The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1859-02-10

The following decision of the Supreme Court in the
case to which we alluded last week, of Mr.. ]. HI
Strauss rs. the Collector General of Customs, has been
handed US for publication
c. c. Harris VS.. Wrren Goodaie, CoHecfor-Generaf Of
Customs.
OPINION OF ALLEN, c. J..
This is an application for a writ Of maidamus to be issued to
the Collector-General of Customs directing him to grant a per-
init for the landing of certain goods now on bosrd the bark
Frances Palmer, and which are the property Of John II. Strauss.
legally authorized agent of SAID Strauss for the purpose of maxi
o the .e c saaes Il sm@ With It'll the bin hi Of Of isdinr a ID t5 ! 'o orir 7 Tf IN.
voice to make the inward entry, and offered to verify the same
to pay the duties, and proposed to have every nackase onrned
in the presence of an officer of the Customs, that the contents
the extra trouble, but the Coliector-Genera declined to admins
tier Sim the Re- oath to said said a u = IL ID agent. and to grant the permit to
compliance with the law.
between the Collector and Mr.. Strauss in relation to the entry Of
these goods, for he had at one time deputed his clerk to make
But all that is alleged to have transpired antecedently to the
agency Of Mr.. Harris has no bearing on the legal right Of Mr.,
valuable public oncer, and the Court is fully aware that he
justice.
The Counsel for the Collector contended that the cour. had
where individual rights were concerned, and in such case it was
within the legal discretion to grant or withhold a mandamus-
check upon smuggling IL persons were allowed to make their en-
never made any entry OF the goods. and that no one could enter
the goods unless he was the owner or authorized agent at the
That Il was necessary to swear to the orisina, bills Of iading
and invoice, and exhibit them at the Custom House.
That it was in the discretion Of the CoIector-0eneraI to Judge
IS to whom he would administer the oath, and was hound only
to administer it to the party authorized to make entry by law.
The law prescribes the mode Of entry Of goods. The Statute
10 In these words:
Whenever any inward entry shall be made 1t the Custom
House, the person making such entry shall exhibit 70 the Col
lector the original invoices and bills Of lading, and verify the
same by oath. (Sec- D.
person shall enter any goods, and secure the duties on
them as principal in the bonds, unless he Is the owner or consie-
nee at the time the vessel enters the port, or unless he is tie
authorized agent Of such owner or consignee-" Csec. o.
The question fs-has the law been complied with? II II adj
mitted that Mr.. Harris was duly authorised by Mr.. Strauss to
make the entry ; that ne rendered the inward entry and o0er-
ed to verify the same by oath, a. well a. TO comply with ai te
requirements OF the law.
The duty OF the Collector il purely ministerial in this case;
the law prescrioes IT, and he has no discretion in the matter.
HIS duty Is 70 carry out the Law. The Court Is clearly OF opin-
lon that the Collector had no right to connect this case with any
sning winch may have transpired between the parties before, un-
less he could show ai,gal connection.
II Il sound las that an act at an executive officer cannot be
examined by mandauaus, which invades the exerc1se Of his tudg-
m ae;, 2 discretion. But IN the entry Of socds the mode and
requisites are prescribed by law clearly. and IL complied with by
the importer, the Collector b enjolned by law TO allow the entry
70 oe made, and 10 grant the permit The Court is Of opinion
that the Importer did all that the law enjolned, and that the Col
kaor should have made the entry and granted the permit. In