The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-04-01
TARIFF BILL PASSED.


whatsoever hands found, except in the
| hands of persons holding them for final
consumption and have no purpose to sell
| or part with the same or any part or prod
uct OF the same. and except also In the
hands OF persons shown to have obtained
such articles without notice of the pro.
visions OF this act; any person not a final
| consumer or holder without notice, having
obtained an interest in or possession OF
any such article or articles so subieCt to
| duty, except as common carrier or ware
| houseman. shall be liable for the payment
| of such duties thereon. and the same may
be recovered with interest by action or
suit by the United States against such
persons In any district or circuit court
| thereof
And all persons liable under this act
| for such duty or any part thereof, In re-
| spect OF any shipment, cargo or lot of any
article or articles may be joined on the
same action for recovery without regard to
mutullity of nature or interest or defenses
and such joint or several judgments or de-
crces may be rendered therein, including
the enforcement of any such lien. as JUS
tice and equity may require. In every such
case the process of the court In the dis
| trict where the action or suit is brought
and where one defendant resides, and is
served, shall run to and may be served on
any defendant in any other district.
| 1t is hereby made the duty of the secre-
tary OF the treasury to prescribe and en-
| force suitable regulations to carry out the
provisions of this section, including the
retention in the bonded warehouse of the
United States or any other place where
such goods are deposited of samples OF
such goods until required for evidence on
any such trial.
The democrats were alcrt. MIR. Bailey inn
media,.lv made the point that tho amend
ment was out Of order II was obnoxious
no said, to the oldest and best rule of law
that no statute should be re,rospeciive.
Mr. Dockery lpem) of Missouri offered
an amendment proyiso To suspend the du
ties on articles controlled ,,y trusts.
point of order was made against it. which
after n short discussion was sustained NV
the chair
An arranrement was made for fifteen
minutes dcbate IN o,cb sIde an tho I,rns.
venor amendment AIR R.iev sta,ed that
tbe onnosi,ion wnx ex,rcmeIy anxiors 70
roacb t,yn schedules I'm tbo hiII npa did
no, dssiro ~ consn,,,o wore I'M, nn th,s
.r1opd,ra,+ I, onenir,, Nv crosv,nor ~
-, Az, ~, $50, ~, ~
-, uPoA ~, ,,o,Itia.i ia, az, -,
M. ~ w ,i,,.nt ~. - A.. ~. 49,,
49, 49, ,,,,, 10 lie, ,,,,
pe"uns ptop.si.,U.i ~ ,.,'H. us 49, 49, ~,
~ my ..'se Up Nv .' 10 . Wy
oatc oi ils n"al e,'ae s ne saiu W.
~, -. =, 70 -, ia -,
VS. Wisuolh' nat ~ "as WIS., u. WV , Ia
|
therefore direct ms attention eh'''eiS 10
'he question OF lts eSpeu'ehcy'
AS question @; law'oi course everything
was not IN the power OF congress. pu' ms
view was, that those things not torbldaen
to congress were legal ON this subject ne
quoted Judge Cooley's work on consutu-
tional law to the effect that there was no
doubt of the right OF the lcgis lature 10
enact retrospective legislation II that pow
err was not forbidden. This law would be
retrospective, he said. in that IL would levy
| customs duties OH merchandise bought aud
shipped after tomorrow. lie declared it was
a liberal provision in that II did not ap-
ply to goods now aGGat.
Mr. Grusvenors strongest point was made
in connection with the present tariff law
which bore date of August t. 1894. hut was
not finally enacted until twenty eight DAYS
later Although this was unintentional
the supreme court had held that it was
| retrosrectiye
Mr.. Richardson Dem.) OF Tennessee con
tended that tho supreme court decision In
| the case involving the Wilson law, in which
| the oninion of the supreme colrt WINS de-
Iivernd Inv Chief Iustice Fuller. decided eX-
actIv contrary tn the contention of Mr.
Grosvenor Goods imported between Au-
gust and August %, 1894, 1t was decided
should nav the Mckinley and not the VIII
son rates
'iJf Won are going TO make this 70 into
effect tonorrow whv saw today." demanded
Mr. Blond dem of Missouri. cor why not
The day tho Mckinley law was repealedY''
The real purpose he added was to check
ALI imports 90 long as the bill was pending
before congress II that should he until
next March. The debate on the amend
ment was concluded by Mr.. Boiley. who
said
| "Mr Grosvenor fails to distinguish be-
tween the mower of congress 10 pass re-
troactive laws and to put two inconsistent
laws In action at the same time The
proposition OF the WAYS and means com
mittee is that congress shall have the
power to compel the peop'e of the United
States to live at the same time under diff
| ferent and conflicting laws Even II by
some strange decision of the court congress
could exercise that power 1t would not be
wise 10 exercise it, You propose TO put the
people under laws that have - yet passed
the unfathomable wisdom OF the United
States senate"
The debate having been ended. an amend
A .Nt.a.a. aNnsaf