The San Francisco call., 1897-08-17
Await McKenna'S Tariff
Decision With Great
Anxiety.
Discriminating Clause of the
Law That Is Causing All
the Trouble.
Railroad Attorneys VIII Test It's
tutionality-Talk of
Reta iation.

NUN l. hEAI, QUEBEC, Aug. lo.-lI tIe
United States Government ratifies Attor-
ney-General McKenna's reading of the
Dingley bill, the clause affecting the
Canadian Pacific and Grand Trunk rail-
ways will be tested before the Supreme
Court of the United States. Their legal
representatives are already named. 1t is
stated that Sir William Van Horne and
others interested have received assurance
from eminent legal authorities, both in
Canada and the United States. that the
action Of the American customs authori-
ties is undoubtedly unconstitutional.
Great stress is said to be laid on the fact
to collect duty of 10 per cent if the
country allowed it to come into other
portions of the Union free.
WASHINGTON, D. c., Aug. 16.-The
Canadian Pacific Railway at. orneys are
anxiou ly awaiting Attorney General Nc
Kenna's decision in tue matter of the dis
eliminating duty on a carload OF tea which
reached Chicago from Japan last week.
Ii the decision is rendered as expected the
consequences will befar-reaching and may
lead to retaliation by Canada. The clause
in the tariff bill which is presented for in
terpretation makes no pretense Of dealing
with the transcontinental railroad ques-
ton, yet decision one way or the other
will affect that more than anything else.
The clause provides 'that discrimi
mating duty of 10 per cent ad valorem, in
addition to duties imposed by law, shall
be levied collected and paid on ali goods,
wares or merchandise which shall be i'm
l.. 6 = ko it1I
or which, being the production or manu-
facture ofany foreign country not conti-
guous to the United States. shall come
into the United States from sucn contigu-
GUS territory"
Then follows the provision which ex-
empts from the discrimination herein de-
scribed vessels from countries not entitled
to the exemption by the provisions of
treaties with the United States. This
proviso SO restricts the discriminating
clause as to make it matter Of very little
significance as applied to importations
direct to this country.
The clause which is making all the
trouble-that providing for the application
of the discrimination against goods not
the product of contiguous countries. bat
coming into the United States through
contiguous country-has significance of
no consequence if applied only to ship.
ments landed in Canadian port, which,
if landed in United States port, would
be exempt from discrimination. If, how
ever, the clause is made to apply to all
goods transhipped through Canadian
territory into the United States, the rail-
road question, which is entirely foreign to
this section Of the tariff bill, becomes in
volved seriously.
II goods landed in San Francisco not
subject to the 10 per cent discrimination,
and then shipped by the Canadian Pacific,
become subject to the discrimination upon
again entering the United States, the vital
application of the law bears upon the
rivalry between the transcontinental
American railroads and the Canadian
Pacific without reference to the question
which the clause in the tariff law nomi-
nally deals with of the nationality of the
vessel in which the goods are imported.
Such an application of the law would
render it a discriminating duty again t
goods carried on the Canadian roads, and
will be apt, if adopted, 10 result in
Canadian retaliation. The question is
likely to lead to serious conten ton, with
serious results.
On the face OF it the provision against
goods coming through a contiguous coun-
try appears to have been designed to pre-
vent vessels subjec TO the discrim ination
from avoiding it by landing their goods
in Canadian port and transhipping
them by rail. 1t appears that the pro-
do f<,
the discriminating duties where it ap-
piled, whether the goods were origin ally
landed from vessels in this country or in
Canada, and to prevent an invasion of the
law
Those who had the clause inserted
however, may have had in view the
broader application, or, finding the clause
worded as it is, may simply have seized
the opportunity to profit by its am biguity.
If the discrimination is applied to al
goods shipped over the Canadian road. re-
gardless of the nationality Of the vessel
in which they are imported. it will have
the effect of cutting off all transportation
OF goods for the United States over Cana
dian roads. and this will probably be fol-
lowed bv a retaliatory provision by the
UOVSrumeuI VI Sdudud iAiuS u olSCIluu-
ination against all foreign goods shipped
over American roads in bond for Canada.
Under such an Interpretation OF law if
good s should be landed in San Francisco
in an American vessel, which would be
exempt from any discrimination, those
goods could not be shipped to Boston by
way OF the Canadian Pacific without hav-
ing to pay the 10 per cent additional duty.
The law provides that this shall not apply
to importations in the usual course of
strictly retail trade. II, however, goods
OF foreign prod ductjon should be bought at
wholesale in San Francisco by whole
sale merchant in Boston and they should
be shipped by the Canadian Pacific road.
going out of the United States into Canada
and from Canada arain into the United
States, they would be subject to the dis
eliminating duty, whereas if those same
goods were shipped over the Great North
ern, the Northern Pacific or the Southern
and Unioh Pacific they would not be sub
ject to the additional DUTY.