New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-03-23
CRITICISES Mr.. SHAW.
III ". .Somer11Uc Tells Of Trouble
Orer 4gpraiSer8' Decisions.

49,, rr,,5ereon n ssrnery1le a member Of
IN. United States Board of General Api'ialstla 20
,e-sav admitted that serious trouble existed De1'
ss,reta-v Shaw of the Treasury Department ana
-, ,.-s az AZ least some Of Ste members. ms
a, a. e-ef ffrne ANYTHING Ike an Official ADMISSION
,,a. heer made publicly. Mr.. Shaw has claimed '-e
yseht as Secretary ~ the Treasury 70 eAeIciSe -
-to-ftv over the actions % the board muse 80
have been members Longest particularly Tese1 ''.lS
declaring that the board Is JleleIA Do-'' "
,to-frb Il mart q the Treasury De1aT tii-eI'
F,v-Judre somer,lIe. who was formerly a mem
t-- q the Supreme Court u A4aoalna. mas ii'O,
ft-enuousIv asserted the prerosatiFes % tl'e -
\ has fs- known 20 his intimate friends llal ne
,s,ls lose his Office rather than submit 70 "i4a' N
corded as the unjust professions or me 9ecie'als
n WAS formerly understood that inc Heiiloei' "a
SIC board were appointed Tor lie. and thar they
-ra DO removed only Tor cause The United Slales
courts however. have decided that a genera -
f,~afrpr can De removed without caes.- as,
The e+.ter1eut given out by eN-Judge soIneI we
g. "a rrr.r-a-.-nrv on decision rendered "a le" Gag
.f-o bv the United States Circuit Court OF Afl-'S
st Richmond r. the case OF stone vs. - =
: -, t,,,,,,, --e value of the Indian rupee The
statement follows In part
-,o 5s-fsfop or the Circuit Court Of Appears an
,,cr-71os a principle OF great impoTtaIlce. -
fliur fudlcaIlv the relations % en- go C.I
Departmeut and the Board of me- 80 ~ he
49, A-rraiears I'M that case the secretary vt -
Treasury had ordered the co-.-'. ;,r,o-te5 rner-
rar5iso on The basis OF the couluaerc2- hale . %
the rupee. which was y e.ll's .scfr+airlcd by the
r1irr~for ~ The Mint under an act OF congress-
hoard held that this order was IN ylotaLloh % -i
- +t-orcrora nun and void. The circuit OIL l
81 baltimore sustained the board. = .lto 49,
-or Mass lad previously done IN similar Co.
IN the argument before he Sllcuil 80 fDeie't5
$500 cd Richmond. the district attorney mss,
80 +Te board of General Appraisers was 4 SUI
riirsfe nara OF the Treasury Department and
4be Secrctarys order. The court cNe ellI, I,,
contention. and in doing used the ioAo"lhg IAN
we cannot agree that IN EXERCISING The ro"e ,1s
~ reyfeV vested IN the Board Of General , Ap-
,,-s,eorg Isl law the board IS suboroitaIe cikL9n
~ the Treasury Jepar JIleiL - -,-5l ar--3 isers
ere amounted bv the President by ana WIN .t tLe
advice and consent or We 80 81 81, ir6e7enderit
,-iFurai empowered BIZ law 10 pass upon eeIl an.
contr3'erses IN, - rsre-i Inc board is no more
subordinate 20 the Treasury Delal lii'el-' ' "
a. he United States supreme Court has he ere,
tofore refused writ oi oeIJl3Iai-, - ~ NT4ees-
sng tho corroctuezs Of the decision IN lle -, -.
Shqselts as s -,sa irs+ heard al Richmond should
an application be made 20 the supreme Oo01' 'S
M, iseiIe zetted Nv this decision has caused al.
80 e,oalI la friction between the present sc
81 the Treasury and the boaIl -. 95.E 49, -
- ,,-a,of,e occupants Of that once Inc Jlli.l
character Of the board and It's Ilsh. 40 20 o s5r
1870 and rore-iencps OF its members has 9eeh
Recognized Nlic. t- ,,-is--- 1-osta~ carlisle and
care In fact. NTr. Gage in refusing 70 la{eIleIe
r. a
1be enocsl ground that the case Was IN INC halus
81 the board which was Judicial trilnaI -E
bv Congress especially Tor the decision OF H10N
questions -. l---- 100000
u IS ir1no~sihlc 70 believe that Congress iteiea
fhe hoard be Inferior or subordinate 70 INC
rotary In the matter 81 formulating aiq pIo,
rating fte decisions. with the single PIoNls'
that he has the power 10 appeal ron sucn oes,-
sions when they do not meet WITH nls allllgy' ~,
IN fact the specification of the right 70 appear -
q PARTY ltigant. would seem - Drecluoe al o''le'
methods OF correction interference.
II the department viii conform 10 me lelleet
and spirit Of the recent decision by ne .9
Court OF Appeals and recognize the laWIul 1uTlSS-
dction OF the board. there would he no possitie
occasion FOR any future friction whatever.
The present membership OF the board. ~ ~
r,ersonre and qualifications IS stronger than ever
before in its history. II they arc conpeteIt 70
manage fs affairs Including both its internal ana
,-fe~ral administration they should be permitted
10 fo so absolutely unmoested by outside inhu-
enoee II not competent. they should be removed
Tor incompeteacv. and successors appointed VINO
are III 10 meet the requirements.
II would be entirely IN order for the Finance
or Judi~iarv COMMITTEES OF the Senate TO make
thorough investigation Of the whole subject, and
-enort what are the existing evils. r any, and ap-
NV che correction by appropriate LEGISLATION OF
r dt-isorv suggestions