The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-09-04

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD.
In your issue Of Tuesday last, in your police intel
igence an article appeared hea led "Impositons on
Immigrants" which article tends to hold US up to
publ, Reproduction and Is calculated to inure us in
our business. The article, so far as we are person
ally concerned Is untrue, and as far a. in US lay
we have remedied the wrong done, not by us, or
through our orders, but by person in our employ.
ment We have, therefore, to request You will at
ford us an opportunity in your journal for its con-
tradlction.
The facts are briefly as follows The luggage
of the immigrants was brought at their own request
to the depot on Friday night and IS so paid to the
cartman who had been employed. The next morn.
ing the immigrants came for their luggage and saw
the depot watchman, who, Of his own authority,
demanded fifty cents for each box, ia number
twenty four, and refused to deliver them up without
bis demand being satisfied. This was an unau-
thorised act on his part, and for which he was dis
missed from our employment.
withOu! coming to our Office to complain
of the conduct Of our servant, the men went to the
office Of the Mayor and lodged their complaint,
where statement, puIporting to be theirs was
speak Englsh,) and was sworn to-; but which does
in no way implicate the firm, but charges that the
act in question was that of clerk in our employ
ment, and which, by your reporter, is charged as
ouI aCt, Implying was ooLo w ouA ousuVAAy -,
The first intimation we received was by the
atteI dance at our office of an officer from the
May or's Office, where we Immediately pronounced
the demand as unauthorized and an imposition, and
directed that the luggage should be given up to the
immigrants upon the payment OF the money paid
OUTS so.
At the depot, the CLAIMS 50-was resisted by
the immigrants, and consequently the pers1n in
charge refuses to deliver the luggage. The demand
was satisfied by one of the cartmen, aud the lug
gage removed but too late to start by the train on
that night. The immigrants then refused to pay the
cartman the money he had paid, and the luggage
was detained by him.
On Monday the matter was again taken to the
Office of the Mayor and heard before the First Mar
shall, Mr.. Stephens. Mr. Loescher was also in at.
tendance, when on its being made to appear that
the whole of the proceeding arose. in the first place,
from the unauthorized conduct of the Waterman In
our employment, the suggestion made by Mr..
Stephens that the men ought to be unidentified for
their loss of time, was acceded to by him MIR. L.)
who considered, in common Justice, the firm were
responsible for the acts of their employees, and that
some repsraton was due to the compliments
The complainant was never taken before the
Mayor nor was he consulted or had one word to say
on the matter nor was he present during any part
of the investigation.
This is plain statement of the affair. If we had
done the acts charged upon us we were then proper
objects Of public Indignation but to be accused as
we are, wrOngfully, is wrong and injustice done
to us. Our POLICY has ever been to afford every
facility to immigrants, and as far as lay in our
power to shield them from oppression. Trusting
you will do US tho Justice we claim, we are. &C.,
RIsCHMuLLER & LoEsCHER,
NEW YORK, Aug. 81, 1854. 70 Greenwich st.