The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1898-11-30
ALCOHOLIC THE ARTS
Famous Customs Rebate Claims Ar
Sued i'm Supreme Court.

| washington, NOV. S5.-ATS uultHI WdS
begun in the United States supreme court
in the case of r. Dunlap & Co. versus the
| United States, involving the claim of this
firm to a rebate on alcohol used by them
in the manufacture of hats. as allowed
by the else section of the Germany Wilson
! triff law. The case comes to this 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 treasury did not pre-
scribescribe the regulations which were
made necessary by the laws. The argu-
ment was begun for Dunlap by George
A. Wing who contended that the OBJ
| lection raised by the court below was
without force and did not relieve the gov
eminent from the obligation to pay the
rebate He argued that the professed OBJ
ject Of the Wilson-Gorman law was the
reduction of taxation. whereas the tax
on spirits had been increased 20 cents to
s1.10, contrary to the spirit of the law, as
a whole.
This tax amounted to 900 per cent, and
was made so onerous, as all know be-
cause of the use of spirits as a beverage,
and while this might be legitimate, the
same reason could not be supposed to
hold good in the use of alcohol in the
TO foster and not to discourage. Evil
IDENTIFY, he argued the intention of con-
gress was TO relieve our manufacturers
from the tax in order TO place them
an equal footing with foreign manufac-
turers who have free alcohol. Moreover.
a drawback is allowed on imported alco-
hol used in the manufacture of articles
to be exported. Hence, the present prac-
tice is discrimination against American
1fI l1as -ha
the requirement 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 rebate should be allowed.
Concluding Mr. King declared that TO
concede the position of the government
would be equivalent 10 leaving the en-
forcement of any legislative enactment TO
the discretion Of the executive, which.
he claimed. was an encroachment dam
gerous TO the best interests of the citi-
zens 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 encroachments by its
executive officials. and that there was
no danger from that score. He argued
that the determination OF the question
grant to the manufacturer was condi-
iional, holding that il was made upon
the condition that the rebate should be
made only after the secretary had made T.
his regulations. The secretary had fall +
ed TO make these regulations, because, /
without an appropriation 10 execute the /
law il would De unavailing. hence the IN /
tenable character OF the claims OF the 4
appellants. The secretary had not put 1
himself above the law. but he had found 4
himself unable 10 protect the United 4
States in the execution OF the statute
He contended that the court could take !
no cOgnizance Of the manufacturer con-
tention. as IL could not perform execu-
tive acts or sustain the rights Of persons
dependent upon executive action which
lad not beeen performed The exercise
OF a discretion by the executive was no
but an act for the protection
O. the interests OF the government. ana
this was not hte only instance IN which
srch discretion had been exercised II
deed. the ACTION or congress IN repeating
the law made Z manifest that congress
had. partially a. least. anticipated sucn
g course b. the treasury as pursued
The time for the presentation O. ths
case was continued fer - hours and A.
torney General Grigzs and Hon J II
Choate would be heard tomorro~. the a.
tOrney general for the government ana
Mr.. Choate Tor the appellants There Is
much interest manifested n the case, e.
peciaIly among the manufacturers OF pro
prietsry medicines Il IS sid % Involve
az aggregate OF s.. 6ls.osa.