The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-07-13

cost and duties equal to slls-sl 90, gain on which
Supposed cost, 500; duties 20 per cent, arc $50;
cost and duties equal 10 $500 At under valuation OF
10 per cent is $50; duties 60 per cent on which Is
slS;cost and duues equal to sli6-s2 w, or gain
on which is | TO 100 per cent
Supposed cost, 500; regular duties are sSOj cost
and duties equal TO $3.50 Under valuation at Is per
cent, $751; duties on which sl7 cost and dunes
equal to Sll7-S3 90, gain on which Is 2oo-loo
per cent.
Supposed cost, 800; regular duty is s2O cost
and duties sl20 Under valuation at 20 per cent? soO;
duty on which is sl6 cost and duties sll6-s4 90,
gain on which is SAL 100 per cent.
Supposed cost, 500; regular duty is $50; cost
and duty $500 Under valuation rs per cent, SIS;
duty on which is SIS; cost and duty, sll5-s5 OO,
gain on which is 35-l00 per cent
Supposed cost, 500; duty on which 10 s2O cost
and duty sl20 Under yalustion at 80 per cent s70i
duty on which is sl4; cost and duty, sll4-S6 10,
gain on which is 5.26-l00 per cent.
Now | take il that before any sensible trader
would make out false invoice, he would pause, No
man IN his sober would incur such risk Tor
such paltry consideration. He would not attempt
TO undervaue article IN open market, the value OF
which would be so well known to an appraiser. IL
the dishonest trader, who would do such a thing,
should escape the State prison-f he should escape
the heavy forfeiture of the bill Of 1872 he would gain,
as shown by the statement the highest underyalu-
alton, but four 1--WE per cent say, therefore, that
there is no adequate motive for such fraudulent
invoices. Nor do believe that such are ever made
might dwell longer this point, but suppose
enough has been said 10 show the futity OF the OBJ
lection. But suppose there was an adequate motive
on the part Of the importer TO induce him 10 under
value his goods. Suppose he had the prospect OF
thus gaining something by succeeding. or, IN other
words, suppose that there a sufficient induce
ment IN the case; yet he would not succeed. why
Because, simply, the duties are declared not upon
his invoice, but upon the actual valuation. The du-
ties not founded on his invoice, though the law
requires him to make out an invoice yet the vauers
are not to determine by that invoice, but by many
invoices. The officers who value the goods are men
selected for their experienced judgment and knowl
edge OF the goods; who daily in the habit Of APP
praisng goods and in that way, and in consequences
Of constant association with commercial men, be-
come thoroughly acquainted with the actual market
value Of the goods arriving at the proper conclusion
as TO the price Of each article. The appraisement,
then, is not at all controlled influenced by the in
voice made out by the importer On the contrary the
valuation is made Of the goods in the foreign market;
and there is any made, il is more likely to be
in favor Of the government there is the strongest
nducement TO make the valuation over and above
the invoice. Now, l ask, Is II reasonable TO sup
pose that any three or four practical merchants OF
common intelligence and common honesty would
appraise goods ten days before establishing uni
subject, admit, to occasional variation in prices,
but in the main there is uniformity. Blu. the sp.
prasers would not be likely 10 value one set OF
goods at value to-day and at another value to-
morrow There will be Of necessity uniformity IN
their decisions; and If so, why fear the effect OF
under valuation Is that likely when it is the direct
interest Of every man in the custom-house to prove
that exporter has underyalued his goods and In
voiced them at too low price, But | 60 further.
| will show that so for from the importer having an
interest in undertaking his goods that he has a
direct interest the other waythat is to his advan-
tage to over-value his goods. Howl Why to avoid
the possibility Of mourning the heavy penalty OF the
law. | have already that he can gain nothing by
undertaking his goods by making out a false in
voice, as the appraisers regulated by rules
which he cannot control. If he swears to
a cost below the valuation Of the appraisers,
they at once declare that the goods are placed
by him below their value, &c, and forfeiture fol-
lows, and that without trial or jury. IL is sum
mary process. Very often an exporter would glad
ly give the value Of his goods. He is required to
give the cost and complies, protesting that 1t is not
the value-that il is above the value. But the ap.
praisers say that that is consideration to them;
they declare that he has forfeited under the law, and
he Is held to the forfeiture. hold in my hand a
statement from reliable source illustrative Of this
| case. In lS4l, Mr.. John A. Newboud, of New
| York, contracted with ronmonger of Blrming-
ham for certain kinds Of goods to be delivered IN
equal Quantities ior hve consecutive years, IN .ne
mean une IRON rose IN sa'ue SO n,sIn as ~ Iou'p1 M
INC lrononge' W rese 'ne p,''e ~ NE " a.
ms o'seL cus'ome.s ~ per GEM, s,. communal
.osehu mem 70 Mr. Newooulu aooIiu's eon-
tract me appraisers al .ne cussom.nouse, o1se NV
ing Ihe discrepancy oe,Ween the INVOICES y, n.,
Newpoulu anu ms heisnoois eN ,ness a ooun ~
unuer tne Jaw 70 no' Only the S sn uuey u'
the ouhers Pa,u' oo' aso s sne Penoy ~ :" Pei W.
required ny me &c. OF lofs. ihe Jaw anoweu az. ho
aiscreuon. Nooooy aouo.ea .ne enataoe. .. mI
transaellon, as W.T. NeWoou,a anev, anu oU'
as n'sh as any importer IN Ne~ DIN WI. t,'~
oouid was ooi'ged 70 give up ms gooa contract, as
was losing business urea' ulosrs VI iInpot ~
ers nave mus oeen oougeu 70 oiIer tneli o
invoced al hieher rates, 10 aVoie tne Penay. am
YET gentlemen tell us that the enect OF ms Jaw wiz
be 70 induce importers 10 unaerVa'ue thelr gooos'
ana mus Gneat .ne government OF 50 nuon le'ents
Mr.. WEBSTER. nope that the hohoraple
member VIII hand ms documents 70 tne cnair, OF
pat them IN such form that we can nave access 70
| them.
Mr. LEWIS. shan nave them Puolsned, sir.
| have thus SHOWN that Is privnege 70 alow
Generalization OF goods, NOT gwen oy me law o.
1912 but gwen by TINS phi; ana IN order tnat all