The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-09-06
SUGAR BOUNTY VOID.
COMPTROLLER Bowler Vetoes all
Appropriation.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. HE SAYS.
He Declares an Attempt Has Been
Made to Give Public Money
to Private Persons.

comptroller OF the treasury. today rem
dered an opinion in the now celebrated
Oxnard sugar bounty claims, in which
he holds. il effect: First, that he, as
comptroller. has jurisdiction OF the case,
and second, In his opinion the act or
March. 1850, making the sugar county APP
preparation, is unconstitutional lie de-
csded, however, that the papers N the
case should De sent TO the court OF claims
for the rendition Of Judgment, in ORDER
that there may be furnished president
for the future action OF the executive &C.
pa. tmsnt in the adjustment OF claims IN
volved In the sugar bounties.
The particular claim decided today IS
substantially on the same footing as all
the other sugar bounty claims. for the
satisfaction OF which congress at Its last
session appropriated S. 80. -. The comp
troller answers az great length the argu-
ment presented by counsel at the hearing.
In which his jurisdiction Is attacked. ana
in the course OF his reply he says statutes
which do not conform TO the constitution
are not law, and therefore when stat
ute is in apparent conflict with the con-
stirution II becomes the duty OF the ex-
ecutive officer TO determine for himself
as between the statute and the consttu-
ton whether the statute is the law. IL
is true that the statute is to be CONSIDERED
prin1a facie constitutional, ana should De
followed unless IL is clearly unconsutu-
II IL also tsteAh ZIG SA''~~A
at mis- peril IL he does not execute con-
stitutionaI statute, out IL is no less true
that he acts at his peril If he executes
an unconstitutional act. AS the comp
troller does not act on this case by dEec-
ton Of the secretary of the treasury or
the president, his decision within the
sphere OF his jurisdiction is final ana
conclusive upon the executive branch or
the government. 1t was claimed that no
executive officer had the right 70 raise
the point of the unconstitutionalty OF 4
statute. even in a case in court IN oFder
TO finally determine its validity ny the
only branch of the government CONCEDED
to have the power to settle such ques-
ton This contention cannot be sound, as
shown by the decisions or the supreme
court of the United States and those or
the state courts. Applied TO the question
of the payment of money from the treas, treas
ury of the United States by an oHcer
sworn to support the constitution. ne
would be without power to protect the
treasury against such unlawful claims
for the largest possible amount
AS 10 the constitutionality of the act,
the comptroller says in part that the pF1h-
CHILE has long been decided that taxa
ton must be for a public purpose; that an
attemnt TO take money from the people py
the forms of taxation for a purpose other
than a public one Is not an exercise OF
legislative power. and therefore taat an
attempt to do so is a mere nullity, as an
effort by the legislature TO exercise power
not granted by the constitution
Manufacturing establishments nave been
uniformly treated as private rather than
public enterprises. Numerous decisions
are cited tending to show that factories
of all kinds sawmills, rolling mills, etc,
are private, and are in no sense pubnc
enterprises 1t was suggested That When
congress gets out of the domain OF the
law and into the realm of justice ana
equity its power is unlimited. That would
be no doubt true If congress could ger
out of the domain of law, but 1t cannot
do so. AS the courts cannot declare any
act of the legislature unconstitutional on
the ground that IL is contrary to the prin-
cipIes of natural justice and equity, neith-
er can the legislature make an act consu-
tional which otherwise would not be so.
because in passing the same they We're
actuated by motives founded upon the
principles OF natural justice and equity.
The bounty of the act of 1898 is not limited
10 those who have suffered an injury by
failure to receive the bounty of the Nc
Kiniey act, but is given TO all alike,
whether they suffered loss or not. There
Is nothing which indicates that il is in
tended to make compensation for such in
jury. and that cannot be implied. II the
comptroller should pass the claims the
government would be absolutely commit
ted and the money of the people taken
from the treasury In payment OF demands
not authorized by law. II the appropris-
ton Is In fact unconstitutional. BY
fusal TO pass the claims the ultimate
rights of the claimants are In no way af-
fected. for they have a perfect remedy in
court 10 test tho validity OF their claims
and obtain payment thereof after final
determination of the constitutionality of
the law. If 1t be held unconstitutional
If the comptroller had no other alter
native than to pay or reject the claims
for the reasons above given. his duty 10
the whole people. who cannot bring their
rights into court. would require him 10
reject them.