The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-09-23
lis OPINION ON CERTAIN POINTS
OF THE BRAND NEW TARIFF
LAW.
TWO QUESTIONS WERE ASKED HIN
Which He Cheerfully Answered, and
the Average Public VIII Now
Know Nearly nv Much ms II
Did Before.

eral McKenna today announced his
opinion in the matter of section % of the
new tariff law. He holds in effect that
goods coming directly into the United
States from foreign countries through
Canadian ports are not subject to the dis
eliminating duty of 10 per cent, and also
holds that foreign goods shipped from
countries other than Britain are not sub.
ject to the discriminating duty.
Two questions were asked the attorney
general, the first of which was, in effect,
whether the discriminating duty of 10
per cent provided for in section 30 should
be assessed against an invoice of tea
from China which has arrived at Van
couver in British vessels and then ship.
ped through Canada to Chicago; the sec
ond question was whether the dis
eliminating duty should be assessed
recently arrived in British ship at
Philadelphia. Both these questions the
attorney general answers in the negative.
TIL, opinion of the attorney general
first quotes section % in full, and then
says:
Three plausible contentious are based
upon this section which us to strength
differ only in degree.
"First-That the duty is discrimina-
ton upon importations in vessels not Of
the United States whether directly TO
the United States or to a contiguous
country and thence to the United States.
"Second-A discrimination against inn
nf l,nt In, hn ttnl
course of strictly retail trade) from q
contiguous country, they being the pro
ducts Thereof. In this the character Of
the vessel Is not important
''T'hird-A discrimination against goods
being the productions of foreign coun-
try not contiguous to the United States
which shall come into the United States
from contiguous country.
I'm this contention the words come in
to the United States are used rs Il
designating movement only
"Under the first and second contention,
the duty would not be imposed. Under
the third il would be-hence | select it as
n basis for consideration.
etc support it, the section imposes the
duty in two cases (A) when goods are
imported in vessels not of the United
States and to the United States: (B)
when they are the production of coun-
try not contiguous and come into the
United States from contiguous country.
The character of the vessel in which they
were transported into contiguous coun-
try being Indifferent.
THE first case we are not now con
ccrned with, and the second is attempted
to be established by the following reason
ing.
1.-THE goods are Chinese or japanese
production, hence the production OF a
foreign country is not contiguous to- the
United States They come into the
United States from Canada. a c0ntigu-
nons country, and so 1t IL urged that ny
the letter as well as by the spirit OF the
statute they are subject to duty.
at Is conceded then that Importation
Is to the United States-passage through
Canada being merely movement to-
wards destination--the latter being the
United States. This being so, it would
seem that there was no reason to dis
tinguish between that importation and
what may be called In distinction a. q,
rect one-why one should be burdened
and the other not burdened-when the
discrimination was not necessary to the
main purpose OF the law. 1t Is said that
the purpose of the amendment was to re.
lieye !he American trans-continental
reads against the competition of the
Canadian Pacific. 1t may be admitted
that this is a strong consideration, but on
the other hand 1t is urged that this COM
petition is a benefit and other american
railways claim that the Canadian Pa
oifc is direct advantage to them How
congress regarded this conflict we have
no means Of knowing. There was GER
tninly no avowal and the only expressions
Of members we have. indicate different
purpose than one which might or might
not have been entertained, and that II
il had been entertained II would feom
the natural thing TO have explicitly de-
clared il.
"As there was no reason therefore. why
the Observation-Disclosures or direct
should be Disseminated against. l am
not disposed 70 think that IL was in
tended. To so hold would be to put
new purpose to the Notwithstanding its
unity-which il not compelled by i's
language or any mischief which we may
say was in the contemplation of the law
makers TO be remedied.
"The section therefore regards. as the
law which preceded 1t regarded, the
of goods by sea. Its pur-
pose was to secure this to vessels OF the
United States by discriminating against
transportation not in them primarily t.
the United States. secondary and to pre-
yent evasion to a contiguous country
Canada or Mexico. The necessity Of II
TO the effectiveness OF the law IL obvious.
It would have been useless to have i'm.
posed n discriminating duty on goods
brought to San Francisco in foreign YES
sells and leave them free to go to Van
couver in foreign vessels and thence
across the intervening land to the Unite{
St0tes.
1.-THE amendment Of the law which II
made by section % therefore continues
its object while it strengthens and better
secures it. II does this In two ways, viz:
Ry taking away the means Of its evasion.
through the contiguity Of Canada and
Mexico and by repeating the statutory
exemptions from the 10 per cent duty.
81 have considered your inquiry 80 far
as If the section only regarded mere
through Canada. We
shall see hereafter that 1t has broader
scope.
"In the second contention the words
come into the United States are used as
to imported. The language
Being the production Of manufacture of
any foreign country not contiguous 10
the United States Is urged only as de-
scriptive Of the goods to which the duty
applies. The goods Themselves, 1t is con-
tended. must take their departure from
The contiguous country in the strict
tense Of importation as distinguished
from coming through II as an importation
from other countries. This view is gwen |
Dlausibiity by the exception that dutv |
shall not apply 10 such foreign products |
,r manufactures as shall be imported !
rom such contiguous countries in tie |