The record-union., 1896-04-24
SUGAR BOUNTY CASES.
Argument Continued Before the SUI
preme Court.

WASHINGTON, April 23.-The argu-
ment for the Government in the sugar
bounty cases was continued in the Su-
preme Court of the United States to-day
by E. B. Whitney, Assistant Attorney
General, who did not conclude yester-
day.
Counsel for the claimants followed,
ex-senator Manderson of Nebraska
who argued the claim of the Oxnard
Sugar Company before Comptroller
Bowler, being the first speaker.
Thomas J. Se1nlnes of New Orleans
followed, largely devoting himself to the
efficacy of the findings of fact made by
the court below, which he contended
were conclusive as TO the purpose of
Congress in making the appropriation.
Joseph H. Choate Of New York entered
upon the concluding argument in behalf
of the claimants. 1t was the first time,
he said, in the history of the Govern
ment that the Executive having in due
form approved an appropriation OF pub
lie money made by Congress resisted its
payment and invoked the exercise Of
judicial power to defeat it,
He contended first that Congress had
power to make the appropriation, and
it's action in respect thereto was not
subject to judicial control or reversal.
In support of this he quoted Story,
Marshall, the Federalist, the Madison
papers, reports of the State conventions
which ratified the Constitution and ju-
dicial decisions and authorities. Each
one of the fifty-four Congresses in turn,
he said had made appropriations of
moneys for individual benefit or relief
which was open to all the criticisms
and objections now brought forward,
and which in their Judgment were new
ertheless for the common defense and
the general welfare; but never until
now had it been claimed that the courts
could review and veto.them. In this con-
nection was presented a long list of ap-
priations-fisheries bounties, inter-
nal improvements, etc.
Second-But assuming that any and
every appropriation Of the public
moneys made by Congress was open to
judicial review and control, and that the
eighth clause of Article I. of the Consti
tuition which defined the purposes of
taxation to be "to pay the debts and
provide for the common defense and
general welfare implied a restriction
the power of Congress to any public
money, whether raised by taxation or
not, it was submitted that this appropri-
alton must be held to be within the
power of Congress SO limited
The general welfare of the nation
in the sense in which the founders used
that phrase, said Mr.. Choate, and in
the sense in which the American peo-
pie have treated it, involved the ma
tional honor and dignity and good faith
its character for justice and fair deal
ing and humanity. And when Con-
gress by making an appropriation had
decided that the object specified did
tend to promote the general welfare
in this sense. If there was any reason
able ground for so reeArding, the court
would not and should not interfere.
Third-Congress had the undoubted
power and the unlimited discretion to
appropriate money to pay bounties for
the encoura cement and protection of
the commerce, agriculture and manu-
factures Of the people Of the United
States as an incident to the national
sovereignty and by virtue Of the pow
ers intrusted to it over the public
moneys in the treasury, from what
ever source derived.
Mr.. Choate asserted that at the time
the Constitution was adopted, the
granting of such bounties was a recog-
nized part of the governmental sys-
TEN Of Great Britain. Bounties, too,
were well-recognized means en-
ployed by the Colonies to encourage the
production of articles deemed to be for
the benefit of the general public.