Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1851-02-11

ration as between port and port.
And here, Dir. President, let say, and think should
saw Justice To The character Of merchants in Justice
10 this law 1885, that think great msapprehen sion exists
in relation The frauds which said be committed on
the revenue by false invoices believe they have been
greatly exaggerated not by design but by mistake When
10 look the statistics of the case and the very
facts upon which The Secretary of the Treasury relies 10
draw the conclusion OF fraud when we look al the nature
OF our system OF appraisements would impos
sbc that there could have been this large amount Of frauds
from false invoices and undcrvanaons In the first place.
let us look to our system and what penalties lie encoun.
ters and how difficult it is for the merchant to deceive TO
any very great He has his invoices and
If evidence is produced of false invoice not only is he
deemed guilty Of perjury but he loses the goods and az the
officers share of the forfeiture they will be constantly
the alert 10 detect every attempt fraud In the second
place. these appraisers examine the Invoices and they
pare the invoice price with The foreign price the ports
from which the goods come and if they frd the foreign
price more than ten per cent above the import price the
merchant importing them foreits twenty per addi-
ton 10 the duty which he will have 70 pay But this is NOT
ALL The collector If he suspects that the individual is act
ing irauduenty levy the duty In kind that is if
twenty per cent. duty, he may take Of every
hundred packages and sell them for the benefit Of the Gov
eminent.
When look the history Of our legislation We see con-
elusive evidence that The of apprusemen eas been
improving and increasing in efficiency We of the
strongest ana ndputabe marks Of the greater accura
~ which experience has given methods of apprase
nen Under the act of 1923 II provided that if the differ.
ence between the appraised value and the invoice price
more than twenty-five per cent? the importer should forfeit
fifty per cent Ii at that day supposed that the die
renee between The appraised value and the invoice price
twenty-five per there clear evidence fraud But
within that the law presumed he might beinnocent In
li2 this limit was reduced perhaps 1t reduced sooner
uut DO not now recoect any earlier provision this eec
and difference of more than ten cent considered
evidence oil fraud This shows the degree of
which the appraisers had acquired from long habit ex
peence shows The approach perfection of the
system il shows how small margin is left for in this
respect and how small Is the inducemen fraud since the
probable gain generally be only little than twenty
per upon ten per cent of The real value OF the
uOO 10 foh al.
the invoices which under per
situc moro than three times as many all the others in
New York when put together Under these circumstances
Them 1t would be unreasonable suppose there could
be great many Of these frauds committed.
Let take the table which the Secretary of the Treasury
himself has given us, In which there is list Of invoices
marked up it is technically called. He has given us
list of the invoices marked up with the OF the advances
made The advances under ten per cent constitute by fur
the larger amount. The total OF advances New
York and Boston under ten per cent 80 49, while those
above that rate amounted only $685. the invoices
ceedng ten per than three times many as
those beyond that proportion.
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 no has reason TO be-
eve he bought his goods al than ten per below
the market value 10 mark his goods to that value for
purpose of avoiding the forfeiture The law does pre-
sumo such to be fraud II it did il would give
that permission Indeed, that provision of the of 1916
arose out OF the fact that much experience had shown
necessity, in order 10 protect sometimes honest importer
from an undeserved penalty Before that the merchant
if he were honest had TO produce his invoice and if that
showed that he bought his goods often happened
than ten per cent below the appraised value be incurred
forfeiture This occurred often that the Secretary fire.
quenty had remit the forfeiture under power vested
him by the act OF May $780, it's being proved that there
design deceive. Now the Secretary doos tell
how many of these In the table which refer
red where goods marked by the importer
himself does he show how many the appraisers adya-
But take it either way suppose they marked up by
the appraisers does il show the saqacy the ulerness
n tfcara Harba shat
duty in relation TO these matters? When the
great majority of in which the advances
han ten per cent we cannot avoid the conclusion that
very difficult 10 deceive officers and that their scrutiny
close and detect any small differences
between the invoice and market price. take hen Mr. Pre-
deni this very table 10 prove the sagacy, energy and
dey with which our officers discharge their duties and dc
eci error or fraud.
