Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1846-08-01


faithfully copied from English statutes. tyranncal
code OF laws than those which existed in this country in ela-
uon to the cusombouse, he believed had been
ed The law and oppressive against Import
es Believing that the fate of the bill great measure
pended upon keeping precisely was, he utterly OPP
posed TO all amendments
Mr.. PENNYBACKER differed with the Senator from
Massachusetts particular If the Senator would take
the trouble to examine the English relation the
pms he would find that the forfeiture of all the goods took
place only where the importer had falsely the
haton
Mr.. WEBSTER. Will the honorable Senator allow me
% ask him WHETHER if certain offence were described and
an act passed imposing certain penalty whether by forfeit
ure otherwise and another passed purporng
cover the whole ground, and enacng penalty either il,
by pecunary muct the first act was not abro-
gated by the latter :
Mr.. PENNYBACKER. This section enacts penalty
against the who attempts os upon the
false invoice It does not propose to declare it criminal
offence The construction given to by the Senator from
Massachusetts il not the proper one.
Mr.. WEBSTER ask the Senator to read the last part
Of the seventeenth section Of the existing law. He will find
that the offence is there provided for.
Mr.. PENNYBACKER read the clause, and continued TO
contend that the Senator from Massachusetts, had not given
the proper construction.
Mr.. JOHNSON, Of Maryland, said that, whatever doubt
there might have been asto the purposes Of this law he thought
was apparent now that it had been submitted precisely in
the form In which il intended that il should be for he
took for granted that the chairman of the Committee FL
nance understood the purposes of those who prepared the BILL
proposed amendment according to the honorable Senator
from North Carona, to get rid of the yrannca provisions
be found in the whole system of the laws But he
quite that the honorable Senator had
the paseoogy of the section because he thought
able Senator would be the last in the Senate say that
there any thing tyranncal declaring that no frauds
should be committed upon the of the United States
The into which the Senator had fallen supposng
that there analogy between this clause and the pro-
visions Of the act Of Sd and 4h William 9Th He was sure
the honorable chairman that this clause had nothing
to do with false valuation.
Mr.. BENTON. did not wish to upon any clause
OF amendment to this BILL intend TO for the sin
gle ground of overurnng the act of 1872 did wish
into the business of amendment Amendment implies the
exercise OF Judgment consideration and deliberations and the
time and circumstances do not admit Of these requisites to e
glslation hope there will be motions amend
but this motion being made, forced to upon IT, and
must give my for the vote. The motion to strike
out the sections which authorize the Government constitute
itself the purchaser of the importation This is not
question to is not the first time have thought talk
ed about it, At least six months ago. a with
the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means Of the
House Of Representatives, (Mr Mckay mentioned the
British practice OF taking the Importation at the invoice price
as objection to the ad vaorem system objected to the
system, and mentioned this identical practice Of the British
Government incident of the system, and suit
able to the genius of Government perhaps consistent
with constitution. In Great Britain it found, upon
experience that ad vaorems the limited
used, subject to Fraud and frauds which could
be proved that it necessary have recourse addition
all other penalties to the extraordinary remedy Of
the Government into merchant and taking the goods
its own account
But in the OF fragrant raudof proveae
aud-bu in equvocal where fraud could be
established in court of justice In that case the Govern
ment shutting its eyes upon the fraud but willing deprive
the fraudulent importer of his undue gains, treats him
honest man-akes his goods at his prce-and allows
him the usual mercantile profit of ten per This is fair
and ntelighe and act evidently intended to be
copied from it, 1t evidently intended to make the Ame
act confomabe to the British act but with total mis-
conception of the British Our bill differs from the British
in being applicable fraudulent instead of innocent mporta-
tons and differs from in not giving the importer his fair
mercantile profit In this bill is contradictory and ncom-
pehensbe. The British take the goods and pay the price,
and add ten yer cent profit the ground Of innocent
differentiation in the Of fraudulent importation the
importer punished by the loss of his goods and other penal
and this has been the from the time of the patrarch
the present day. Fraud before rewarded
by this BILL undertake to say is the first bill which
wards fraud which has been in the annals Of human le
gsaton The section in bill, therefore, differs from tbs
British in the great feature Of application fraudulent impor
taons il also differs from IT in the Of per cenun
allowed to the importer The British allows per cent
because that is the usual English profit fair Importation
They therefore take the importers goods at his price
and at the established profit That treating him fa
merchant and carrying out the idea Of the But
allows only five cent and that not only different from the
British act but from the Of il, and in fact is founded
in Five per cent is not mercantile profit bu
about twelve and half IT. therefore, the importation con
sdered fair in Great Britain, the usual profit in addition
the price. should be paid But bill goes upon idea
fraud II is for intention defraud that the goods may be
taken for Government And now, upon what principle
five per cent any per cent? be given fraud By
all cusomhouse awsby the laws Of the world from thu
time Of the patarchs TO the present dayhaud crime pun
ishabe by fines and orfeitures by human legislation
fraud before rewarded This bill gives back the whole
Of the fraud and then gives Ave per profit
that amount This is incompfehensble -inconsequenta
preposerous only result from copying the substance
of the British act without understanding and then, think
ing ten per cent rather high premium fraud, bill
duces TO FIVE Why, sir in the of fraud the British
system oe the whole importation and that is reasonable
and have acts always DONE Our laws always forfeit
| for fraud, but this rewards
And upon what principle bill propose Civ,
five per cent Only upon the principle Of homes
importation any thing be allowed and then il should b,
the usual profit, in Great Britain But profit, five
per cent is a robbery of the merchant il defrauds him
and half per cent As fraudulent Importation,
the bill declares it to be, il is premium fraud is ar
encouragement to crime 1t is vice and folly in legislation
Of which there is example the annals Of human lega
ton. But IL il copy Of the British act, should still
| he opposed to IT, The British Parliament do what
cannot il is omnpotent-we limited II may take th
subjects property in what peases, and pay him 70
it, 60 upon the ground Of paying his price and profits
We only take the citizens property in specified case
that of its necessity the public service piece Of groun
for fort We then take the property and make compensation
But this is not of that kind. This is dry goods
and grocery business not to the existence of the Gov
eIhment but make money We take the goods 10 sci
them, pocketng the profits above five per cent Have w
any such power IF merchant has made good impora
ton haye right take il from him, under the plea tina
he purchased top cheap, and sell his good bargain for GU
own profit know Of such power; and If we had il,
should he against its unsuitable 10 Govern