The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-09-06 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL CUSTOM-HOUSE.

It will be remembered that, in one of our numbers of last
month, we hinted at some evils connected with our Custom-
house business, which we thought admitted of a remedy. These
hints have drawn from head-quarters an expressed desire for
information. That desire we have thought it right to meet, by
promptly furnishing some details. There we should have been
content to leave the matter, as we have no wish to make a pa-
rade of our humble exertions to advance the interests of the
town of Liverpool. But it seems some people are not conteni
that it should be so left. Amongst the information we have re-
ceived on this affair, there is evidence of a disposition to deny
the existence of these evils, and something like threats held out
for "daring" to touch the question. This, the parties will now
perceive, is a rather dangerous course to pursue towards us;—
for, be it mere denial, or be it menace, we meet it by a simple
course—the publication of the correspondence on the subject.
We shall not be misunderstood in certain quarters when we
say, that, although " much is said here, yet more remains he-
hind,"—and we shall have as little scruple in sending that
forth, if need be,. as we have in publishing the following corres-
pondence _

-
Custom-house, LivetTool,2lst August, 1833.
The Collector presents his compliments to the Editor of the
LIVERPOOL STANDARD, and, with reference to the paragraph
commencing with " Let us hope, then," in the fifth column of page
95 of his journal, requests to be informed what specific regula-
tions they are he alludes to therein, as being new and vexatious
to the merchants as well as prejudicial to the commerce of this
port, although they are unnecessary for the protection of the
revenue, and the substantive topics for complaint, which he in-
timates as now existing at this port; as the chiefs of the customs,
however so disposed, cannot apply the proper remedies with-
outfirst making themselves acquainted with the disorder.

Liverpool Standard 08;ce, August 31, 1833.
The- Editor of the Livr.aroor. STANDARD presents his corn-
plipents to the Collector of Customs, and with reference to his
requeSt'ilf tiro 21st instant, desiring to be informed what specific
regulations were recently referred to in that paper, as being
new and vexatious to the merchants, as well as prejudicial to
the commerce of this port, although they are unnecessary for
the protection of the revenue, begs to state, that he has been
furnished with numerous details which are deemed by the mer-
cantile interest of this port to bear out those declarations; some
of which details the Editor has now the honour of communi-
cating to the Collector.
In makirig. this communication, the Editor considers it ad-
visable to divide the causes of complaint advanced by the mer-
cantile interest into two clases;—those which tend directly to
their inconvenience, from what they designate as vexatious and
unnecessary regulations, or changes in the previously existing
practices of the Customs' department ;—and those which result
from the inadequacy of the numbers of practical officers for the
convenient management of the inci cased and increasing business
of this port. Besides these leading causes of dissatisfaction,
there are others within the cognizance of the complainants,
from which considerable inconvenience is stated to be sus-
tained, although such causes may be beyand their right or wish
to controul; and which the Editor of the STANDARD will also
snore particularly notice before he concludes his statement.
To revert, however, to the leading grounds of dissatisfaction,
the merchants allege,

That, when property is transmitted from the King's warehouses
in London or elsewhere under the-Customs' seal, and is again
deposited, with certificates of weights or quantities, under the
charge of that department, until shipped, the refusal to permit
the shipment of such property without breaking the seals—
opening the packages for the examination of the contents—
and, in many cases, compelling the re-weighing or estimating
of the same, is productive of delay and expense, and is conse-
quently "vexatious" to them, whilst they contend that it is
" unnecessary for the protection of the revenue."
That, as the advancement of science has induced the exemp-
tion of objects of natural history from the payment of duty,
all impediments to the most prompt admission of live plant's,
introduced by them (the merchants,) at great expense and
trouble are contrary to the intention of the framers of those
laws by which such objects are admitted " free"—and that
instances of vexatious impediments of this nature are of not
unfrequent occurrence, when theloss of a single day in their
removal may be, in this climate, destructive of the plants.
That it was formerly usual, when bonded goods had to remain
on the quay all night, for the searcher on the station to ap-
point an °Meer to watch them, and then sign his bill for so
doing, which was immediately paid by the merchant ; but
that now a written application must be made to the inspector-
general to have such goods watched. If the merchant or his
agent, for want of time or other sufficient reason, does not go
through this form, the searcher appoints an officer to watch
the goods, and havin,,,* received his instructions from the in-
spector-general, sends the bill to the clearance clerk, with
orders not to allow the vessel to clear until—What ? Until
the charge for watching is paid ?—no; but until a written
application is made to the Inspector-General, and his permis-
sion obtained for an officer to watch goods that were watched
a week or two before, and are then stowed away in the hold
of the vessel, totally out of sight ! The written permission of
the Inspector-General is also necessary to make a deposit to
cover the probable expense of watching goods, the exact
charge for which is stated in a bill in the merchants' posses-
sion, which they are prepared to pay. When the detainer
from the searcher, lodged under such circumstances, is per-
haps not discovered until the vessel is on the eve of com-
pleting her clearance, and the Custom-house is about to be
closed for the day, the merchants deem themselves justified
in charging this as an act productive of unnecessary delay,
and consequentiv of expense—and as being " vexatious" to-
wards them, whilst it is " unnecessary fur the protection of
the revenge."

