The times., 1897-09-22

II has been Under consideration for many
days aud has been Submitted to the Presi-
dent three orfour times. II was not finally
decided 10 Il axe 1t poblic until after the
Cabinet meeting yesterday. Itwas noteyen
concluded after its recent reconstruction
until late hour yesterday morning.
The law officer Of The Government holds
that the discriminating duty provided for
in the 22d section Of the new tariff law
does rvt apply to goods coming into the
United States through Canada. He cites
various decisions in support Of his Conten
tenLOn and leaves the situation just as II
stood before this clause WAS put into the
law, Sc far, at least, as il relates TO goods
brought IT. by tie Canadian Pacific road.
THIS opinion was not reached unta after
several hearings had been held and much
time devoted to consideration of the
law and the decisions of the Supreme
Court. The OpnicI VIII be satisfactory
70 tie New England roads which connect
with tie Canadian Pacific and isappoint-
ing to the transconUnental lines that hoped
through an adverse decision 10 secure the
long haul OF tie goods from Asiatic ports.
il il was a contest between the railroads,
as has been asserted in some quarters,
those roads that have been hitherto bene.
fitted VII continue 10 derive that benefit.
OF c0crse, IL IS not expected that every
body VIII be- satisfied with the opinion.
Mr Elbins aud those with him who be
heve ia q discriminating duty are Of the
opinion that tie Attorney General has
not correctly construed the law, and il is
conteHded taat inasmuch as it IS d qucs
tion about " hich there s strong doubt ii
should hav" heen decided in such a wa.
that an appeal could have been taken 20
the courts Being, as il is, in favor Of
TheimnoFtrrs, there wlIIbe no appeal Ia ken
by them, aud it is improbable that the
Government viii disagree with its legal
adviser and carry the question into the
courts
The Cabinet is satisfied with the opinion
For it 'v0s submitted at the meeting yes
terday, and had there been any material
dissent the opinion would either have not
been promulgated promptly thereafter
or wouid probably have been modified in
come way.
The full text o: Attorney General Nc.
KennH's opinion is as follows:
The Secretary Of the Treasury.
SlT-I have the honor To acknowledge
August 10. II is not necess sary TO quote
al OF II. You say:
on the 6th instant I had he honor 20
submit FOR yuUr consideration d CDpy OF
letter received by me from the Tfeasury's
special agent at ogdeusburg n Y, which
involved the question whether. under sec
tiun p of the new tarm act. a dir
eliminating duty of o per cent should Do
assessed upon certain diamonds brought
into the luitrC states from tile cont Euuus
teuitoTy ~ Canada.
''SinCe tbr date 81 ms letter above re-
ferred 60. ] have received from the col
leCtUr ~ customs at GuiCaEn "a request for
instructions as 10 the assessment Il die
eliminating duty, under the ahUre pro-
vision ~ law, upon certain Enuds, which
come from Jauan, via Vancouver, b. O.,
aud Thence per railroad through Canada o.
Chicago. Ihess goucs arrived IA Chicago
IN cars. sraird az Vancouver, B g., bv "a
United states consular officer, under
regulations q the department.. which are
based upon he treaty u Washington and
upon section 81 90 ~ the Revised statutes 90
Aou inquire snan tnese goods be- sub
9ected L. special discriminating duty OF
10 per cent?
An answer 10 your inquiry depends upon
TIE Interpretation Of section - or tie
Diugley tariff bin and its effect on sec
tion 422 : or the Revised Statutes
Section - is a. follows:
That a discriminating duty OF 10 per
centum ad valorem, in addition to the
duties imposed by law, shall be levied,
collected, and paid on all goods, wares or
merchandise which shall be imported in
vessels not Of the United States Tor which.
being the production or manufacture OF
any foreign country not contiguous TO the
Daited States, shall come intO the United
States from such contiguous coCntry}: hut
this discriminating duty shall not apply
IN fr1E VA ltnrn nsgf i,.ls
shall be imported in vessels not Of the
United States, entitled al the time of
such importation by treaty OF convention to
be entered in the ports Of the United
States on payment OF the same duties as
shall then be payable on goods, wares and
merchandise imported in vessels Of the
United States (nor 70 such foreign prod
nets or manufactures az shall be imported
from such contiguous countries in the
usual course OF strictly retail tradel.''
The matter in parenthesls is mine and
indicates the affirmative changes made III
pre-existing laws.
Three plausible contentious are based
upon this section, which as TO strength
only differ In degree.
]. That the duty is a discrimination upon
impOrtations In vessels not OF the United
States, whether directly to the United
States or 10 a contiguous country and
thence to the United States
2. A discrimination against importa-
tions OF goods not in the usual course of
strictly retailuade from contiguous coun-
try, they not being the products thereof. In
this the character Of the vessel is not inn
portant.
8. A discrimination against goods be-
ing the productions of foreign country
not contiguous to the United States, which
shall come into the United States from a
contiguous country.
IN this contention the Words come into
the United States are used as designating
movement only.
Under the first and second contentious
the duty would not be imposed. Under he
third 10 would be. i hence select &C as
basis for consideration.
To support it il is said that the section
imposes tie duty in two cases, fal " hen the
goods are imported in vessels not OF the
United States, and to the United States.
(bl when they are the production OF d
country not contiguous and come into the
United States from q contiguous country
the character Of the vessel in which they
Were transported 10 the contiguous country
being indifferent.
The tirst case We are not now con
cerned with, and the second is attempted
TO be established by the following reason
Ing: The goods which are the subject Of
inquiry are Chinese OF japanese produc-
non, hence the production or a foreign
country mot contiguous TO the United
States" They cume into the United States
from Canada, contiguous country, and
SO IL is urged that by the letter as well
as by the spirit OF the statute they are
subject to the duty.
1t is conceded that the importation IS q
the United states passage through Canada