton must be for a public purpose lhal
an attempt to take money from the peo-
PIE by the forms OF taXatlon lGr ,1ot pun an
exercise of legislative power ana, there-
fore, that an attempt to do so is mere
nullity as an, effort by the legislature 10
exercise power not granted by the con-
Stitution.
Manufacturing establishments have
been uniformly treated as private rather
than pubic enterprises. Numerous decl-
sions are cited tending to show that rae
tories of all kinds. saw mills, rolling mills
ETC., are private and are IN no sense pup
lie enterprises. It is suggested that when
Congress gets out of the domain of the
law and into the realm Of justice and
equity their power is unlimited. That
would be no doubt true if Congress could
get out of the domain of the law, but
they cannot do so.
AS the courts cannot declare any act Of
the legislature unconstitutional on the
grounds that it is contia airy to the princl-
pies of natural justice and equity, neither
can the legislature make an act consul
tutional which otherwise would not be so
simple, because in passing the same they
were actuated by motives founded upon
the principles of natural justice and
equity. ,,o-
limited to those who have suffered an in
Jury by failure TO receive the. bounty of
tEe Mckinley act, but is given TO all
alike whether they suffered loss or not.
There is nothing which indicates that 1t is
intended to make compensation for such
injury, and that cannot be Implied.
Ii the comptroller should pass the
Gle inns the government WOULD pc absolute
ly despoiled and the money of the people
be taken from the treasury in payment
of demands not authorized by law, II the
appropriation is in fact unconstitutional.
Ry a refusal to pass the claims the uiti-
mate right of the claimants are in no
way affected, for they nave perfect
remedy in court to test the Validity OF
their claims and obtain payment therefor
after a final determination of the consti-
tutjonality of the law if it be held I'M
constitutional.
If the comptroller had no other alter
native than to pass or reject the claims
for the reasons above given his duty to
the whole people who cannot bring. their
rights into court would require him to
reject them