The Kootenai herald. [volume] (Kootenai, Idaho) 1891-1904, 1896-05-30
MUST PAY SUGAR BOUNTY
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES HAS so DECIDED,
sary to Satisfy the Claims
of Producers.

court To-Day sustained the validity OF APP
preparations to carry out the sugar Ooun-
~ features of the Mckinley and Wilson
tariff acts by unanimous opinion affirm
ing the decision of the circuit court for
the eastern district of Louisiana and re-
versing the action of the comptroller of
the treasury, mr. Bowler. who refused to
permit the payments of bounties on the
ground that the act was unconstitutional.
The cases invUIveu were those of the
United States, plaintiff in error, VS.. the
Realty Company and Andrew III. Gay, re-
spectively. The opinion of the court was
delivered by Justice Peckham. Both
were test cai es.
The realty company was one of class
coming under the terms of the appropria-
ton to those who had manufactured a
certain class of sugar previous to the 18th
day of August, 1894. and upon which no
bounty had previously been paid. The re-
peal of the bounty clause in the act of
1880 by the act which took effect on the
2Sth day of August, 1894, and which prohib-
tied the payment of bountieS thereafter,
preventing the company from obtaining
the money on the warrant which had
been issued to it prior to that date. There
were comparatively few persons coming
under the class in which the company
stood, and the appropriation made for
the payment of that class was little less
than $25000
The plaintiff in the other suit, Gay, is
one of a class under the second portion of
the act of 1895, he being among those
who complied with the provisions of the
bounty act as contained in the schedules
of the act of October, 1890, by filing no
tice of application of license and bond as
therein required. and would have been
entitled to receive a license as provided
for in said act and bounty of eight
tenths of a cent per pound on the sugar
tfoa Ia
period commencing August Is, 1884, and
ending June 80, 1885.
The amount of bounty claimed by Gay
is between $4,000 and $4,000 The persons
forming this class are numerous, and the
appropriation for them amounted to $5,-
100000. Comptroller Bowler had based his
action largely upon the decision of the
court of appeals of the District of Colum-
ba, that the sugar bounty clause of the
Mckinley act was unconstitutional.
The supreme court, in its opinion today,
said that for the purpose of the cases it
was unnecessary to decide whether such
legislation is beyond the power of con-
gress, but that in either case the appro-
priations of money in the act of 1898 TO
manufacturers and producers of sugar
who had compiled with the act of 1890 were
within the power of congress to make, aud
were constitutional and valid. In discuss
ing the conditions which existed at the
time of the passage Of the appropriation
| act of 1895, the court says:
THE production of this manufacture of
sugar in the southern and western states
! from sugar cane and from sorghum and
beets had become at the time of the pas
sage of the act of 1890 an industry in which
! large numbers of citizens of this country
were engaged, and it's prosecution involved
the use of a large amount of capital. The
| tariff therefor had been very high on i'm
| ported sugar, and that industry haC there
/ hrrh f1tr Inc
The subject of how to treat this in lustry
was under discussion in congress VIII lie the
tariff act of 1890 was before it, nd it
finally decided the question by ens citing
the bounty clause of that act.
This act was approved by the president,
and no question of it's validity was made
by any officer of the government having
! any duties to perform under it,"
The court says there can be no question
of the good faith of the plaintiffs. The
! question of the constitutionality of the
sugar bounty in the act Of 1890 is entirely
immaterial. 1t is a question of equitable
| consideration, and the court says: 1.-THE
plaintiffs acquire claims upon the govern
ment of an equitable, moral or honorary
nature"
The HOrsa Case.
Chief Justice Miller today delivered the
| opinion of the supreme court in the case
| of the United States VS. j. S Wiborg
| captain VI the steamer itOTSdt ana OInerS.
The case is one advanced by the court
at the instance of the attorney general
| for the purpose of securing a decision
as to the construction of our neutrality
laws and their effect in preventing fill
/ clustering expeditions against friendly
| powers. Wiborg and associates were ac-
| cused of attempting to land arms sur
reptitiously in Cuba. They were found
/ guilty under the neutrality laws by the
United States court at Philadelphia To-
| days opinion held the decision of the
| Pennsylvania court was correct on the
point that the expedition was in violation
of neutrality laws. Judgment was af-
] firmed as to Wiborg, but reversed as to
| Mates Johnson and Peterson, on the
ground that they were ignorant of the
! purposes of the expedition. Justice Har-
! ian concurred in the reversal of the judg-
ment as to Peterson and Johnson, but
/ dissented from the judgment affirming
sentence against Wiborg.
BannOcLs Held Liable
The supreme court, in the opinion of
Justice White, today passed upon the right
| of the Bannock Indians to kill game in
the unsettled lands of their former reser-
vations in Wyoming, holding that under
| their treaty the Indians could not kill
game in violation Of the game laws of the
state.
The title of the case was J. H. Ward.
| sheriff. VS.. Race Horse, the latter being
the Indian who surrendered himself to
! the Wyoming state authorities for the
| purpose of testing the matter. The opin-
! ion of the United States supreme court
for Wyoming, by which Race Horse was
released from custody. was reversed, and
It was ordered that the Indian be COM
manded to the custody of the state au-
/ thorties.
Against the u. II.
Chief Justice Fuller today handed down
the opinion of the supreme court in the
| case of the Union Pacific Railroad Com
pany VS. the Chicago Rock Island &, pa