The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-22 00:00:00

3. FINES AND SATISFACTIONS.

In considering this subject, my lords cannot but bear in
mind that the penalties imposed for defrauding the revenue,
and the securities which are taken with a view to prevent
evasion of the payment of the full duties established by law,
are as needful for the interests of the honest and upright
dealer as they are for preserving the rights of the Crown ; and
my lords recognise it as one of their duties, to take every
care to protect the fair dealer against being placed in a dis-
advantavous position in relation to his competitors in trade
on account of the duties which he has paid ; and this applies
equally, though in different degrees, to cases where• goods are
undervalued for ad valorem duties, and to cases of direct
smuggling. But while my lords feel it incumbent upon them
to adhere to those objects most rigidly, they are desirous that
the ordinary course of trade shall be interfered with as little
as possible.
These " fines," by which term they are desirous all pecu-
niary mulcts imposed by the board shall in future be distin-
guished (the term " satisfaction" being no longer applicable
to the existing state of things), are connected with seizures of
goods, which may be classed under two heads : 1. Nominal
detentions of goods for inaccurate description, wrong deno-
mination, or non-compliance with the law from inadvertence
or negligence. 2. Detentions for undervaluation, and seizures
in case of attempted smuggling, and other cases of clear and
decided fraud. It is especially in reference to the latter class
which consists of attempted evasion of duties, that both the
Crown and the fair trader are interested in a rigorous and
vigilant execution of the law. With regard to the former
class, though it is necessary for the accurate performance of
business, and though laxity in enforCing the regulations would
lead to facilities for fraud, yet my lords are of opinion that
they may safely rely upon the general character of the officers
for a strict performance of their duty without any other en-
couragement or inducement.
With regard to the first description of cases in the second
class, viz., under-valuations for ad valorem dutios, which it
appears is the most fruitful source of contention and incon-
venience, my lords cannot regard the present state of the law
as at all satisfactory. The difficulty of determining the pre-
cise value of the goods, the frequent attempts to enter goods
below their value—sometimes by the owners to defraud the
revenue, and sometimes by agents to defraud their principals
—and the numerous cases in which wrong values are given
(which are afterwards permitted to be amended, where no
fraud was intended), all lead to
groat inconvenience and fre-
quent detention of goods. And the regulation by which the
Commissioners of Customs aro permitted to take the goods on
the Crown's account, by paying the owner the price at which
they are valued, with 10 per cent. thereon, and which en-
titles the seizing officer to a moiety of the net profit derived
from. sale by the Customs authorities, is stated to have pro-
duced a suspicion of undue strictness in this class of cases.
My lords would observe that if, as they hope may soon be
the case, the application of the principle of ad valorem duties
may be materially narrowed, the inconvenience arising out of
this class of cases will be greatly mitigated ; and, in that
event, my lords are of opinion that they may he safely dealt
with in the same manner as the first-named class; and that
the officers seizing or detaining goods shall, in future, have
no personal or 'direct interest in' the fines imposed in such
cases, or in the profits derived from the sale of ad valorem
goods ; but that all such fines and such profits shall be paid
into a separate fund, and dealt with in the same way as the
fines are in the Inland Revenue department, viz., distributed
amongst the officers periodically. My lords are f opinion, in
relation to this class of cases, that the mode proposed, accom-
companied by a careful discrimination of merit in the promo-
tions in the service, will form a much sounder stimulus to
exertion than that which at present exists, and that it will be
free from the suspicion at present often entertained, that
officers are actuated rather by speculative considerations as
to advantages which may accrue to themselves than by the
interests of the Crown ; and that, consequently, much unne-
cessary trouble is given to merchants.
But with regard to the second description of cases in class
2—seizures made on the coast or elsewhere from smugglers—
my lords are of opinion that no change whateverishould be
made in the present system, but that the danger to which
officers are exposed entitles them to all the advantage they
now have in the case of seizure ; not only as an inducement
to vigilance, but as a reward when it is successful.

