Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-09-19
SUGAR BOUNTY CLAIMS
They May Not Go to the Court of Claims
After ALL
What In Said mt the Treasury De-
partment as to the Sec
retary's Power.

1t now looks as though the claim of the
Oxnard Beet Sugar Company, involving the
constitutionality of the sugar bounty clause
of the Mckinley tariff law, may not be SUBJ
mitted to tie Court of Claims for adjudica-
ton, a course suggested by Controller Bow
Ter when he disallowed the claim on the
ground that the bounty clause was uncon-
stitutional.
In his decision the controller said that the
refusal to pay the claims did not affect the
ultimate rights of the claimants. for the
reason that they had perfect remedy in
court to test the validity of their claims
and obtain payment thereof in the event
that it is held that the law is constitu-
tional.
He therefore suggested the reference of
the Oxnard claim to the Court Of Claims
in order that the department have pre-
cedent FOR its future action in sugar bounty
ca ses. This course could be followed, ne
said, under sections 1O6S and 1904 Of the
Revised Statutes.
What One Section Provides.
Section 1903 provides as follows:
Whenever any claim is made against
any executive department, involving dis
puted facts or controverted questions of
law, where the amount in controversy ex-
ceeds three thousand dollars, or where
the decision will affect a class of cases or
furnish a precedent for the future action
of ary executive department in the ad-
justmept of a class of cases, without re-
gard to the amount involved in the parti-
cular case, or where any authority, right,
privilege or exemption is claimed or de-
ME / under the Constitution of the United
States, the head Of such department may
cause such claim, with all the vouchers,
papers, proofs and documents pertaining
har fn h0 fra I'D
Claims, and the same shall be there pro-
ceeded in as If originally commenced by
the voluntary action of the claimant; and
the Secretary of the Treasury may, upon
the certificate of any auditor or controller
of the treasury, direct any account, mat
ter or claim, of the character, amount or
class described in this section, to be trans
mitted, with sll the vouchers, papers, doc
uments and proofs pertaining thereto, 10
the said court, for trial and adjudication.
Section 1904 provides that cases thus
transmitted shall proceed to judgment as
in other cases in that court, and section TOT
of the United States
Senator MandersOn's Protest.
Soon after the controllers decision was
announced, Senator Manderson, represent
ing the beet sugar interests. telegraphed
the Treasury Department, protesting
against the reference Of the case to the
Court of Claims, at least before he had
an opportunity of arguing the question be-
fore the Secretary. He was informed that
Secretary Carlisle would be prepared to
hear him any time after the Goth instant.
Since then there has been no further cor
respondence on the sunjeet, and no date
has been set for the proposed hearing.
Senator Manderson is now in Chattanooga.
1t is said at the Treasury Department to-
day that the reference Of the claim was in
the interests of the claimants to a certain
extent, and If they did not wish that course
to be pursued the Secretary would probably
accommodate them and allow the question
to stand on the controllers decision. 1t
was said further that the Secretary has no
power to overrule the controller in this mat
ter and that the claimants sole remedy is in
the courts.