The daily morning journal and courier., 1897-08-31
NEW TARIFF IS A MYSTERY
AN0TRER IMPORTANTSECII0N THE
 MEANING OF WHICH IS OBSCURE.

Hundreds of Steamers and Vessels Flying
 Foreign Flags May be Compelled to Pay
 Discriminating Duty of 10 Per Cent on
 Their Cargoes-Many Countries Con-
 cerned in Interpretation of the Law.
 Washington, Aug. 3O-Involved in the question of the interpretation of section 22 of the new tariff law with regard to the 10 per cent. discriminat- ing duty on foreign goods coming into the United States from Canada or Mex ico, which is now before the attorney general for decision, is another ques- tion of equal, if not greater magnitude. This other question has almost entire ly escaped public notice, but it is giv- ing the treasury great concern. It was referred to the attorney general by Secretary Gage for interpretation along with the other features of section 22, which are in controversy. It involves the question of whether the discriminat- ing duty of 10 per cent does not ap- ply lO dll SOOuS lIlpol lSu III 1oAoiS vessels landing at United States ports which are not exempt from discrimin- ating tonnage taxes by express treaty stipulations.
 This important question arises from another slight deviation from the lan- guage of previous provisions in section p which, if made intentionally, would seem to indicate that it was designed to discriminate against three-fourths of all the big transatlantic and. trans Pacific steamship lines as well as many South American lines. In all previous laws the section corresponding to sec tion 22 of the new law, after providing for the 10 per cent. discriminating duty on goods imported in vessels not flying the United States flag, provides that this discriminating duty shall not apply to goods. wares or merchandise which shall be imported in vessels not of the United States. entitled at the time of such importation by treaty or act of congress to be entered In ports of the United States on the payment of the same duties as shall be then paya- ble on goods etc, imported in vessels of the United States"
 The new law omits facts of congress" and substitutes convention" so as to make it read not exempt by treaty or convention"
 l It Is in pursuance of an act of con- gress (sectton 4228) that presidents in the past have by proclamation exempt ed the vessels of many countries from this discriminating duty. The question now before the attorney general is l whether the omission of the words "act of congress- does not repeal section 4,22S If it does. it will strike tre- | mendous blow at all foreign lines now exempt by presidential proclamation and confine the exemption strictly to | the vessels of countries with which we have treaties granting such exemp- tions. The vessels of countries which | could not be affected by an adverse de- | cision that is, countries with which | we have treaties covering this specific | subject, are: Sweden, Germany, Aus l tria Brazil, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, l Greece, Chile, Argentina, Hayti, Ha- waii Holland, Russia and Turkey. Sev- eral of these countries have no mer- chant marine sailing to American ports.
 The countries now enjoying exemption | from discriminating duties either who'll ly or in part under proclamations issued | in pursuance of section 4228 of the re- vised statutes, are: Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Mica ragua and Mexico. Of course the larg- est class of vessels which might be af- fected are the English lines which come to the United States not only from British ports, but the Oriental coun- tries, India, South America and in fact from every country on the globe. If British vessels should be thrown back upon their treaty exemptions, which are contained in the treaty of Washington, the goods of all British vessels sailing from the ports except the territorial possessions in Europe, would have to pay the additional 10 per cent. tax. More than that, all goods shipped in vessels not the products or manufacture of Great Britain's European posses sions, even though shipped from Eng | fish, Scotch or Irish ports, would be subject to the discriminating duty as the treaty gives exemption only to such | goods.
 | An adverse decision would therefore affect the Cunard, the Anchor, Arrow, Transatlantic and other trans-Atlan- tic lines to that extent, the French line. the Phelps line running to Mediterra- mean ports the two Portuguese freight lines (except products of PortugaD 1 several of the South American lines in- cluding what Is known as the Green Line of steamers; the Japanese, the | Canadian Pacific and the Oriental and Occident steamers on the Pacific be- sides hundreds of tramp steamers A curious question would arise in the case of the French line were an adverse de- cision rendered.
 | Before General Grant issued his proc- lamation exempting the cargoes of French vessels from 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 discriminating duty of 20 francs per ton. If section APPS is re- pealed, then the question would arise as to whether 10 per cent discrimin- atlng duty should be imposed or the S5.to per ton provided for by the treaty.
 Should the attorney general decide that section 4,228 is repealed by the new law or course steamers of the several ! lines plying hetwaan +b, Trot4oJ