The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1897-09-21
Attorney General McKenna's De-
cision on Section 20.
NO FORMER LAW REPEALED
Goods In Transit Through American
Territory Not Subject to the Ten
Per Cent Discriminating Duty.
Existing Practices Supported by
the Opinion.

| handed down lis opinion ON section 20
of tie tariff bill. known as the discrimi
mating duty section. He decides that this
section does not rel cal section 422s Of
| the Revised Statutes, and that merchan
disc brought in through Canada in bond
| received from any outside port, is not
subject to !. discriminating duty OF 10
per cent.
Theopinionisyeryy iluminoas and covers
| thirteen RACES of typewriter manuscript.
II Is based upon queries submitted by the
Treasury Department on requests from tie
collectors at Ogdensburg, N. Y, and Chi
cago for instructions as to the reassess-
nent OF discriminating duty un-
der section %, upon certain guosS
that carue from Japan, via Vancouver,
b. C., and those per railroad through
Canada. The Revised Statutes, section
22 levies this 10 per cent discriminating
duty on Ill goods imported in vessels not
of the United States, ''or which, being
the Production or manufacture of any
foreign country not contiguous to
the L nited States, shall COME
INTO the United states from
such contiguous country" The clause
quoted is the addition to the old law, In.
serted in the DinGley law. Among the
new exemptions visited are the words,
NOR to such foreign products or manu-
lactures as shall he imported from such
contiguous countries ia the usual course
OF strictly retail trade
hn flor finr h.
law, says,
Three plausible contentious are based
upon this seStioa, winch as To strengt
only differ in degree
1. That the duty Is a discrimination upon
luportations ia vessels not uf the United
states, whether directly TO the United
States or To contiguous country and
thence 10 the United states.
=. "A discrimination against importa-
lions OF Gcods-not la the usual course of
strictly retail II AIDE from a Contiguous coun-
try, ttey not bein . the products thereof. In
| this the character OF the vessel Is not Inn
| purtant.
b A discrimination against goods be
| ing the productions OF foreign country
| moi contiguous To the United States. which
| shah come into the United States from 9
| Contiguous country.
In this contention the words ''cofne into
| the United stat es are used as designating
movement only.
| Under liie List and second contention,
TIE uulE NbUlu DOl be1ll IDSeu. tnueT TIE
| third IL woIld he. ! Fence select il as
| hasis for consideration
To support IL IL is said that the section
| imposes tie duty In two cases, taI W ben tie
goods are imported In vessels not OF the
| United States. and 70 the United States
| (b) when they are the production OF a
country not contiguous and come into the
United States from contiguous country.
The first case We are not now con-
cerned with. and the secossd is attempted
to he tablished by the following reason
ing THE goods (which are tie subject OF
inquiry are Chinese or .faJanese proluc-
ton, hence the production OF a foreign
country mot contiguous to the United
States" They come into the United states
from Canada. Contiguous country. and
so il is urged that by the letter as well
subject TO the duty.
4, r saia wat tue purpose or the amend
men: was 10 relieve the American trans
cunt lien.al RAILROADS against tile cotupetl-
lion of the Canadian Pacific Railroad.
IL may he admitted that this is strong
Consideration, but, on the other hand,
it lie urged that this competition Is
beDeill, and other American raiiroad
claim that the Canadian Pacific ~ uieCt
advantage to them.
A 3 there was no reason VIII tue importa-
lions direct or inuirect -snoulo be dis
eliminated by different duties, 4 am moi
disI,oseu To think That IL was Intended 70
50 hold would be to put a new purpose
ia the law destroying its unity which
miscnIef which we may say as IN the
tontenl tJlation or the la wmakers t.. De
remediei.
1nr section Therefore. regards, as the
law wbIcu preceded IL required, the trans
poratiOn OF goods 10y sea Its purpose was
10 sec ure tins - vessels OF the United States
by discriminating against transports ton
not an them primarily u the United States.
secondarily, and TO prevent evasion, to a
contiguous country -Canada or Mexico.
The necessity of it to the effectiveness
fine law Is obvious. The amendment oI
the law, which is mad eDy section p
therefore continues its object While II
strengthens and better secures il.
III does this IN Two ways, III i may re-
peat, Oy aSIng wa the means OF It's eN aston
through the cont1guity OF Canada aud
Mexico, and 10y repeating the statutory
exemptions from the 10 per cent duty.
In the second contention the words,
come into the United States are used
as synonymous TO imported. The Ian guage
being the production or manufacture of
any foreign country not contiguous to the
United States is urged only ~ descriptive
or the goods to which the duty applies.
The goods themselves, ii is tontended
must take their departure from the con-
tignous country in the strict sense of inn
portation as distinguished from coming
through II as an importation from some
other country.
Inc a,uorney General holds that the
answer 10 the inquiry, 50 far as section
S2 is concerned, depends, first, upon the
character of the vessel in which the GOODS
were carried TO Vancouver: anu, second,
il in foreign vessels, whether the goods
were eniilied by treaty or convention to
he eDtere q in the ports OF the United tates
upon the pa ytnent of the same duties as
IL imported in American vessels.
He assumes that the vessels We're not
American, bGt British vessels.
In conclusion, therefore, he says, section
422S was not repealed by section %,
and the Eools referred to are not subject to
a discriminating duty.
Special Meeting of Printers.