St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-08-08
B0UpTYQUESTIOpS
COMPTROLLER BOWLER HEARS
ARGUMENTS ON THE sUG- .
AR LAW.
HIS POSITION ATTACKED.
HENDERSON DECLARES HE HAS
NO RIGHT TO SIT IN JUDO
MENT.
OFFICE OF THE COURT UsURPED
the Sugar Bounty Claim
ants.

WASHINGTON, Aug. THE hear
ing today before Comptroller Bowler
upon the question of the constitution
atty of the sugar bounty appropria-
tions made by congress at it's last ses-
sion, for the crops of 1893 and 1884,
arises upon the claim of the Oxnard
Beet Sugar company, of Nebraska,
that being the first claim settled by the
auditor since the passage of the Will
son bill by which the old sugar boun-
ties of the Mckinley act were revealed.
The decision of the comptroller is re-
quired to be acted on by the auditor,
whose certificate is made by law final
and conclusive upon the executive
branch of the government. The re-
suit is that the decision of the comp
troller cannot be reviewed by any other
executive officer of the government
Claims rejected by the comptroller, how
ever, may be sued on in the circuit and
district courts of the United States,
their decisions being binding upon him.
The court of appeals of the District of
Columbia having held that the sugar
bountieS were unconstitutional, the
comptroller of the treasury deemed it
his duty to be satisfied upon that point
before passing the claim of the Oxnard
company. The hearing took place in
Comptroller Bowlers office in the
treasury building. Ex-senator Man
derson, of Nebraska, made the first
argument. He said the interests I'M
der consideration were of great i'm
portance, not only to his state, but to
the entire United States. The bounty
provided for in the Mckinley law was
pledge of the government to reward
experiments in sugar production to the
extent OF two cents per pound. 1t was
solemn contract for a term of years.
and the producers had a right to rely
upon 1t. He characterized the repeal
or the bounty law as IAN unrighteous,
unjust and almost unlawful exercise
OF congressional prerogative,' and re-
ferred to it as a "bunco'' process. The
speaker discussed at length the duties
OF the comptroller and his authority
10 act In this case, which he denied.
Ihe president and congress, said Mr..
.Mahderson, had passed on the consti-
tutlonaIty of this act, and he refused
10 acknowledge the authority of a SUBJ
orolnate to pass an ex-poste-facto veto.
OHly the judiciary could do this. He
characterized the action of Mr.. Bowler
as an encroachment on the provocative
Oh the executive and congress. and
especially the judiciary.
A SPECTACLE FOR THE GODS
senator Henderson made the noint
lhal the law providing for the nav
iheht OF the bounty was of later enact
ihehl IMAM the general law defining the
cc!hplfotlerS duties, and should he
gwen que weight in the latest instruo-
'loh on the subject. Senator Caffrev
asked Mr.. Henderson whether it was
not true that Republicans had voted
LOT the bounty as a relief measure. and
Aol as gong to establish a bounty
pflnclple, to which Mr.. Henderson re-
piieu that SUCH was the case He con-
tended that congress had the consti-
tutloIal r1ght to make q donation or
glft IL 1t should see fit, and quoted Jere
BLACK as authority for the opinion
SltlhS presidents, Mr.. Henderson re-
lerred 10 the opposition made by the
Iederallsts to the purchase of the
LOUISVILLE territory and said: Sup
pose we should then have had an Of
nclal who would have assumed to null
lily that act by refusing to pay out the
money appropriated, he would have
DE- en- spectacle for gods and men. I
th2nk COD 1t was not decided against
the purchase, and l hope we NAV 60
on acquiring and purchasing until we
get Hawaii and Cuba and other ont
iylnS strips of territory towards which
we nave been looking with longing
eyes. suppose, too, comptroller had
refused to pay warrants for war ex-
penSeS during the rebellion, on the
ground that he had doubts of their
constitutional validity? In that event,
he added, Il think there would have
been a rape on the treasury and a
murder of the comptroller
VALIDITY OF THE LAW.
After an hours recess for luncheon
Mr.. Henderson resumed his argument.
devoting this portion of his statement
to the constitutionality. of the bounty
law. For the purpose of establishing
the validity of the law in this respect
he quoted many authorities, citing
legislation and congressional debates
as early as 1879, and coming down
through the history of the nations.
He showed that from the earliest DAYS
bountiss had been a common thing.
and claimed that only the slightest
disposition had been shown in congress
to criticise their constitutionality. He
expressed the opinion that $3.50, OOO. 900
in gold would be sent abroad this year
for sugar and contended that one of
the best means for keeping our gold
at home was to produce our own
sugar. The senator contended that, as
a constitutional question, there was no
distinction between encouraging an
industry by granting a bounty and
imposing a protection duty. 81 can
not" said Senator Henderson, in con-
clusion, deem it possible that all past
precedents are to be thrown to the
winds, and that a new and startling,