The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-08-31
.SN(0ro x -
A 0E1, 1h|5[Esssss
IN SECTION z.
Question That Has Escaped
the Public Worrying the
Treasury Officials.
. DOES 1HE Duty APPLY?
The Acts Language Aimed at
Most of the Great Steam
ship Lines.
4 CHaNGE IN WORDING
Only Treaty Stipulation Re.
leases Any Country From
the Discriminating
Ten Per Cent.
4 CHaNGE IN WORDING

INTERPRETATION
section % of the new tariff law, with
regard to the 10 per cent discriminat-
Ing duty on foreign goods brought into
the United States from Canada or
Mexico, which is now before the attor-
ney general for decision, is another
question of equal, if not greater mag
nltude. This other question has al
most entirely escaped public notice.
out IL is giving the treasury great con-
Germ. 1t was referred to the attorney
general by Secretary Gage for inter
pretation along with the other features
OF section 22 which are in controversy.
1t involves the question of whether
TINS discriminating duty of 10 per cent
does not apply to all goods imported
IN foreign vessels landing at United
States ports which are not exempt
from discriminating tonnage taxes by
express treaty stipulation. The ques-
ton arises from another slight devia-
ton from the language of previous pro-
visions in section %, which, if made
Intentionally, would seem to indicate
that 1t was designed to discriminate
against three-fourths of all the big
transatlantic and trans-Pacific
steamship lines, as we'll as many of
In all. previous laws the section cor
responding to section % of the new
law, after providing for the 10 per
cent discriminating duty on goods i'm
ported in vessels not flying the United
States flag, provides that this dis
eliminating duty shall not apply to
goods, wares or merchandise which
shall be imported in vessels not of the
Tot
at the time of such importation. bv
treaty or act of congress, to be entered
in ports of the United States on the
payment of the same duties as shall
then be payable on goods, ETC., import
ed in vessels of the United States
The new law omits "act of congress-
and substitutes convention" +" so as To
make it read not exempt by treaty
or convention" 1t is in pursuance of
an act of congress (Sec. 1929 that pres
idents in the past have by proclama-
ton exempted the vessels of many
countries from this discriminating
duty. The question now before the at
torney general is whether the omis-
sion of "act of congress- does not re-
peal section 1888. If it does, it will
strike tremendous blow at all for
proclamation, and confine the exemp-
ton strictly to the vessels of countries
with which we have treaties grant
ing such exemptions.
The vessels of countries which could
not be affected by an adverse decis-
ion; that is, countries with which VIC
have treaties covering this specific sub
ject, are Sweden, Germany, Austria,
Brazil, Belgium, Denmark. Italy,
Greece, Chile, Argentina, Hayti, Ha-
wall, Holland, Russia and Turkey.
Several of these countries have no mer-
chant marine sailing to American
ports. The countries now enjoying
exemption from discriminating duties
are Great Britain, France, Spain, Por-
tugal, Japan, Nicaragua and Mexico.
Of course, the largest class of vessels
which might be affected are the Eng
lish lines, which come to the United
States, not only from British ports, but
from the Oriental countries, India
South America. and, in fact, from every
country on the globe. If British yes
sells should be thrown back upon their
treaty exemptions, which are contained
in the treaty of Washington, the goods
of all British vessels, sailing from other
ports, except the territorial possessions
in Europe. would have to pay the ad-
ditional 20 per cent tax. More than
that. all goods shipped in British YES
sells, not the product or manufacture
of Great Britain'S European posses
sions, even though shipped from EUg-
liSh, Scotch or Irish ports, would be
subject to the discriminating duty.
An adverse decision would, therefore,
effect the Cunard, Anchor, Arrow and
other transatlantic lines to that extent,
and also the French lines, the Phelps
line running to the Mediterranean, the
two Portuguese freight lines, except
products of Portugal, several of the
South American lines, including what
are known as the Green line of Steam-
ers, the Japanese the Canadian Pacific
and the Oriental and Occidental steam
ers on the Pacific, besides hundreds
of tramp steamers.
A curious question would arise in
the case of the French line, were an
adverse decision rendered. Before Gen.
Grant issued his proclamation, exempt
ing the cargoes of French vessels by
our treaty with France, they paid a
discriminating duty of $3.75 per ton.
and cargoes imported into France by
vessels of the United States paid p
discriminating duty of 25 francs per
ton. If section 1928 is repealed, then,
the question would arise as to whether
a. 10 per cent discriminating duty
should be imposed on the $375 per ton
provided for by the treaty. Should the
attorney general decide section 422S is
repealed by the new law, of course the
steamers of several lines plying be-
tween the United States and foreign
ports which would be affected might
escape injury by change Of nationality
and flag to that of Belgium or some
other country whose treaty gives them
full exemption.