Blu, the Secretary also furnishes US with abe of wines
md Spirits which he shows the average price of wines
Ind spirits imported under specific duties and the average
orice of the same articles under ad vaorem duties. From
Ibis appears that tho value of the wine imported
much higher under the system of specific duties than
under that OF nd vaorems But that not prove
aGd II precisely what the friends Of the nd vaorem
system predicted would take place 1t proves that under
Inc system OF high specific duties the consumption the
article s confined 10 the weaher classes and the higher
priced varieties while under the ad vaorem the poorer and
more numerous classes rnabod to consume much Larger
amounts OF the cheaper kinds of the article Let US
lake tho article OF Madeira wine for example, which figures
50 largely in this table On this the specific duty was 60
cents the average price under that specific duty the nine
months ending June 80 1919 50 % per gallon; for the
s..
had been done away withand nd vorem of 10
substituted The price reduced 1t end.
June go Si5 II and for The year ending June 80
1872 45 cents; and for the 1880 81 gallon
We thus see that under The high specific duty the rich
who consumed wines at 50 29 per gallon did pay even
80 OF al vaorem but under that system the
AZ per gallon would have been taxed than l0U
per and thus placed beyond the reach Of the
nerous and poorer classes. But under nd vaorem
high 40 per cent this article placed within the
Of the poorer consumers and the Itself
thus greay increased This fact hen much relied upon
evidence of fraud s rather proof of the forer
ton OF the od vaoem SYSTEM not only for the of
but also in the distribution of personal and ndiyid
ual comfort
This relative operation of the system. of specific and ad
and this difference has been used heretofore argument
favor of the latter mode OF raising This subject
too has been discussed in countries than Ii You
takc up almost any modern book the English system
finance you will find they discuss the operation Of the high
specific duty upon French wine in diminishing the revenue
and excluding the poorer classes from the enjoyment Of
innocent article of consumption Such is
nent of Mr. Porter in favor of lower duties. He says hc
consumption then would be much increased and great ad
on would he made TO the innocent enjoyments Of the
people,
proving the part Of the importer Is be taken
he as evidence the Improvement in the operation Of our
revenue laws under the ad vaorem SYSTEM
But there is test OF the accuracy of nppraaements
which, in my opinion Is more certain still thun any yet
erred The Secretary OF the Treasury has given
BILE of imports and exports for period OF years
and nine months from 1921 1850 Ii you take the sum of
brought in and deduct from ia the of the domestic
exports from this country and the exports of specie DIFF
ference between the will represent The share of the pro-
on export trade and the freight which
receive say This OF imports represents these
mens because imports valued In the foreign market
Now il take periods of ,ie and show that this
OF imports exports greater at period than
ther greater under tariff than under another shows
one OF thngsether that share of the eghts and
profits upon exports greater when the of imports
was rencst else that the imports more fairly ap-
praised estimated nearly according to their true
value during that period say nearly according
their value because there is danger error
over valuation That such must indicate one Of
these two is be doubted unless sup
pose what is known be SO, that in addition other
things We had imported securities abroad which,
appearing the cusomhouse books, rendered II Impossible
10 institute q comparison between the imports of different
periods.
Now sir have taken the trouble of going into this cacu
aon for the purpose OF seeing how il works find that
calculating upon this principle table at end ospeech
period of twenty nine years and nine months, share OF
the profits upon the export trpde together with share OF
the ireghs amount to about $40 per cent? but find this
does not represent whole of those profits when
10 look little closely INFO the statistics of the period
During these twenty years large amount OF gold was
produced in this country and during na period there was
steady OF specie setting in 10 our shoeso in
othar of the Importation of specie