Weekly national intelligencer., 1851-02-08

F gaasiipG aiI y3 3IsAgEa51!a iaaaial3y6s3 -
dionsl smendmsD necessary 10 the bill which hss beso Re
ported BY the COMMITTEES Finance. The Supreme Oeur
have decided that is the duty Of the appraisers hsmselye
examine and sPprsse goods and personally inspect them
the present corps Of officers that the goods can be APPRAISED
and inspected with sufficient dispatch for the porpose Of com
According the present practices and according to
the unbroken usage, understand. of the Department for
time past (ever since the of May 80 1907 the
appraisers appoint clerks called who are
skilled in the examination Of particular articles One era
mines silks, smother cottons smother woolens &c.. and
when this examination s brought in, the appraisers certify
y ana ns. me certleste Of spPaisement which has
been heretofore taken evidence of the value, and which
the amendment now proposed will deem to be sufficient Is
any thing to Be gained BY requiring the appraisers personally
to inspect the goods Nothing that If the ap-
paser were inspect oil the goods personally, ID impos-
sbe that hs opinion could be so reliable as that Of the exa
miners amongst whom these duties are pacelled out on
account OF their special skill and knowledge Of the subject
snow the necessity Of such amendment that which
speak, may refer to Judge Woodbury. himself who dev-
cred the opinion Of the Supreme Court in Greey ps hemp
and Forman, and who having been himse an eminent
head OF the Treasury Department was familiar with the
working OF our revenue system. He said -e
should Sc sBad Il aute 90 no.
in person should be dispensed with an act Of
It would be much better It seems 10 me- to dispense ub
these duties By an act Of Congress- will be proposed by
%
the number of officers. So much for that portion Of the
amendment which relates the which the foreign
valuation is to be taken.
There IS snoihs, section which provides for the appoint
ment Of four appraisers at large 1t is provided that this
board Of appraisers at large shall such duties Of ap
praisement as the Secretary of The Treasury may direct II
Is also provided that Of them may 60 such port as the
Secretary Of The Treasury designate, and there con-
'sspS ss Ct sssb ass these .s,
differed me collector was to decide For the purpose Of
giving uniformity TO the system between port and po and
for the purpose correcting frauds from false invoices ana
under valuaons j. believed that change to this extent in
he system q spPal.snsn ril operate most bens6cis
and give uniformity 10 operaon as between port and port
And here, Mr. President let say, and thick should
say in justice to the character of merchants in justice
to this law Of ls46. that think great MISREPRESENTATION
in relation to the frauds which said to be committed on
the revenue by false invoices. believe they have been
greatly exaggerated BY design, but by mistake When
to look at the statistics Of the case and the very facts
upon which the Secretary Of the Treasury relies draw the
conclusion of fraud when look the of our sys-
tenn OF appaisemens it would to be impossible that
there could have been this large amount Of frauds from false
invoices and undevauations In the first place. let look
to system and what penalties he encounters and
how difficult 1t is for the merchant deceive TO any
very great extent He has to swear to his invoices,
and evidence produced Of false invoice, only is
he deemed guilty Of perjury, but he loses the goods;
and the officers share pa Of the forfeiture thew will be
constantly the alert detect every attempt at fraud
In the second place. these appraisers examine the invoices
and they compare the invoice price with the foreign pcs
the ports from which the goods come and if they find the
reign price more than ten per cent above the import price,
the merchant importing them fots twenty per cent add
ton to the duty which be will have pay But this is not
all The collector, he suspects that the individual is
ing audulently may levy the duty in kind that s if Il is
twenty per duty be may take twenty Of every
hundred packages and sell them for the benefit Of the Gov
ernment. s f
When we look the history legislation we see con-
elusive evidence that the system Of sppasemen has been
improving and increasing in efficiency We some Of the
strongest and ndspuabe marks Of the greater accuracy
which experen5 has given to methods Of aPpsisemen
Under the act Of 1928 was provided that if the difference
between he appraised value and the invoice price
than twenty Eve per cent the importer should forfeit fy per
1t that day supposed that If the difference be-
tween the appraised value aad the invoice price wss twenty
five per cent there clear evidence of fraud But within
that the law presumed be might be nnoc mt In 1912
this limit reduced (pehaps i reduced but
do not now eccect any earlier provision to this effect and
difference OF more than ten per cent considered ev
dence Of aud This shows the greater degree Of accuracy
which the appraisers had acquired from long habit and e1pe-
shows the greater spproach perfection of the ys-
tenn; shows how small margin is left for 10 this
spec and how small is the nducement fraud the
probable gain generally be only little than twenty
per cent upon less than per Of the real value Of the
goods Indeed, according Mr. Corwns table, the ad
the invoices which were under per
New York when put together Under these circumstances
them say would be unreasonable 10 suppose there could
be great many Of these frauds committed 5&
Let us take the table which the Secretary of the Treasury
himself has given u.s. in which there is list Of invoices
tmarked UP, il technically called He has given
list Of the invoices marked up with the Of the advances
made The advances under per cent constitute by far
the larger amount The total amount Of advances al New
York and Boston under per cent 073 while those
above that rate amounted only 1895, The
ceeding ten per cent than three times many
those beyond that proportion, III ns,ti+i a a4f 4a u8
But the Secretary has not Disseminated in this table be-
tween those invoices which marked up by merchants
and those which were advanced by the appraisers.
The act Of 1916 allows merchant If be has to be-
eye he bought his goods at than per below
the market vaoe to mark bis goods up to that vane for the
purpose Of avoiding the foreure The law does not pre-
sumo such an act to be fraud If i did j. would not give that
permission Indeed that provision Of the act Of ls46 arose
out of the fact thai much experiences had shown its necessity
in order to protect sonemes honest importer from an un
deserved penay that act The merchants he ware
honest had produce hs invoice and that showed that be
bought his good often happened more than ten per cent
below the sppased value, be incurred Forfeiture This
CURED often that tbeSecrstsy frequently had to remit the
forfeiture under vested in him by the act Of May,
$780, lis being proved that there design to deceive
Now. the Secretary does not tell how many Of hese
were ked up by the importer himself does he show
how mpny The sPpraissrs sdyanced.
But take either way; suppose they marked up by
The sptaiser does il not show the sagacy the slerness
and fidelity with which our public officers discharge their duty
in relation these ma,srsl When the great
msoy of in which the advances were lees than ten
per cent we cannot avoid the conclusion that il 10 very diff
cult to deceive our officers and that their scrutiny close
datect