The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-09-24

only one warranted IS CndC the QecTedSti
of protection results in increase of ex-
portation of manufactures.
A WOBBLING ATTORNEY GENERAL.
The murkiness of the opinion rem
dered by the attorney general on the
scope and effect of section % of the
Dingley act is probably due to his de-
sire to allow his party to escape from
a dilemma into which Steve Elkins
slipped" it, but also quite as much
to get around a previous decision Of
his department, approved by himself,
in which he gave to the section it's
plain Interpretation and made it en-
tirely harmonious with the policy. of
the whole act. It is fair to assume
that when on Aug. IA, he approved of
the opinion written by Judge Richards,
he was not aware of the effects of the
act in which, on that same day, the
G O b called attention to this leg
up simultaneously with the Northwest
to the blow that had been so stealth
lily dealt. Statesmen responsible for
it began a 1usty disavowal of all
knowledge of it. Our own TaWney, at
first inclined to plume himself on it's
imputed authorship, took to the woods
with greater alacrity than he ever
took to anything before. Tom Reed
said it slipped in Allison said it
did not mean what it said} and Ding
ley affirmed Allison. Only Dana's
Sun stood out manfully for it; but that
is due to the freshness of his Repub-
Hcanism. The attorney general saw
that a great b1under had been COM
mitted, and he has been cudgeling
his brain for weeks to find a way out.
On Aug. IA he approved decision
Of bis assistant Judge Richards con-
STRUNG the smuggled clause of sec
ton %, on a state of facts submitted
by the secretary of the treasury. The
opinion states the case submitted by
the secretary in his letter of Aug 6.
Certain diamonds, the production Of a
foreign country not contiguous to the
United States, valued at 100000, were
imported into this country coming
through Canada The treasury asked:
First should the diamonds pay the
10 per cent discriminating duty; sec
ond, is it material to ascertain the
OoOGa Of 1Jcn6 in
ing them into the United States from
Canada? The decision then quotes the
section as it stood in the act of 1894,
notes the alteration, and commenting
on the change, calls attention to the
wording which substitutes "cone into"
in the interpolated clause, for the
wcrd imported" used in the original
portion, although holding that, "for
the purposes of this opinion, it is not
necessary to consider the precise effect
of the words come into as distin-
guished from the word imported, if,
indeed, there be any difference in
meaning"
I'm determining" says that opinion
of the attorney general, whether the
goods under consideration are subject
to the discriminating duty it is not ma
terial to consider the mode Of trans
portation or method of Importation; it
is sufficient to know that they come
into the United States from a con-
tiguous country and are the pFoduc-
ton or manufacture of foreign coun-
try not contiguous to the United States
and are not imported in the usual
course of strictly retail trade. Your
first question (as to the liability of the
diamonds to the 10 per cent taxi,
therefore, is answered in the affirma-
tive; your second las to the mode Of
conveyance in the negative" This
decision is what the G o b e referred
to when it predicted that the attorney
general would sustain the construction
evidently intended by the language Of
the clause. The dispatch that gave
this decision also stated that "the at
! torney general called that day upon
the treasury department and assured
the officials that he would render an
| opinion on the more important ques-
ton of a discriminating duty on bond
ed goods before leaving Washington"
| Comparing the decision of Aug. IA with
that rendered the other day the COM
plete self-reversaI of the attorney gen.
eral becomes ludicrously apparent.
But he got his party out of very bad
hole by his somersault.
OUR COMING FINANCIAL sUPREM-