Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1901-06-27
RUSSIAN RETALIATION.

been by the imposition of IA duty on
American iron and steel manufactures,
machinery, and tools imported into
Russia, in return for the export duty |
imposed by Secretary Gage on a few |
Thousand tons OF beet sugar. The |
Secretary has been strongly blamed for |
his action, but the true fault lies in |
the Dingley act.
Section 5 Of the act of July oath, |
1897, 1.-THE Dingley act), provides as
follows:
That whenever any country, dependency,
OF colony, shall pay or bestow, directly or
Indirectly, any bounty or grant upon the
expectation of any article or merchandise
from such country, dependency, or colony,
and such article or merchandise is uutiable
under the provisions of this act, then upon
the importation of any such article or mer-
chandise into the United States, whether
the same shall be imported directly rom
the country of the production or otherwise,
and whether such article or merchandise is
imported in the same condition as when ex-
ported from the country OF production. or
has been changed in condition by retnanu-
facture or otherwise, there shall be levied
and paid, in all such cases, in addition to
the duties otherwise imposed by this act, an
additional duty equal to the net amount of
such bounty or grant, however the same be
paid or bestowed. The net amount OF all
such bounties or grants shall be from time
to time ascertained, determined, and de-
clared by the Secretary of the Treasury who
shall make all needful regulations for the
Identification of such articles and merchan-
disc and for the assessment and collection
of such additional duties.
This section was doubtless the work
of the Sugar Trust, which feared the
bounty system on beet sugar adopted
by foreign countries. Since 1884 the
cost of beet sugar had fallen one-half,
and European countries had carried
the system of bounties to such an extent
that Belgium invited representatives
of various nations to conference on
the SUBJECT at Brussels in 1898. At
this conference England assumed nom
conimital attitude, and France. and
Russia claimed that the question Of
internal revenue taxes was a purely
domestic one. December 18th, 1893, the
Secretary of the Treasury directed
additional duties on sugar imported
from Russia, Austria, Denmark, France,
Germany, and the Netherlands. Russia
protested vigorously that she did not
come within the provisions of the act.
ard did not directly or indirectly offer
any bounty. April goth, 1900, the
Secretary suspended the order, SO far as
concerned Russia, and entered upon
friendly course of negotiations with
that country, leading to better COM
mercisl relations. Very little sugar was
imported after this remission; but,
when few cargoes began to arrive and
more were learned to be on the way, a
wall went up from the Louisiana Sugar
Exchange an American Cane Growers
Association, which claimed to have
lost million dollars in year, and to
be threatened with ruin. The Sugar
Trust began to exert its powerful
pressure. Meanwhile other nations COM
planned that they were discriminated
against in favor OF Russia. In the
latter part of January last cargo of
beet sugar from Russia was hung up in
Philadelphia. A trade treaty negotiated
by Special Reciprocity Commissioners
Kasson and Russia failed, tt rough delay
in the Senate; and early in February
the Secretary issued the following
order:
In pursuance of the provisions OF section
of the Act of July oath, 1897, the amount
OF the bounty or grant pail or bestowed by
Russia on the export of sugar is hereby de-
clared to be sixty-four copecks per pood of
refined sugar, and that an additional duty
equivalent TO such amount must be assessed
and collected under said section 8 of the
Act of July 24th, 1897.
100 copecks=1 ruble=51 cents.
pood=36 pounds.
In reference to the legality of the
proceeding give herewith copy OF a
letter which 1 received from the
Attorney General:
Office of the Attorney. General, Washing
ton, ID. o., March 9th, 1901-Norman +.
Hesseltine, ESQ.,, 10 fremont St., Boston,
Mass.---Sir; In reply to your inquiry, under
da4n IL 49, l,.. AT
that no opinion or decision has been rem.
dered by this department with reference to
the so-called Russian sugar bounty.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) John W. Griggs,
Attorney General.
The Secretary sets forth in his letter
that foreign governments have claimed
that the Russian government regula
tions resulted in an indirect bounty or
export sugar equal to the differenc,
between the price, exclusive of excis.
tax, of sugar sold in that country fol
home consumption and the price O.
sugar sold for exporting. The Rus
sian COVER nment, on the other hand
vigorously protested that by no act O
hers was any bounty or grant paid O.
bestowed on the expectation of sugar
The letter then concludes as follows:
''As an administrative officer, it i
my duty to determine questions O
doubt in favor of the government, tn
more SO that, IL err in that dire stion
the error can be readily corrected by
competent tribunal upon protest an,
appeal by those adversely affected
while, II by my action the interests @
the government are injuriously affected
there is no remedy. In the presen
case there seems to be no other prone
course than the one you are hereby in
structed to pursue
st ought TO bring the whole cues
tion promptly before body constitute
to hear and determine disputed aues
tions of fact and of law. The iuris
diction of the board of general ar
praisers to determine similar question
has now been sustained by the Unite
States Circuit Court of Appeals in th
case Of the United States vs.. the Hill
Brothers Co., decided February Stt
1901, unpublished; and, IL appeal /
taken from my ruling to that body,
will be your duty to facilitate in eyoI
way prompt and final adjudication ,
such appeal. !"
The following is fair interpret,
tion in summary form of the Russia
law of 1896, limiting the sale Of be-
sugar in domestic markets and ii
directly encouraging expectation:
II. The government establishes Il
maximum price OF refined sugar in IL
domestic market.
20. Estimating the demand for hon
consumption, it permits the refiners
put on the market, under a,tax of |.
ruble per pood, certain limited qua
o tk.. ILL -. 4.