That, on the arrival of a British ship in this port from a foreign
voyage, her stores, instead of being sealed.up on board, are
removed to the Custom-house. The merchants state that they
should have less cause to complain on this head, were the
stores sent from the vessel to the Custom-house under seal,
and returned on board the ship with the seals unbroken ;
which they contend would be amply protective of the reve-
nue. But that, instead of this course being pursued, they
are first packed on board in the presence of an officer ; and
on their being delivered at the Custom-house they are un-
packed by an officer, guaged, counted, or weighed, according
to the nature of the stores, and deposited in the warehouse;
where they are again unpacked, guaged, counted, or weighed;
packed up again—sent down to the vessel—once more un-
packed hi the presence of an officer, and stowed away in the
lockers. That many articles, tea and wine for instance, sus-
tain great injury, and are exposed to extensive destruction by
these repeated, and, as the merchants insist, unnecessary in-
terferences with the property; which, at the same time, leads
to considerable expense. That all these formalites are re-
quired, however small the quantity of any particular kind of
store on board, although, probably, the.vessel may be depart-
ing on her outward voyage again in a few days; and that the
trouble and, inconvenience thus attending the reshipment of
stores, not iinfrecoently presients vessels from obtaining their
clearances with despatch; which has led to their being sent
to sea without a part of their stores, in order to avoid delay ;,
and, on such stores being subsequently claimed, heavy
charges have been-paid for rent before they could be obtained.
The merchants state that foreign vessels are exempt from
this inconvenience; it being permitted to them to have their
stores sealed up on board. This distinction, they maintain,
is highly unjust in principle—" vexatious" to themselves—
and wholly "unnecessary for the protection of the revenue."
That they, the merchants, are called upon to pay for the expense
of the Custom-house officer,—which frequently amounts to a
considerable sum,—after the expiration of a fortnight from
the arrival of the vessel, although the want of despatch in un-
loading is in no way chargeable upon themselves; and that
no difference, in this respect, is made between a vessel of one
hundred tons and the largest ships that enter this port.

That the existence of the Bill of Entry" office is prejudicial
to their interest, and productive of frequent delay; inasmuch
as before the clerks of the customs can make any use of the
searchers' bills, they have to be delivered to a clerk in that
office, by whom they are often detained so long that ware-
housed goods cannot be passed until the following day,
lieteby ships are also prevented from clearing.

It is further stated that the person filling the office of inspector-
general has, from time to time, introduced regulations which,
nut being found to work well, are withdrawn, and others
equally absurd and unnecessary are substituted, apparently
on his individual dictation, which are a source of constant
annoyance to them, the merchants.
Without going into further details on this head of their com-
plaint, the merchants contend that the course pursued in the
cases above stated, and in many others which could be adduced,
I is in direct contradiction to the spirit of the circular of Decem-
ber, 1832, sent by the commissioners of customs to the outports,
in which it is laia down to the effect—
That the merchants' business is not to be needlessly impeded;
That unnecessary labour and expense are not to be created, but
that increased facility and despatch are to be afforded;
And that all changes of a speculative nature are to be avoided.
On the second head of complaint,—the inadequacy of the
numbers of practical officers for the convenient management
of the increased and increasing business of this port,—the mer-
chants allege,—
That, in the year 1798, there were four clearance clerks, and
seventeen landing waiters exclusively employed in discharg-
ing ships, when the year's foreign trade amounted to only about
1,000 vessels and considerably less than 200,000 tons. And"
that, at the present time, although the foreign business of
the port has reached 3,000 vessels, and 650,000 tons per an-
num,—the vessels generally being of much higher tonnage
than at the former period named,—and, although the clear-
ance of ships is rendered more difficult by new and harrassing
regulations, there are still only four clearance clerks; and
of the whole establishment of landing waiters, about thirty-
five only are employed, on the average, in the discharge of
ships; whilst it not unfrequently happens, that the number
of vessels which cannot discharge for want of landing waiters
is so considerable as to impede extensively the transaction of
business, and, consequently, to operate " prejudicially to the
commerce of this port." To repair which evils a great in-
crease of the actual number of landing waiters on service is
considered) indispensable.
That, in consequence of the vexatious, many of them new,
regulations to which they, the merchants, are thus exposed,
and the altered system of clearances, they are frequently
subjected to an expense of ten or fifteen pounds for a steam-
. vessel to convey the oaptain, with his papers, on board his
ship; which, to-save the tide and wind, may have gone to
sea at high water. They maintain that the localities of this
port aud that of London are so totally different, that a sys-
tem of clearance which may be productive of very trifling
expense or inconvenience in the latter, is attended in this
port with great inconvenience; and, as here stated, fre-
quently with heavy expense.
That the difficulties here detailed arm much increased by the
change of regulations with regard to the working hours;
since, in the year 1798, the landing waiters, if required,
worked from sunrise to sunset; but, now, their time of attend-
ance is limited to the seven houri from eight to three o'clock;
thus, during a considerable portion of the year, causing a
loss of the most valuable parts of the day for the performance
of heavy labour.
The Editot of the STANDARD having thus, in compliance with
the request of the Collector of Customs, set forth sonic of the
leading causes of complaint which the merchants have com-
municated to him, feels that he is not overstepping the bounds
of propriety in repeating what the merchants declare has, in
their judgment, tended to produce, and is well calculated to in-
crease, to a great extent, those evils. They allude to the prac-
tice which has prevailed of late years, of passing over the heads
of active and efficient officers of long standing, well versed in
the business of.the port, (which is, in many respects, different
from that of London and other ports,) and placing above them
men of little general, and no local experience, brought from re-
mote parts of the country; by which practice the:transaction of
business is often very extensively delayed.
The merchants declare, that they are not unapprised of the
fact, that, from certain quarters, charges have been insinuated
to the higher authorities, of collusion between themselves and
the officers for purposes of fraud upon the revenue; all which
insinuations they indignantly repel, as base and unfounded.
The Editor of the STANDARD would not be doing justice to
the Collector of the Customs if he (lid not distinctly state, that,
in the numerous representations which have been made to him,
in evidence of the complaints that he has felt himself called
upon thus to detail, at some length, for the information of the
Chiefs of the Customs, there has been one uniform declaration,
on the part of the merchants and others who have occasion to
transact business in that department, that the personal demean-
our of the Collector has been invariably marked by a desire to
afford every possible facility to the conduct of official business,
which is consistent with the faithful discharge of those duties
that devolve upon him as guardian of the revenue.

