New-York tribune., 1867-06-20
CIVIL COURTS.
United STATES DISTRICT CoURT-Before Judge
BLATCHFORD.


BLATCHPORD.
TIE FAMOUS CHAMPAGNE CAsEs-CoNTNUATIoN OF
, s aiE ds gIcs eases Of chsmpagn. Wine marked S
Co. Alexander De 81 harceaut 20 'anana
This case was resumed yesterday morning purSu-
Henry Bator sworn testifedReside I'm this city; am
onnecfed with the house Of Herman Batter have been
an connected since 1857 the wines in question con.
signed 10 us by the claimants in the early part % 1864
tie market price for claimants wines IN ts market was
Carte Blanche" S13 80 per case quarts, gold; tate
Noir" SiJ 5OHer quarts gold; Red Lac $l 80 Per
case quarts gold Royal" SIC per case quarts gOIu
these the net average prices for six months pflor 20
the seizure; render statement on sales To cEhah' ever!
Mr Fyarts desiring leave the Courtroom for short
period the further examination OF this witness was ss
ncndnd and the reading OF the sworn statements com
menced 10 DO be read Tuesday aud unfinished at the
time of adjournment on that day, was resumed. -.
In them it is denied by claimants that they nad ever
received any ntmation from this country of any sus
pected undervaluaon prior to the seizure OF the VINES
H. controversy That the highest prices were put In te
invoices OF wines sent TO this country, to prevent any
possibility of exception being taken thereto Ihat III in
ncinp wines the interest their receipts for the same
from the time OF sale, until received by thein was hot
deducted That the difference in quality OF the VARIOUS
grades OF wine was owing To the difference In quality OF
fhe Brut" wine from which It is made and also OWING
to a difference in the mode OF preparation 49,, ,ho
From these statements further ascertain that the
average cost Of the seized wines, and the average ps
at Which they were inyoiced were as ioAoWs the SUI
iojned prices being the amount per case -.
Carte NOir" quarts cost 2I3o ecntlnes lhyoceu az
30 francs and 80 cetmesj SAME Phs, oOst 20 Hai, C
Banohe" quarts, cost "a francs 20 cenumeS lhNooou
ut so francs 90 confines same pmds cost 20 Rod
Lac" pints only cost q francs 66 confines lnyoced M
"a francs 90 centimcs "Roya" quarts cost 81 francs @
francs 96 centimes invOiced az 80 francs
Mr.. Lawrence. examined ON Tuesday, was recaieg PJ
prces paid by our firm of Farar Lyon, to claimant
agent, from May 1861 to January & &d0IS' On Se'e "N
The deposition OF Alexander DE St MarceauN was rend'
tic depoics: Am senior partner in the nouso OF De st
Norrcny " Coz that house commenced business on Jan
uary ], 1855; have been familiar with the WsileS OF Fo
paring wines q years; nd0rse thc deposition oi t,
m ID "a
The deposition OF Prosper Thebaut was as follows:
Am a resident Of Rheims and have been IN The employ
OF claimants 1865; have charge oi tcr cellar ue
cost Of preparing wine from me Brut OF eiuue VINO
Alexander Ncszcnmonisld deposes: Ana ovcrser Of
claimants cellar IL costs fiom 10 TO Is cemc 10 P''A
This concluded tho testimony for the day.
The vines In controversy were nvoced ~ prices aver
aging about 9 francs per case which the claimants INSIST
il the net amount received by them Tor tho Mlhe2 hh,
therefore, is practically thc maIhet ya'us &c d, ~ W.,
Of the statute. The point to be proven by th' e3eln
mont is that the wines l question Noie llf Vo' % q,
prices than the rcalnet amount 20 trctNed Dy C"nts.
10 arrive at This net amount 70 Is necessary 70 OBTAIN uo
prices received by the age Ut mere lnr ' EIhgN az w.
til the alcs made, less the duty paid From INC os
tmnuy for the claimants t would appear the brut OF
crude wines from hoh these wine, were prepared cost
them ON an aScrage about II francs W cchtues per S'
that the expense Of preparing th, Wh,a vas i.li9 i.9 81
about eight francs per case. .
A MOTION TO BOND 4 DlS1iIfEY DENIED
Cu.td STATE, ag- D4tieu. Sc, Il No y Ham Ton o.
This was a motion made by II. j. David, counsel
for the owner Of the above distcry, which hd been
seized on charge OF fraud On the irNehue against 4ts
owner 10 huye the distillcry bonded.
Mn Samuel G.. Courtney opposed tle Inouoh, hA]lhE'
In opposing this motion, DO 30 on the principle that h
prOuotOr U q seized dstiCry should bc allowed 70 onohd
trc same. No honest can atUIa 10 rum druHcfy,
DAY the necessary expense, and also thc tuNmihtl lA
OF s. Der Gallon when tho article dlstururAh %" bnutht
iu the open market at s. 80 per gallon, Jy honQ mere
fore Is simply cncOuragrlucut OF l4cit d tHhiloh
Since yOug Honor has been on the bench, there h Dten
but one order for bonding drtrty iu tbs district ana
iu that case The bond hn not been perfected the claimant
failing 90 give adequate fcgurii Ihc statute mahtt ae
question of bonding one of discretion The exercise Oh
sound discretion, iu my opinion vOuid deny TIE bpnHhk
these dCfaCltug distilccs. IN. claimant lu t. ti
SWcare ho did not Vulnto any ercunn or lhe lhicIiW
RoycAuc Law and that TIC allie cations o The libel arc ia'
This il "a broad ana sweeping dc.liafiOu. Ihute Whose
business 10 is 10 study and become familiar VAIN me ia
tcrIal Revenue Jaw lLu great difficulty u arriving at M
true construction and yet hi, claimant, Cnurry utcfeed
ia that law. construcs ~ aud swcau our allegations arc
fa-c. The whisky is s. per gallon the expense OF
mixing % about cent? more, aud yet the nrucc can
readily De- bought u market 40 81 80 per gallon IAbhE
these iacts into confederation, no drilcGy con De- run
without dcfraudilg the Government Ia ny opinion.
repeat t s not c exercise of sound discretion 90 Duid
these disterics. Ia Brooklyn, whore an Immense
amount of Illicit dihtlatlon has taken pIc@, uIdtrhud
the Cout has decided tLat u no case viii he bond dis
uUcIy. The Court denied the notion