The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1895-08-08
SUGAR nnuNpY CLAIMS.


BowIsr-HIS Authority To Pass Upon the
COnStitutIOnhI!ty Of the Law Denied,
WAsHISaroN, D. O., August 7.-The
hearing to-day before Comptroller
Bowler upon tho question OF the consti'
tutiouality Of tho sugar bounty appro.
priation made by Congress at its last
session. for the crops OF 1893 aud 1894,
arises upon tue claim Of the oxnard
Beet Sugar Company, Of Nebraska, that
being the fret claim ssItled by an audi.
tor since the passage Of the WilsoR bill
by which the old sugar bounties Of the
Mckialey act wore repealed. The COM
missioner Of the internal revenue, hav.
ing ndju,tsd the amount OF the bountisI
duo the 0xnard company, referred all
tho papers to the auditor for the treas
ury department for tha statement Of an
account thereon. Tho auditor stated an
account allowing the amount axed BY
tho commissioner Of internal revenue
aud certified his decision TO tho coup.
troller for his approval, disnpprnval or
modification, as required by the pro-
visions OF the new accounting system,
in the act OF July 81, 1891. as the reSul!
OF the labots OF tho DoCkcry commits
sion.
The decision oi the comptroller can.
not DO reviewed by any other executive
officer OF the government. Claims re-
iecLed by the comptroller, however,
may be sued for in the court OF claims,
or, in cSrtain cases. in the circuit aud
district courts ut tho United States.
The court Of appeals Of the District OF
Columbia having held that the sugar
buuuEieS. were unconstitutional, tho
comptroller Of tho currency deemed II
necessary to bO aatistiSd upon that point
before passing the claim OF the O&nard
company and establishing precedent
for tho payment oil tho sugar bouasies,
provided ior by the new appropriations.
He therefore, without making any dc.
ciSiou upon the matter whatever. called
upon tue counsel OF tho Oxnard com.
pany to be heard upon tho quoStion.
The matter gives rise Immediately to
very considerable discussion as TO the
comptroller'a powers aud duties, and
the claim has been pOrIIStBntly made
that no had no jurisdiction to decide
the question, and was compelled to obey
the law as passed By Congress, whether
constitutional or not. That question, 1t
ia understood, ia being argued as vol rs
the conStItutionality Of the bounty ap.
proptiationI.
Tho hearing took place in Comptroller
Bowlor's oGlce in tho treasury building.
Ex-senator Mandsrion, OF Nebraska,
made the first argument in the case. He
said the interests under consideration
was ono OF great Importance, not only TO
his state but to the entire United States.
Tho bounty provided Tor in tho McHin.
10y law was pledge Of tho government
to reward experiments in sugar prodnC'
ton to the extent Of two cents per
pound. II was solemn contract for a
term OF years aud the producers had n
right to rely upon II. Tho state ot No.
brRSka, he said, had gone TO great OK
psnSO in establishing experiment sta
tionS for tho purpose OF teaching tho
people how to grow the beets. He then
explained tho present bounty lecisla'
ton under which tho preIOnt claim Is
presented.
Mr.. Mlndaraon declared that III by
any method in tho treasury department
or the courts this boon DO denied our
iac,oriol, disaster beyond any deacrip.
ton and distro1a beyond auy capacity
10 paint will result"
Senator Blanchard, In the course Of
his argument said:
THE attitude Of tho comptroller Is
ono OF apparent rOhistauco 10 the oxecu.
ton OF an nc. OF Congress. Questions
Of GrAvO And aorIou, import arlSO, An
extraordinary spectacle IL horo present.
OF. Three gentlemen. who as sOdators
oil tho United SlNtOs, actively par.iCi.
patel IN tho paSSa1s ot tho bounty mp.
propriation through the senate, and two
mOmbOrs Of tho house Of rOptoionta.
tivcs, who did tho Same In that body,
nro proVont at this hearing. Aud Tor
what purpoSs2 10 present before n
subordinate official OF tho troN0ury do.
rafsnsa. Fealoat why no shoall exc.
cutc tho law Of Congrosa" l."