OUR CONTEMPORARIES AND THEIR FRIENDS.

We are glad to perceive that whenever anything like idea
tity is fastened upon any individual supposed to be connected,
whether truly or erroneously, with the rabid Whig newspapers
of Liverpool, the utmost anxiety is manifested to disclaim the
connection and forswear the personalities in which these jour-
nals too frequently indulge. This is a good omen. It is a
wholesome symptom to see persons who have hitherto taken a
deep interest in these papers, and have lent their name to them
in the former days of violence and faction, come forward now
to disavow their sentiments and disclaim-their scurrilities.
An instance of this has occurred in consequence of a para-
graph which appeared its the STANDARD of Tuesday last. A
Saturday journal, which we are not conscious of ever having
alluded to, far less of having named, was pleased to direct
against us some personal-rancour as flippant as it was false.
We were led to understand that the writer of that paper was a
gentleman holding a responsible situation in the nightly police,
and we took occasion to remind him that such displays of per-
sonality in a newspaper were inconsistent with his station and
the proper discharge of his duties.
This gentleman has disclaimed the authorship and the con-
nection in the following extract of a letter to Our contemporary
of the Courier:—

"'lila general application of the doctrine laid down by the
editor of the Standard might be fouud inconvenient to more
persons than one; but I owe it to him to state, that his notice
of me originated, as I learned from himself this morning, in a
misconception, inasmuch as he had been assured, that- I was
the author of an article in last Saturday's Journal personally-
offensive to him. To my connexion with the Journal I owe an
introduction to many good, kind friends; but, on being ap-
pointed to my present situation, I ceased to be the editor of that
paper, and have not contributed to it since the arrival of my suc-
cessor. It is only due to him to state, that I have not written a line
in the Journal during the last five weeks..
6" lino, Sir, yours truly,
" M. J. WiIITTY,
" Superintendent of the Liverpool Nightly Watch.
Liverpool, Sept. 3, 1833.

So far well, and we are glad that Mr. Whitty is in a situation
which enables him to occupy a more useful position in society,
and we should regret if any thing thnisve have said could hypos_
sibility do him an injury, which after this we feel confident will
not be the case. As he was not the writer, our imputation falls
to the ground; he stands completely exonerated, and we have
much pleasure in saying so as openly as we made the original
charge.
Uad we known, as we now do, the character of the person
who has incurred the responsibility which Mr. Whitty has thus
shaken. off, we should have addreved ourselves to his masters,
Rot to him, for reasons which we shall explain when necessary'
To a few of the gentlemen who support the paper in question
we beg to say, that we hold them as their.townsmen generally
do, in profound respect; but these personal invectives, uncon_
nected as they are with politics, or public men, or even known
men, are unworthy of their bearing in society, and must do in-
jury to any journal.