modevy
4. AD VALOREM DUTIES.
At a time when it was the policy of this country to le
considerable duties on articles of import generally, the
of charging by value was necessary as a mitigation of that
system, which would otherwise have operated with intolerable
severity upon articles of inferior quality in their class. But
among the many benefits attendant upon recent legislation,.
not the least considerable is that, except upon a few articles,
our rates of duty are now low, and that in consequence there
is no fear of au undue pressure upon the lower qualities of
articles from their being charged in the form of specific rates.
My lords are, therefore, of opinion that the recommendation
of the Parliamentary committee in relation to this subject
should be carried into effect as far as it is possible, and that
articles now introduced as " uneuumerated," and which ne-
cessarily must always be charged on the ad valorem principle,
should be revised and considered, with a view, as far as it is
practicable, to bring them under specific rates, or place them
in the free list.
With regard to whatever ad valorem duties may necessarily
be left, my lords are of opinion that the present mode of deal-
ing with goods which aro seized and detained for under-
valuation should be treated exactly as they now are; except
only as described under the head of " Fines and satisfactions,"
my lords are pleased to direct that the seizing officer shall
have no personal or into direct interest in the sale, bu
oft
finethat the
profit, if any, shall be pai the general fund e.
5. SEIZURES AND STOPPAGES AND ADJUDICATIONS
OF THEM.
Under this head of the committee's report, my lords ob-
serve that the following modifications have beau already in-
troduced by the Commissioners of Customs in conformity
therewith ; first, it has been made incumbent upon every offi-
cer seizing or stopping a vessel, boat,, or goods, to furnish the
owner or agent with a written notice, specifying the grounds
thereof, iu accordance with the following circular:—
hereby give notice, that directions have been
issued to the
Notice.—" The Commissioners of her Majesty's Customs
officers of the Customs in the United Kingdom, that whenever
t they may sieze or stop a vessel, boat, or goods, they are to

6. LAW OF COSTS AND PENALTIES.
My lords are of opinion that in matters of costs arising out
of legal proceedings, the principle applicable as between sub-
ject and subject should be in every case, and as nearly as pos-
sible, applied between the Crown and the subject. Accord-
ing to the existing practice, the position of the subject to the
Crown is more favourable than the common practice, and in
others less so. My lords are pleased to direct that they
shall in all cases be assimilated as nearly as possible. But
my lords are of opinion that in assimilating the payment of
costs in Customs cases, both with respect to seizures and in-
formations for penalties, the suggestions of the Commissioners
of Customs in respect thereto, to the effect of requiring secu-
rity from the defendant for the costs, should they be awarded
against him, ought not to be adopted, but that the Crown
must be satisfied with its remedy in such cases in common
with the subject. In reference to the complaint of the com-
mittee, that in the event of the Crown failing in a suit the
defendant " can only bring an action against the seizing of-
ficer, who is alone responsible, and may not be worth pro-
ceeding against," my lords refer to the 126th section of the
Bth and 9th Viet., cap. 87, which provides that no suit shall
be commenced for the recovery of penalty or forfeiture, ex-
cept in the name of the Attorney-General, or in the name of
some officer of the Customs or Excise, under the directions of
the commissioners. My lords, therefore, can only regard the
officers as agents of the commissioners, who ought, therefore,
in every respect, to be placed in the relation to the defendant
as if they were nominally the plaintiffs. My lords understand
that in practice this is so at present, but if any alteration in
the law is needful to give it legal effect, it ought to be made.
And my lords are further of opinion, that any merchant or
other person feeling himself aggrieved, shall have the right
to bring an action against any such officer seizing or detain-
ing his goods in the county courts, when the amount of da-
mages claimed would bring the case within the jurisdiction
of such court, hi place of being obliged to resort to the
higher and there expensive tribunals.
But my lords are of opinion that, for the reasons given by
the Commissioners of Customs in favour of the provisions
contained in the 114th and 115th sections of the Customs
Smuggling Act, they ought to be retained, and that the law

