The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-05-26


This action TO recover back an extra charge Of
duty with penalty, upon an importation Of barwood
and palm oil made by tho plaintiff in the bark Chan
cer from tho west coast of Africa In the onth Of
March, 1S49. at time when Mr. Lawrence was Colec or
OF this port The cargo obtained by barter with tho
natives and the master had not therefore any invoice
upon his arrival in New York. He made one him SELF
however after his return home which received by
the officers OF the customs, from the necessity Of tho
and an entry of the cargo permitted without any
compliance with the second section Of the March,
1873 The Deputy Appraiser Mr. Phillips, upon
Of tho invoice and from his knowledge Of the articles
imported added to their invoced value 35I dollars on
the barwood, and 200 dollars ON tho palm oil and.
thoe sums increased the value Of the invoice than
per oen the penalty Of twenty per cont added
and exaoted, together with the regular duty the
increased value the two sums principal and interest
amounting to p2s dollars and sixty. eight cents
Upon the trial Of tho cause Mr. Phillips tho Deputy
Appraiser called az witnesses by the plaintiff, and
lao testified that he himself added the values to
the invoice without instructions from Mr. Lawrence the
Collector that he (Mr P) then sent 1t to the regular
appraisers two OF whom gave II their sanction, by
dorDg their initials upon IL and in this condition. and
thus perfected 1t was returned to the Collector and in
his Office the duties assessed and the penalty i'm
posed Being asked by the plaintiffs counsel why he in
creaed the invoice value of the barwood and palm OIL
he answered that he did not consider tho invoice
hbtng the fair market value Of those articles at the
principal kets upon the west coast Of Africa and that
he increased the values In obedience to the urements
Of law In order to bring them up to the usual standard
The District Attorney in his defence relied upon the
apprasmen conclusive evidence Of value under the
acts Of lS46 and 1872 but Mr. Ely, for the plaintiff,
commenced tnat the appra5ement was VOID, lrrcgu
ary and that therefore tho invoice exhibited the only
value upon which the duty could be lawfully assessed
That Deputy Appraiser has no authority for making
spprisement In any case and that in this instance the
principal appraisers merely adopted tho appraisement
made by Mr. Phillips the deputy and that too without
any personal examination of any kind by the principal
appraisers who relied exclusively upon the accuracy Of
the deputy's Judgment These points having been ar
gued and the various acts of Congress applicable to the
subject referred to by the counsel his Honor Judge
Belts ruled that the apprasement in this case ir
regular ana wholly void and that Mr. Lawrence was not
justified In increasing the value Of the invoice, adding
the penalty to the duties That the Supreme Court of
the United States had decided in the Of Thompson
Greeley, doth Towards Rep 1851 that tho prin-
cpal appraisers must act in person and upon their
inspection In every case and cannot adopt the oert
cate Of deputy whether accurate not their own,
without violation of duty and hence, that any appraise
ment made In this form must be imperative and void
In this the Judge held that there must be verdict
for the plaintiff to the full extent of his demand He
added to his remarks Also that under the present
quirements Of the law, expounded by the Supreme
Court would be generally impossible to the du
ties in this port in any except by the invoices
But this matter he said the Courts had power
and fthere evil in the way Congress alone could
it, The District Attorney excepted to the ruling
OF the Judge stating that he would bring the for
reverse upon bill Of exceptions. Verdict for the plain
tG, $pS2 SO.