The Watertown weekly leader. [volume] (Watertown, Jefferson County, Wis.) 1912-1917, 1915-11-30
WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENCE.

Washington, Nov. 29.-Special Cores
pondence.-The democratic admisis-
tration is approaching very awkward
situation.
There are on the docket of the
United States supreme court the So
called 5 per cent. rebate cases. They
involve tremendous amount in GUS
toms revenues, loosely estimated at
between Is and 20 million dollars, col
lected under the provisions of the I'm
derwood tariff law. On the courts
decision hangs the fate of these mil
limos.
If the supreme court upholds the 5
per cent. rebate provision in the I'm
derwood law, then the sum in dispute
belongs to the foreign importers and
must be paid back by the government
The treasury deficit long ago became
alarming If this enormous additional
sum has to be paid out, it will still
further emphasize the failure of the
democratic fiscal policy.
On the other hand, if the supreme
court decides that the per cent pro-
vision of the Underwood law is in
valid, the highest court in the land
will have convicted the democratic
congress of humiliatfng blunder and
still further emphasize its record of
legislative inefficiency.
The fact that the Encouragement,
IN order to save the revenue involved,
is attacking the validity of the law
congress worked six months to pass,
makes the situation still more compIi-
Gated.
From a political standpoint, the best
thing that could happen to the demo-
cratic party in this case would be to
have decision go over until after the
next election.
Whether or not this happens de-
ponds largely upon the time the case
is heard. 1t is up to the government
to take the first step to advance the
date of hearing. Litigants on the other
side of the case have complained bit
terly over what they term unreasona-
bic delay, and for weeks have been
urging the government to move more
quickly.
Meanwhile, regardless Of when the
hearing may be held, democratic lead
ers are wondering what can be done
to offset the attack that will be made
on their fiscal policy on the one hand
and their legislative efficiency on the
other. %
Administration officials are alarmed
at the possibility of further loss in
revenue.
Some months ago certain trust COM
panies brought suit to recover various
amounts paid by them under the war
tax" law. Their example was fol-
lowed by others, until at the present
time practically every dollar paid by
the trust companies under the war
tax" law is involved in litigation.
The first of these cases is set for
trial for December /. 1t is apparent
that the administration is by no
means confident of the integrity of the
law congress enacted, for the addi-
tional counsel has been employed to
aid the government attorneys in de-
Tending the suits. 1t is said that un-
usually large retainers have been paid
on both sides for legal advice
The litigation is particularly vexa-
tious to the government because con-
gress laid the foundation for it by
stupid blunder. The tax involved is
levied under Section of the war tax"
law referring to banks and bankers.
At the time it was passed federal
courts had already declared that
statute identical in terms, so far as
trust companies were concerned, with
the present law, was insufficient to
make trust companies liable for the
tax imposed.
1t is said that if congess had exer-
cised ordinary caution and drafted the
war tax" law so that it should not
conflict with a precedent already es-
tablished by federal courts, the litiga-
ton could have been avoided. BY
carelessly neglecting this elementary
principle, congress virtually gave the
trust companies mortgage on all the
revenue they have paid, which they
may foreclose by judicial procedure.
A decision AYERS that the govern
ment would be unusually embarrassed
at this time In the first place, it would
directly due to democratic careless