Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1896-06-01
THE SUGAR BOUNTY CLAIMS.

There are evidences that the Amer
lean producers of sugar who were
paid bounty on their product by the
terms of the Mckinley Tariff. and
who received such bounty until short
ly after the present Democratic adj
ministration came into power. are to
be held off with no settlement of their
claims against the Government for
another year, or at least until after
the next full term of the United
States Supreme Court. There is due
the sugar producers of the country
over So, ZOO, 900, and the last Congress
democratic though it was, acknowl-
edged the justice of the claim of the
sugar men by appropriating this
amount of unpaid bounties which had
accrued under the operations of the
Mckinley act from the time of the
last payment until the repeal of the
law and the enactment of the Cor
man Wilson Tariff.
Although there is nothing part
icularly new in the situation respect
ing the contest between the sugar
producers of the country and the ere
form" administration, beyond the
fact that there will be a still further
delay in settling with the sugar men,
this entire subject is SO full of interest
and SO thoroughly portrays the idea
of justice and fair dealing entertained
by the executive heads of the present
administration in relation to one of
the great Industries of the country,
that it is interesting briefly to review
the subject.
When the Republican party in 1890
declared to give the country cheaper
sugar by admitting the raw sugar free
of duty, it was determined, as an act
of justice to our own sugar producers,
whose important and growing indus
try had been fostered under Republi
can Protective Tariff laws, to give the
domestic industry the benefit of di-
rect bounty from the Treasury in lieu
of Protection from foreign competi-
ton by means of custom duties upon
raw sugar. This was done, and
through the Republican administra-
ton bounty of approximately two
cents a pound was paid for sugar pro-
duced in the United States. This
course was pursued during the early
period of the present administration.
But about two years ago it appears
to have occurred to the Comptroller
of the Treasury, Mr.. Bowler, that the
payment of this bounty was a viola
tion of the constitution. Mr.. Bowler
came to the rescue of the administra-
ton. He decided to pay no more
moneys out of the Treasury as boun-
ties to the sugar producers. Congress
passed an appropriation of $5,000,000 |
to effect settlement with the sugar
men for unpaid bounties, but when |
the matter was admitted to Bowler |
by the auditor whose duty it was to
draw the warrants for the payment |
the comptroller rose to his full height |
as a defender of a bankrupt treasury, |
that had to be replenished by regular
increases of the National debt by the
sale of bonds, and he declared that
the law providing for the payment of
the bounties was violation of the
and declined the pay
ment. Secretary Carlisle was appeal
ed to, and petitions were sent to the
but without avail.
The sugar men have fought the
matter long and earnestly in the de-
partment, but securing no relief there
they went to the courts. The cases
upon which the question raised by
Bowler is to be tested have finally
reached the Supreme Court, and de-
,ision is expected from that tribunal
some time during the present century.