in that respect ought not to be altered except as to the re-
quirement of security for costs.
My lords are further of opinion, in relation to the complaint
that the period within which actions may be brought against
officers for wrongfully seizing goods, &c., neay, without in-
jury to the Crown, and with greater fairness to the subject,
be extended to ono month after the close of the trial against
the subject, whenever that shall happen, in place of its being
limited, as at present, to six months after the cause of action
arises. With regard to the law of " prescription" in bring-
ing actions, it appears to my lords that at present the Crown
is bound in ".civil" actions to the common rule ; and with
regard to actions for offences against the Customs laws, the
right of the Crown to bring actions is limited to three years
in cases brought in any of the superior courts, and' to six
months for those brought before magistrates. My lords aro
of opinion that this arrangement, on the whole so favourable
to the subject, should not be altered.
My lords feel that it would be of great advantage to bring
a system into operation which should combine publicity and
impartiality with cheapness and dispatch in the settlement of
revenue cases; that it would promote the interests of com-
merce, would tend to relieve the board from embarrassments,
would give satisfaction to the public, and would improve the
tone of the intercourse between the mercantile community
and the revenue department.
In cases, therefore, of the seizure of goods with regard to
which the duties and penalties due to the Crown shall not
exceed 1001., my lords are of opinion that the Crown should
be bound to resort to the county courts, or to any other local
courts, or to the magistrates, as my lords may hereafter
direct; but that in any cases, with regard to which some
great and unusual principle is involved, it shall be lawful for
the Lords of the Treasury, on its being certified to them by
the Commissioners of Customs that it would be desirable that
such cases should be tried in a superior court, to order that
such cases shall be so heard iu ono of the superior courts.
My lords aro also of opinion that in all cases the defendant
shall have the option of having his case tried in a superior
court before a jury.

My lords are further of opinion that, in cases where the
duties and penalties due to the Crown shall exceed 1001., with
regard to which the defendant expresses a desire to resort to
the cheaper and quicker tribunal, it shall be lawful for the
Treasury to authorise such a course, upon receiving from the
Commissioners of Customs an application certifying that from
the character of the case it would be proper to do so.

7. THE TRANSIT SYSTEM.
It appears to my lords, that under this head most of the re
commendations of the committee with regard to the facilities
which it is desirable to grant in relation of goods passing in
transit through this country, and for the removal of such
goods from the place of importation to that of exportation,
when different, had been adopted, even before the date of their
report, by direction of my lords, so far as regards to London,
Liverpool, Hull, Goole, Grimsby, and Southampton. My
lords, therefore, content themselves by observing on this
head that they will be prepared to extend like facilities to
such other ports as, from time to time, from a change of cir-
cumstances shall appear practicable with reference to a safe
and convenient means of transit, and to authorise the trans-
mission of such goods under a general bond to be given by the
railway company, thus dispensing with the special bond from
the owners of such goods, as at present by law.
My lords, however, would not wish to be understood that
they now come to any decision in respect of the plan which,
as the commissioners observe, has been proposed for the re-
moval of goods landed at Southampton without examination,
to be bonded iu London. My lords are of opinion that the
advantage to be thus obtained by the importer would not be
commensurate with the risk and the cost which the public
revenue would incur in this and analagous cases. And if this
system be objectionable by railway communication, my lords
are of opinion that it would be doubly so by coasting vessels ;
and that the same objection would apply even in regard to
moving goods in transit by coasting vessels unexamined, as
is permitted to be done by railway, owing to the greater faci-
lity which such a means of conveyance necessarily furnishes.
With regard to the introduction of arms in transit, my lords
are of opinion that the prohibition might be dispensed with,
but that in every case a Treasury order shall he necessary,
made upon an application which shall state the country
from whence the importation is to take place, the quan-
tity to be imported, and the country to which they arc to be
shipped.
With regard to the limitation of the size of the packages
in which some goods can be imported or exported, and espe,
cially spirits and tobacco, my lords aro opinion that the
relaxation of the law which my lords have made from time to,
time in favour of the transit trade have already accomplished
all the purposes which the committee contemplated as
well as with regard to the facility of forwarding samples 'of
tobacco.
My lords will, however, generally observe under this head,
that in the present state of the commerce of the world, and
especially in reference to our great maritime interests, it is
one of the first duties of the Government to afford every faci-
lity for the extension of our transit trade ; and they aro
pleased to direct that that the attention of the Commissioners
of Customs shall be given to this subject, in order from time
to time to recommend such modifications as shall appear do-
sirable.
My lords' attention has been drawn by the Commissioners
of Customs to the present practice of giving bonds in each
case, in which goods are removed from one warehouse to an-
other, and to the great trouble which such practice entails
upon the merchant ; and my lords are pleased to direct, in
accordance with such recommendation, that in cases where
merchants prefer it, they shall be at liberty to give one single
general bond to cover their transactions.