The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-10-07
TIL E REP U BLIC.
WASHIN GTON:
MONDAY MORNING, OCTOBER I, 1850.

MONDAY MORNING, OCTOBER 7, 1850.
The New York Journal of Commerce recent
" published, for the entertainment of its Free
trade patrons, a gross attack upon Mr.. Secreta-
ry CoRwIs, called forth by the very admirable
letter Of the Secretary in reply to the resolution
of the Senate respecting alleged frauds upon
the revenue. We pass over the offensive per-
sonalities of the article without comment, to get
at the substantial allegations.
The Journal quotes the following paragraphs
from Mr.. CoRwIN's letter:
"Without extending this communication to
unreasonable length, the answer to the inquiry con-
tanned in the resolution of the Senate, 'what has
been the result of the measures adopted to prevent
these fraudsl' may be briefly stated
"All the frauds which can be perpetrated by
double invoices and false valuations continue with
out abatement. Honest merchants and fair traders
have been driven from the business of importing
foreign merchandise, being unable to compete with
the dishonest practices that prevail and which our
present system favors.
s''The business Of importing merchandise has
| fallen rapidly and permanently into the hands of
| foreign manufacturers and merchants, and our
own citizens deprived Of lucrative employ
ment in consequence of these systematic frauds"
The Journal alleges that the assertions in the
last paragraph are entirely erroneous, and that
there has been an increase of five TO one in the
importations on American over foreign account,
during the very period selected by the Secre-
tary for the comparison; and that official re-
turns fully verifying this fact were on file in
the Treasury Department at the time the above
was written. With regard TO the journals
private griefs in not having its letters to the
Secretary answered as promptly as II desired,
we suppose any one will acquiesce in the
propriety Of giving precedence to the official
calls of the two Houses Of Congress over those
Of any private individual, however respect
able or eminent 1t probably never occur
red to the Secretary that the object of the
call from the journal was to enlighten Con
gress on the subject, as the columns Of
New York newspaper form very imperfect
channel Of communication between the Treasu-
ry and that body We have no doubt that the
Secretary will, in due season, give all the at
tention TO the Journals communications that
they may deserve. Meanwhile, for the pnr-
pose 81 enabling our readers TO Judge of the
value Of the arguments Of the men who desire
70 pTOllluAt bIt FAUST vi iltfhOii VI tiaht y "a
erting themselves for the maintenance Of the
monopoly system Of Great Britain, We state
the following facts:
First The custom house does not and cannot
discriminate between merchandise imported by
foreign agent and an American citizen, native
or naturalized.
Second. 1t can and does discriminate be
tween merchandise whose invoices state that it
is for foreign account and those which do not,
and none other.
Third. The transfer Of the whole importing
business Of New York TO foreign agents would
make no change in the amount returned as i'm
ported for foreign account, unless the invoices
stated distinctly that such was the case.
Fourth. The returns now published by the
Journal are evidence of nothing except that
there has been large increase in the proper
ton Of merchandise, the invoices Of which bore
on the face Of them that they were shipped for
account OF foreigners.
We now ask the Journal to furnish us with
replies TO the following questions:
First. Does it not knOe that the old estab
lished houses, and the American houses gener-
ally, are being driven from the business Of i'm
portation7
Second. Does il not kno,c that that business
is passing rapidly and permanently into the
hands Of foreign agents, the "unprincipled adj
venturers" above referred to 2
Third Does il not kno,c that the merchan-
disc imported by those "unprincipled adventu-
rers" is returned as being on American ac-
count, except when the contrary is distinctly
specified on the face Of the invoice
Fourth. Does it not kJ1orc that the returns it
has published furnish no key to the truth
Fifth Does it not kno,o that the publication
Of the statements which it calls for would an
swer no purpose but to enable it TO state as facts
what are not facts---to wit; that all the immense
importations made by theforeign agents by whom
it is surrounded, and by whose patronage 1t Is
sustained, had been made for American account
S,gh. Does it not believe that if the ques-
ton were submitted 10 the honest importers Of