New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-03-18
THE VIOLATION OF A CONTRACT

The WAYS and Means Committee will give
hearing this week on the bill introduced by Sen
ator O. II. Plat and Congressman Russell, of
Connecticut, for the relief OF manufacturers who
between August % 1894, and June 3, 1896 paid
the internal revenue tax levied alcohol used
in the arts, under the explicit guarantee Of the
Wilson act that on proof of such payment the
amounts so paid should be returned to them out
of the Treasury of the United States. The hear
ing should be attentive and sympathetic and
should result IN the passage Of the bill.
The section of the Wilson act relating to this
case required the Secretary of the Treasury
to prescribe regulations under which alcohol
should be used by manufacturers claiming the
rebate. But Secretary Carlisle refused to pre-
scribe such regulations on the ground that Con-
gress had made appropriation for their en-
forcement, and on a test case being brought tue
Court of Claims, sustaining the claimants on all
questions of fact, nevertheless held that the Sec
retarys failure to prescribe regulations had left
them without any legal right to the rebate
promised in the act On appeal the Supreme
Court sustained this decision, four of the nine
Justices dissenting, and subsequently denied
petition for a rehcaring. In consequence 1t has
become necessary TO apply to Congress for relief
from burden which Congress never intended
10 impose and against the imposition Of which it
qua lntenu 10 give the manufacturers complete
protection.
1t is represented in behalf of the claimants,
and with convincing force IN the opinion of Jus
tees Brown, Mckenna Peckham and White,
that the words regulations to be prescribed by
the Secretary of the Treasury were not permits
sive but mandatory, and that the doctrine that
an officer of the Government can annul an act
OF Congress Mt his discretion is untenable and
intolerable. 1t is also asserted, with impressive
citations from the record, that the Supreme
Court in this reversed its decisions in cases
precisely analogous The alleged errors Of Mr..
Carlisle and the courts are not at present sub
ject to review, but these considerations are
morally pertinent to the contention of the man.
ufacturers. They are beyond doubt the vic
tins of a breach of faith which Congress did
not fOresee or commit. but to which Congress
will give discreditable consent if II neglects to
repair the wrong. The amount involved, though
by no means a trivial matter to the individuals
concerned. is not an important matter to the
Government; but it is important that the Gov
eminent, whether for profit or loss, should not
tolerate violation of its contract with its
citizens.
In conclusion it is to be observed that the
claimed. 1t merely provides that the failure of
the Secretary of the Treasury TO prescribe regll-
lations for the use of alcohol in the arts under
the Wilson act shall not operate a defence
ION the part of the United States to any suit of
"a manufacturer under said act brought in any
court of the United States" If the bill passes
every claimant will still have to prove his claim
1t is not gratuty but justice that is sought