The San Francisco call., 1898-11-30
ARGUING THE
 ALCOHOL CASE Supreme Court Hears
 an Appeal. CLAIM OF MANUFACTURERS ASK THAT THEY BE GRANTED A
 REBATE. Declared That They Should Not Be Forced to Pay Tax for Alcohol Used in the Making
 of Hats.
ASK THAT THEY BE GRANTED A
 REBATE.
Special Dispatch to The Call.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 29.-Argument
 was begun in the United States Su-
 preme Court to-day In the case of F..
 Dunlap & Co. vs. the United States, in-
 volving the claim of this firm to a re-
 bate on alcohol used in the manufacture
 of hats as allowed by the sixty-first
 section of the German Wilson tariff
 law. The case comes to the Supreme
 Court on appeal from the Court of
 Claims, which refused the petition for
 a rebate on the ground that the grant failed when the Secretary of the Treas
 ury did not prescribe the regulations
 which were made necessary by the
 law
 The argument was begun for Dunlap by George 4. Wing, who contended that the objection raised by the court below was without force and did not relieve the Government from the obligation to pay the rebate. He argued that the pro- fessed object of the Wilson-Gorman law was the reduction of taxation, whereas the tax on spirits had been increased from 90 cents to S1 10, contrary to the spirit of the law as a whole. This tax amounted to 95 per cent and was made so enormous, as all know, because of the use of spirits as a beverage, and while this might be legitimate the same reason could not be supposed to have been good in the use of alcohol in the arts and industries which 1t was our policy to foster and not discourage. Evidently, he argued, the intention of Congress was to relieve our manufac- turers from the tax in order to place them on an equal footing with foreign manufacturers who had free alcohol. Moreover a drawback Is allowed on inn ported alcohol used in the manufacture of articles to be exported. Hence the present practice was a discrimination against American alcohol. He held that the fact that the requirements of treasury regulations should be coupled with the allowance was more in the nature of a direction to the Secretary than a condition under which the re- bate should be allowed.
 Concluding, MT. Wing declined to con- cede the position of the Government would be equivalent to leaving the en- forcement of any legislative enactment to the discretion of the executive, which he claimed was an encroachment dan gerous to the best interests of the citi- zen and one not to be encouraged for a moment by the judiciary.
 Special Attorney Binney contended on behalf of the Government that the people of this country were sufficiently protected against encroachment by the executive officials and that there was no danger from that score. He argued the determination of the question turned on the one point as to whether the grant to the manufacturer was con- ditional, holding that it was made upon the condition that the rebate should be made only after the Secretary had made his regulations. The Secretary had failed to make these regulations because without the power to execute the law it would be unavailing, hence the untenable character of the claims of the appellants. The Secretary had not put himself above the law, but he had found himself unable to protect the United States in the execution of the statute. He contended the court could not take cognizance of the manufact- urers' contention, as it could not per form executive acts or sustain the rights of persons dependent upon ex- ecutive action which had not been per formed. The exercise of a discretion by the executive was no usurpation. but an act for the protection of the interests of the Government and this was not the only instance in which such discretion had been exercised.
 Indeed, the action of Congress in re- pealing the law made it manifest that Congress had partially at least antici- pated such course as the treasury had 
 The time for the presentation of the case was continued for two hours and Attorney General Griggs and Hon. J. H. Choate will be heard tomorrow, the Attorney General for the Government and MT. Choate for the appellants. There is much interest manifested In the case, especially among the manu- lecturers of proprietary medicines. It Is said to involve an aggregate of