The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1897-09-25
SECTION ~ WIPED OUT.
Believed Attorney-General Will De.
eide Against DISCRIMINATE
ing Duties.

IF the new tariff law.
He holds in effect that the goods com
ing directly into the United States from
foreign countries through Canadian ports
arc not subject TO the discriminating duty
Of 10 per cent. and also holds that for
clcn goods shipped from countries other
than British possession i'll British YES
>clS are not subject To- the dlscrimlnaue
duty
Two questions were asked the after
nsy- general the first of which was. III
effect. whether the discriminating duft
uf 10 per cent. provided for IN section -
should be assessed against an invoice at
tea from China which had arrived Ht
Vancouver III British vessels and thenr,
shipped through Canada to Chicago. The
second question was whether the dI>crm
mating duty should be assessed against
y cargo Of manganese or" from Chill
which recently arrived IN a British >hlI
At Philadelphia. Both these questions the
attorney general answers in the negative.
synopsis of the Decision.
The opinion Of the attorncy-gencrai
hrSt quotes section - IN full and then
says:
Thr"" plausible contentious nrc based
upon this section which as to strength only
diner in degree.
l. That the duty is a discrimination upon
importations in vessels not of the United
States, whether directly to the United
States or to contiguous country and
thence 10 the United States
:. discrimination against importations
IT goods mot in the usual course of strict
IN retail tradcJ from contiguous country.
they not being the products thereof. Ia
This tn" character of the vessel Is not i'm
portant.
8. discrimination against goods being
the productions of foreign country not
contiguous to the United STATES which
II q "a
contiguous country. In this contention the
words tcomc into the United States are
used - designating movement only.
nder the first and second contentious
the duty would not be imposed. Under the
third it would be. | hence select ii as Il
basis for consideration.
10 support it. il is said that the section
imposes the duty in two cases, Da) when
The goods are imported III vessels not Of
the nitcd States and to the United States.
lhl when they ar" tn" production uf Il cpun
try not contiguous and come into the Unit
81 states from 4 contiguous country. the
character Of the vessel in which they were
transported to the contiguous country be
ing Indifferent.
The first ease We are not now concerned
with, and the second is attempted to be
established by the following reasoning. The
goods are Chimes" or Japanese productiun
memo" Ill" production of Il foreign country
not contiguous To the United States. They
com" into the United States from Canada
contiguous country, and so it i urged
"f the statute they are subject to thr
duty
II is conceded that the importation is to
the nited States, passage through Canada
being mere nioN cmcHt only toward dtStiuL-
iion. the latter being tn" United States. This
being 80, II would seem that there was no
reason t. distinguish between that importH-
tiou AMI what may he called in distinction
q direct one-Why one should bc bur,lturI
ard the other not hurdened when the dis
elimination WAS not necessary to the main
purpus, ~ the law
II is said that the purpose If the amend
mont Was (" relieve The American tranS-cuH-
tinental railroads against the competition
IT The canadian Pacific railroad. 1t may be
admitted thar this i strong cnu>dcrat ION,
hut, on the other hand. it Is urged that this
competition Is benefit. and other Ameri-
tdn railroads claim that the Canadian Pa
enc IS 4 direct advantage {" them. How
Congress regarded this conflict We have 10
means If knowing. There was certainly 10
aIoWal and the only expressions of mem
herS which we have indicate a different
purpose than one which might or might not
hlgc been entertained, and which if it had
been entertained it would seem the natural
thing to have explicitly declared.
A. there was no reason therefore why the
imp"rtHtiunS, Indirect or direct. should b"
Disseminated by different duties | am not
disposed T. think that it was intended. II
- hold would hc to put Il new purpose III
the law. destroying its unity. which IS not
compelled by its ianguagr or any mischief
which we may say was IN the contemplation
af the lawmakers to be remclicd The soc
tion therefore regards. as the law which pre-
ce1cd it regarded, the transportation uf
goods hy sea. lis purpose WAS t. secure his
10 vessels Of the United States by discrm-
III: ting against transportation not in th"m
primarily to the United States and >croud-
ariiy to prevent evasion to c"ntigunHS
country -t'anada or Mexico. The necessity
"f il 70 the effectiveness Of the law i oil
NinuS.
II would have been useless to impose a
>rritlinatiug duty uu goods brought I"
san Francisco iii foreign vessels and leave
sis and thence across tn" intervening; land
To the United States.
Prevention Of Evasion.
The amendment Of the law which is made
by section - therefore continues IFS object,
while ii strengthens aud better secures it.
1t does ths Ill two ways, VIZ: hy taking
iNHy the means Of lis evasion through the
.ontiSuify IF Canada ami MrXiru and by
repeating the statutory exemptions from the
I" per cent. duty.
have con>ilrrcd your inquiry far as
If the section only regarded mcr" trans
purtuti0u through Canada. We shah see,
hereafter. that it has a broader scope. In
fhc second contention tn" words ''t'ulUr into
The United states are used aS SEnouy nous
IL imported. The languag" being pro
ducrd er manufactured III amy foreign conn
try mol contiguous t. the uitod states is
urged only rs descriptive of the goods to
which tn" duty applies. Ia" goods them
selves. il Is ooutcudrd. must tax" their de-
p8rturt from the contiguous country in the
strict sense Of Importation as distinguished
frnH4 coming through il an importation
from some other country This view l.
given pIausihility to 10y the exception that
duty shall not apply 10 such foreign pred
uctS or manufactures aS shall h" imported
from such contiguous countries IN the usual
course uf retail trade
II is said that the words imported in
thc course Of strictly retail trade" Indicate
thr rule. They are claimed to i" the oppo-
site Of Importation in the course of whole
>alr trade. aud that the latter must he
direct :S those hy retail could be no 0t her