The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-01-24


whole to the consideration OF the bill Is I0s for the re-
lief OF James Dunning The bill provides Tor Inc pay
nent OF $253 9S IN full Tor interest due him from t6e
United States. No amendment being offered Il was re-
ported to the Senate and ordered TO be engrossed for
third reading.
| RNocH BALDWIN.
! The Senate then proceeded, as in committee Of the
whole 10 the consideration OF the bill Is COY for The re-
| lief OF Enoch Baldwin and others
Mr. HUNTER asked for the reading OF the report
The report was accordingly read.
have only snch knowledge OF as can gather from the
reading oil the report Il understand the report. il pro-
poses 10 relieve this individual account OF ignorance
| of the law.
Mr.. DAVIS. The senator from Virginia perhap. doe.
the United States and the West ndes befose the
arrangement of 1882 entered nto made depend
ent upon procamatons. Whenever the British govern
ment disposed to let in vessels OF the United States
to their West India colonies, they issued proclsmatons
sgnfying that purpose, and vessels went there When
the proclamaions were withdrawn that was the end Of
the trade, and carried through the northern
provinces--so crcuous route that IL could not advan
ageousy be carried This trade thrown open by
proclamation al the time referred 10 in this report This
vessel-the Despatch, a provincial vessel-belongng
| TO owners in New Brunswick, was al Tobago, in
the West Indies; and il understood there that
there no discriminating duties tonnage. these
duties existing because the reciprocal treaties had
not been adopted No discriminating duties Of tonnage
were claimed there BY reason Of the terms Of the English
the United States They thought it safe therefore. 10
take the cargo board which they proposed in the out
They to Boston with that cargo, and landed one
hundred puncheons of rum 1t was then understood in
Boston-just it in Tobagohat discriminating
duties were to De exaced II was so understood by the
British proclamation, and understood by the procama
ton of the President They therefore landed one hun
dred puncheons. The vessel then cleared nomnay for
Campo Belo but concluded TO enter the rest OF the
cargo at Lubec, in Maine. near Easport; She en-
tered there upon the LIST OF October, landed her
landing of portion of the cargo in Boston, and to the
landing of the other portion OF i in Lubec there was
ssusa here Tesng the 70 eaSs, dis
listed shows hat the common Interpretation thatthey
did understand the duties to be discriminating. Well,
sir these gentlemen had paid The discriminating duties of
tonnage mereylhe case relates nothing but tonnage
They entered evidently under Misrepresentation They
entered supposng that discriminating duties would not be
required They informed at the custom house.
With this state Of facts the duties were remed some
years ago to that portion of the cargo which was entered
at Boston. beevethat reported that bill myself and
that am, therefore, able to state the fact that the other
parties left out by mistake There were two
petitions, and the case was supposed to be covered;
whereas the parties at Lubec left out by mistake
The question. however was raised afterwards whether
they did not, in this case when they got to Boston, &C
tuay learn of the existence OF this circular Of the treas
ury, whether they did not know OF il at the time they
made the entry Lubec' II is satisfactorily proved that
they did not know Of the existence Of this circular
When they at Boston the collector did not know OF
it; did the collector Easpor when they arrived
there. and they had no knowledge Of themselves 1t
very clear, therefore, that they entered through mis-
take and misapprehenson and they probably would not
have entered in the United States if they had known that
they would have subjected themselves 10 these dscrim
mating duties of tonnage We now PROPOSE behalf of
the gentlemen at Lubec 10 restore 10 them the amount OF
discriminating duties upon tonnage which they paid into
the treasury some twenty years ago
MIR. HUNTER. Ii seems TO me that was right in my
supposon The ground for relief is that these parties
did mistake the law; and, proof of this natural
misapprehenson, the fact is adveed to that treasury
circular was issued in order TO explain the law, and
they were acting under mistake Now, sir, that treas
ury circular either expounded the law it was
it was not II il was mistake then these parties had
racOurse the If the rpa in
pursuance Of the law only proves that it the fact
that they had Inexperienced the law. II seems to
that this principle would extend much furhernot only
to mistakes in reference 10 tonnage duties, but in relation
to duties laid upon imports, and may have most import
ant and serious bearing upon the revenue OF the country
IL we extend the principle further IL seems 10 me TO rest
upon the same ground with every other loss 0ccasoned
by misapprehenson mistake in relation to the laws OF
the land and see for relieving in this case
which would not exist in relation TO duties upon articles
imported through Misrepresentation OF the laws imposing
duties upon imports Many such instances have arisen
where it necessary 10 explain the law by treasury
ciruar and, if 60 back relieve all such cases,
shall certainly expose the treasury TO great loss.
do nosee where 10 draw the line of distinction.
And not only that but IL seems TO me that is very old
case, and there must be difficulty in ascerainng tr
facts. II understand it correctly, il was about -
Mr. DAVIS. Somewhere theree.-"'s. 40 MOI 'e0o''
lect the date exactly. I, m,s, he a
Mr. HUNTER A.,a1', ,nss yea'' aaa am unwilling
10 pass me p mink the senator from Virginia fails
:. ~, :.o his view important part in this matter This
was trade dependent entirely upon proclamation II
existed by proclamation II was closed by proclamation.
II was irregular-anomaous in Ills character. That was
the nature OF our intercourse with the West Indies
Now sir, who is put the construction upon the effect
OF these proclamaons The owners OF this property did
not undertake TO do it, There was a construction put
upon in the island OF Tobago, which was that discnm-
mating duties not 10 be exaced That was the con-
sructon the houses here, by the officers oil the
government themselves recocct that this was the con-
sruc,ion put upon by the collector IN Boston was
the construction OF the collector at EasipoI and probably
Of every other collector in the country IL seems 10 me
very plain that the party was authorized 70 orng IN the
cargo under the circumstances when the action oil the
interpreted by its own ofcers, permitted H.
And it, while acting pursuance OF the construction pat
upon the proclamation of the government BY their own
officers he had been subjected 10 these discriminating du
ties they ought have been restored. The gentleman
says this is old claim believe is some eight or ten
years since the other part refunded am not certain,
but think it has been long as that This has been
hanging between the two houses since. believe
has passed the Senate repeatedly before think II has
also repeatedly passed the House OF Representatives but
whenever favorable consideration has been had in one
house has been delayed in the other should be sorry
10 have II rejected now
Mr. BRODHEAD. Will the senator allow me to ask
him how much the bill would be likely to require from
the treasury
| Mr. DAVIS. believe il is not far from thousand
dollars ], is nothing but the discriminating duties on
tonnage. -,
No amendment being made, the bill was reported to the
Senate and ordered 10 be engrossed for third reading
EDWARD EVERETT.
The Senate then proceeded, in committee OF the
whole 10 the consideration OF The bill (H r. 50) for the
relief of Edward Everett, late sergeant in the United
States army which had been reported from the COMMITTEES