Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-02-02
THE WAR ON THE INSPECTION LAWS.

w itl5 Tcpehl OF Inc tX
'sns lave, and also against the substitution of The
worthless, fraudulent, voluntary system of New
York sfor the old and valuable compulsory Pystem OF
this State. As this is somewhere about the fifth time
that tie enemies Of the present inspection system,
within the last ten years, have been Overwhelmingly
defeated We respectfully suggest the propriety oc
their gracefully yielding to ths well sscertained and
honestly represented wishes OF The farmers and cour.
Try milier6 of the State.
The only question, at this time, before the Lsgis
la!ure Of the sshtes: Importance, far the in.
spection laws concerned is the Bill which we ad.
vocated q few days since. 1t is, We humbly con.
ceve, The imperative duty of the Legislature to see
that the inspection laws are well and faithfully exc.
cuted, since those laws have been declared by so
many Legislatures essential TO the best interests of
the State. Unless the bill which we advocate is act.
cd upon, the enemies Of the inspection system in this
State will eudeavor indirectly TO accomplish wha,
they have 80 often failed in before the Legislature.
The amendment OF the existing statute which was
unanimously reported by the Committee on Agrcul.
ture, in the Senate, and by the Committee on Courts
of Justice in the House of Delegates, is as follows:
A BILL,
SO amending The 20h section Of the ssh chapter OF
The Code Of Virginia, more jnNy 10 define the dn
ties and rights Of Inspectors Of Flour.
|. Be II enacted by tie General assembly, That the
2Dth section Of chapter So of the Code OF Virginia be-
and the same is hereby amended aud re. enacted so
as to read as follows:
Sec ~. Every inspector by himself deputy shall
attend, hen required, at such time and place. with.
in his county or inspection district, the owner OF
any commodity OF which he is inspector may appoint,
and examine such commodity by boring through the
head, in Of barrel, hole not more than one
inch in diameter, and inserting auger tfier not
exceeding hve.elghhs of an inch in diameter in the
clear, and inserting the auger or trer not than
twice IN The same harre and weighing the barrel or
parcel, il he think proper.
THE tour-in Of the inspection of that com.
moditY-whch is extracted from the barrel, shall be
retained by the inspector as part of his compensa
lion."
Wehsve heretofore explained that this amendmen,
of the law in consequence of the enemies
OF the inspection laws having sued the inspectors fol
discbarging their duties and reservng compensation
which they have enjoyed from time immemorial
The objections to this amendment, which the friend,
Of the New York system Of inspection have made car
be easily answered. for the that there really ii
nothing in them.
The first is, that the proposed amendment authorize
tuc usc vi WHICH Detu u6r6
tofore used in this State in The inspection of flour
This s nottrue for the aager and instrument Of inspec
ton which have been used in this State for NOR
thsn half century, fully large If not larger thai
those which the amendment proposes. It has been il
evidence before more than one committee, that Ed
mund Walls for more than twenty yeard used an in
strumen for inspection Of the size in question: tha
oh Eny and tha fcr all
and that Mr.. Britain testified to the use of smila
instrument for nearly nineteen years. 1t is true tha
the law during portion of the time in question, pro
vided for the Of al auger not more than hall al
inch in diameter, but as it was found PHYSICAL,
impossible to inspect -four with an instrument whcl
could be used through so small an orfcs, the Law
was amended in lS49 and the words "or in SOM
other saLisyactory manner" added by tht
revisors and adopted by the Legislature. Ba
as the often defeated nlers have instituted a law
suit and harrassng the -four inspectors, in conss
quence of the alleged ambiguity OF the Code, the
amendment in question has become necessary, al
though it will not add sixpence TO the emolument,
Of the inspectors. For as have said, the earlier
inspectors many years ago-so long since that
remembers the exact time-havng asc.rtsined that
il was impossible TO inspect through hole made By
half inch anger, have Always used an instrument Il
large If larger than that povided for in the abovs
amendmclt. And although this custom not il
exact cOn)rmity to the law, ar that was impossible ye
it was nevsr objected to until suit was instituted By
milling frm in this city, about two years ago. /
has for more than half century met with the entire
approbacp of ninety mine in every hundred millers
---..t.
farmers sad country millers. The amendment
then proposes to effect no change, but merely
to cure defect in the existing statute
upon whi,l law suit his been hung by
a single Milling firm. Another objection urged
by the enemies Of the present inspection sys
TEN is, that it gives greater emouments to the
inspectors in this State than are enjoyed by
ihoAe in ether States OF the Union. But this
CHARGE like which has been already noticed, il
destitute OF truth. From careful memorandum
made by on,of the mos. reliable and GiligsDt mem
hers of the Richmond bar, who carefully examined
the Statutes Of many Of the States we have the evil
dence reftte that charge. In Georgia the inspec
tors OF hor get six cents per barrel for in.
spec.iug ard retain the draft -four. In Lou
isisna, whee, in city, ORR one million OF
barrels of fo.r are annually inspected the Inspector
gets three cer.s per barrel and the draft -four. In
Kentucky the inspectors get three cents per barrel
and the draft iour. In South Carolina the fee is two
cents per barrel and the pequsites the in the
States above mentioned In California the fee is
five cents hundred pounds, and the custom OF the
inspector resviug the -four is the same as in Virginia
In those SateS where the amount Of -four inspected
= % Eo,. -.
the fess the same and the emoluments
therefore, much larger, the quantity inspected
Is greater. Thus in New York. where from two to
three millions Of barrels of -four are annually in
spected under the voluntary system, the fee for in
specton lie what il is in Richmond, where the annus
amount o! -four inspected does not exceed four hun.
dred thouianl barrels whilst in the small towns OF
New York, where amounts like those inspected in
Richmond are inspected, the legal fees range from
three to Eve cents per barrel In Baltimore, where
upwards Of one million of barrels are annually in
-four. In Philadelphia, where one million of barrels
are inspected, the fee is what it ID here and the Gus.
tom ofretainihg the draft -four is the came. In
Georgetown, where the annual inspection is about
what tits in this city, the compensation is the same. We
might extend this list, if necessary, to show that the
feea and emoumens ofhe inspectors in this State are
as small in any State in the Union, and far below
the legal charges in many Of the largest grangrow.
ing States, but it is unnecessary to proceed farther
with this branch OF the subject.
Another argument of those who wish to avail
Themselves Of the ambiguity of the existing statute
for the purpose of harrassing the INSPECTORS is that
the instrument used by the inspectors in Virginia in
the discharge Of their duties, s larger than those OF
other States. There s not particle Of truth in this
assertion, as the following statement prepared from
the Statutes, and the letters of inspectors of other
States will show In no State ia the aIgar used for
boring the hole in the barrel smaller than that which
has been used in Virginia for half century, and
which is that provided for in the amendment already
quoted to legalzs by express statute we'll estab
lished custom.
Thus, in Pennsylvania, according 10 the authority
OF an inspectors letter before us, the suger which
has been used in that State is one inch in diameter
and the trysr or instrument used for inspection is