Richmond semi-weekly times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 184?-1853, 1851-02-04

-, IMPORTANT DEcIsIoN.-In the case of Thompson and
Forman vs. the Collector of the port of Boston, the
U: ): Supreme Court has decided most important
principle in regard to The collection of dut under the
present tariff The decision is, that the ad valorem
duty upon goods to be calculated at the time of
purchase or procurement, and not as under Mr.. Wall
shipment.
The effect OF the decision can hardly he estim atee
but thereis little reason to hope that it will very
materially reduce the revenue from Imports In the
particular decided which was that of an mporta-
ton OF rail road iron into Boston, for the Flichburg
Kali Road it in evidence that the iron was ready
lor shipment IN w ales on the oath Of January, l849
that the vessel which brought it chartered on that
day, and that the vessel sailed the "a of February
1919. The invoice fixed the value of the iron at Is
per ton, and was made and authenticated in the form
prescribed by law. On the arrival ofthe vessel in Bos
ton the iron was entered and the duties paid according
to the invoice. Before the iron removed however
the Appraisers the Custom House. acting under the
general orders OF the Treasury Department, appraised
1t at To per ton, taking the date of the actual sailing
OF the vessel instead OF the date OF the procurement Of
the iron as the time with reference to which s value
should be liked the price of the material having ad-
vanced about I'll per ton, between these dates.
From this decision, the British manufacturers appeal
ed, and according to the two merchant appraisers
were appointed by the Collector ma Ike valuation
Inc Merchant appraisers tone having been removed by
the Collector hrst and another appointed for
ted valued the iron at is l5s, taking in obedience to
Treasury instructions, the 24h Feb. as the time with
reference to which the valuations should be made The
OoiieS'S'
amount which had been added 10 the invoice and also
penalty OF 20 per cent the appraised value TWAS
in proof also that only of he appraisers and only
one OF the merchants who acted such ever saw the
iron although they each took OATH in the language
OF the law, diligently and faithfully examine and H.
spect the goods, &c.
Judge Woodbury., before whom the case was tried in
Boston, and whose decision is confirmed by the Supreme
Court ,-charged;-
lst That the date of the procurement of the iron in
Wales VIZ the 24th Of January, the time atwhct
the Appraisers should have fixed the value OF the iron
and not the date of invoice or bill OF ladng viz: the
24th OF February, when MATERIAL different. (The in
voice OF the iron was "a ,720 Os. lod, the Appraiser
made its value f5 ,42s 0s. Ildthe iron having riser
so much in 80 days.)
3D. That both appraisers in each of appraisers die
not make some personal examination of the iron the
report or decision was not made in conformity Of law
and did not justify the penalty.
Sd That the valuation Of the merchant appraiser:
was invalid, because one Of the merchants who mad.
the appraisal, wrongully substituted for another
wit the merchant appriser, who turned out of Of
tce, attempted to be, without any legal authority to
do it on the facts OF the case
Damages were awarded to the amount of S569l
90 cts)
The effect of this decision is overthrow the whole
series OF Treasury circulars issued by Mr.. Walker ate
the enactment OF the Tariff of lS46, and to make the
value OF goods very unequal, and course the duties
unequal.-B0h. Sun.