The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1915-07-10
URGED COTTON
GRADING BY THE
u. s. STANDARD
Solicitor r. G. Caffey Of Department Of
| Agriculture Addressed Alabama
State Bar Association at
Montgomery.

Montgomery, Ala, July lo.--Strength
ening OF the cotton future law TO requir
cotton in interstate commerce to b
lgraded according to federal standard
was advocated here to-day before tn
Alabama State Bar association by Fran
els G. Caffey, solicitor Of the department
of agriculture. The law now exempti
from a heavy tax otherwise imposed, cot
ton sold according to those standards
Mr.. Caffey also defended the constitu
tionality of the law.
| Solicitor Caffey expressed the belief
that although without legislation the
government standards would soon come
into general use in this country and
Of dealing in American cotton as a mere
matter of convenience and commercial
advantage. If, however, there We're leg
is,ation requiring the adoption of stand
ards in interstate commerce he contend
ed it would greatly strengthen the cot
ton future law, and the two together
would go far towards compelling uni
formity in the standards of American
cotton, both in the United States and in
other countries.
During the six months operation of
the new law, Mr.. Caffey said, there had
been only 703 disputes as to grading, in
yolving a little less than $4,000 bales,
referred to the secretary of agriculture.
All those, he explained, came from one
exchange, and he suggested that the fair
ure of that exchange to frame its rules
so as to give the force it might to the
work of its own grading and classified
tion machinery was responsible for the
disputes. Just before he made that
statement, Mr.. Caffey told the associa-
ton that a dispassionate examination of
the situation created the impression that
ii the evils at which the statute is ann
ed persist, and cannot be eliminated by
amendment, eventually the business of
dealing in cotton future would have to
be carried on otherwise upon exchanges.
In its present temper" he said "Con-
gress is determined to exercise its un.
doubted power to destroy the exchanges
rather than see its deliberately expressed
judgment thwarted by subterfuge or
evasion" He expressed the belief there
was STRONG probability" that Congress
would give further consideration to COM
pulsory standard grading.
One by one the solicitor considered va
rious arguments that the law is uncon-
He first took up the argu
ment that the tax imposed by the law
was direct tax on cotton. He said that |
the tax was not one on cotton, but on |
the privilege of doing business on ex-
,hanges, and hence need not be appor-
Toned, as all direct taxes must be under
he constitution. In support of his con-
lection he referred 10 decisions of the
,ourts upholding the oleomargarine tax
aw. The power of Congress to classify
or purposes of taxation had been thor
'ughly established by long line of cases
n the supreme court, he said, to leave
Dom for argument that the law was UNI
because il applied only to
otton exchanges, TO a particular class
# business upon those exchanges tfu-
ure sales and a part only of that class
4 business tsales not made according to
government standards of grading).
Mr.. Caffey considered the argument
hat the law had violated the constitu-
ion by delegating legislative power to
only on the secretary of the
ressury or agriculture. He explained
he secretary of the treasury merely pre-
cribed rules for the collection Of the |
ak, for affxing and cancelling the tax |
lamps and for keeping the records of |
ersons doing business under the act The |
over OF the secretary Of agriculture TO
stablish standards, 10 hear disputes be-
seen persons entering into contracts in
ccordanee with these standards, TO des, {
mate spot markets. were all mere de- Q
ills for the purpose of carrying out of I
be act which he said, were of charao- !
II which the supreme court had repeat {
lily decided might be entrusted 90 an v
1ecutive officer. i
The penalties provided by the act. he i
-gued. were not so severe as 10 inval- 2
ate the law. and he saw no serious 4
1jection in the contention that the cot
N futures law was a revenue measure
ID originated contrary 20 the eonstitu- 4
on in the Senate. On that point, be n
ated that the cotton future bill, intro q
iced by Senator Smith, OF South Caro- 4
Ia, did not propose 10 raise any reve. d
le. and that anyway. Senator Smiths il
tire bill, including the title and re. 4
ming only the enaciing clauses, was o
ricken out in The House and the Lever Il
Il was inserted and finally adopted by d
Ingress Under those circumstances, he q
Intended IL could not be said justly W
az the measure originated in the Sen e
E. Even II il had. be urged that the 90
preme court had refused repeatedly IN
20 behind the face Of legislation 20 81
stain an attack on a federal statute. Il
sed on charges Of ihformalities in pas p
ve