Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1840-05-15
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,,

The House resolved itself into Committee Of The
Whole. Mr. BELL in the chair and resumed the
consideration If the bill 10 ensure the more faithful exc
cu,ou Of the Jaws relating to the collection Of duties on
imports.
| The question pending when the committee rose on
Yesterday was on tn, motion Of Mr.. Curtis to strike
from the 9Th section Of the hl the words in said section
| III italics. an, ,,, ,
o'a.rS aoie ~" costs "t the commission to take
testimony That might be sued - tho mart NJ NM,
claimant to goods seized $50!
Ihe question was taken on TIE motion 10 S:.s, 49,,
Mr. Erif .RSs1TI moved amend tho -, section, by
t'e words IN italics in the clause "''o"' w;
/ can II, in the cyecu,;cn r,uch commission. II shall
appear that any witnesses called 10 testify before such
commissioners on the part SAID claimant or claimants
on his examination under such commission, shall have
refused rHfCHt Just TO produce any books,
counts paper writings, called for the part Of the
United States the testimony Of such witness wat
nesscs shall :.ot be read the trial Of the OF
| such seizure.
| MIR. FETRlklN wished 10 know who was 10 be the
| Judge oil what was lust cause.
Mr. EVERETT explained; after which the question
being taken on the amendment, 1t agreed TO-
Mr. EVERETT moved further 10 amend the >th sec.
ton b. inserting the words 'papcrs, which shall tr
called for on the part of the nicd States
Mcssrs. ADAMS, TlLLlNGlIAST CLIFFORD
and FILLMORE were Of opinion that the former
amendment jas, agreed TO- superseded the necessity OF
the latter
The question then being taken The amendment was
rejected.
And the .tl section Of the bill! having been then
read III the words following, to wit
Sec. 9. .lad be !. ftrikcr cnacftd That whenever
suit Shall be tried in any court the United States in
which IS involved any question of duties !mpor-
tatIonS OF goods wares, or merchandise, no person
having an interest in such question shall BE- competent
as witness on such trial, unless called 10 testify by
the adverse party.
Which said section tho an Manufactures
had heretofore moved to amend By striking ont all after
the word 'enactcd, and inserting the following:
"lhat whenever suit against any collector other
officer Of the customs for the seizure Of goods wares,
or merchandise unlawtully imported into the United
States or forfeited for the unlawful entry of the same,
shall be tried by any court Of the United States in
which suit IS involved any question of duties mpcr
tations OF goods, wares, or merchandise no person
having the same interest with that Of the party 10 the
suit in the question at issue shall be competent a
witness such trial. unless called to testify by the ad.
verse party.
Mr. ADAMS explained that the object oCtlic amend
ment was 10 prohibit in future, the practice of
porter underwater being permitted to testify the
trial "!amothcr. Mir \. SAID it usual for perhaps
tcr. twelve importers TO be sued once, and ycI
such the present practice, that each al
lowed to testify in the Of the other lie cited va
r Is legal authorities that this course was IN d.rcc,
violation Of the common law.
Mr.. A. said tlis section had been altered from that
proposed IN the draft by the Collectors Of the Customs
of New York and the District Attorney there 1t limit.
ed the rarla. II the law of evidence practscd
by the courts, "a much beyond the proposition con.
tanned in the Official bill This Of the features
Of the bill I" winch the gentleman from South Carolina
MIR Rhril had taken exception the other day: and
also I" winch he OR A. had anticipated there
might IL, ;uch oicction, nasmuch as il had some ten
dcncv f. ml, the competency Of witnesses the part
OF tic parties CHARGED. He would ask in the first place
that III" explanations c!thc collector in relation this
section might he read.
Mr. HOFFMAN had no doubt thai the Government
was dcrauded of millions of revenue by foreign I'M
porters lie argued that, however ANXIOUS he that
the Government should be protected against frauds
committed by this outward enemy, lie did not consider
that that enemy was powerful that they should do
away with the pr;nc pies of the common law 10 detect
and overthrow L. lie knew that il 10 the interest
Of the honest importer that bill in shape should
be passed but he concnded that by the section under
consideration its present shape the honest would
be- sacrificed to detect the dishonest 1t treated all
# they were dishonest, which he considered was wrong
IN principle. The powers given in tins section Ia the |
collector subvertcd in fact the trial by Jury lie wished
mat collector to be armed with ample power TO punish
dishonest importers, but opposed TO subpetlng the
Drinc'Pes OF the common law and do injustice thereby
o the innocent Ior The purpose OF detecting and punish
ny the guilty
Mr. PETRlk4N sad il mign, tc eht bv some,
because he did not come from district ia which ;.ere
seaport. tibet be should take part in tie dis
ussion the BILL but ne thought it the duty of Re-
resentativcs from all parts OF lie country to make an
fort to protect the revenues. This section, Of eli
TIERS was the more necessary and with which
atsre, He thought that it igh time that Con
ress should irssiae this subject, to prevent and
ut stop innovation ay HE JUDI cs and the courts
n the rights of the Government ana tie citizen, by
iyinp wrong construction to the laws. Speculation
as become now 50 universal even 10 corrupt The l