The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-03-22

requires the warrant to issue on "complaint
and affidavit" " and confines il TO cases Of com
mitted, not merely ATTEMPTED, fraud. Under
the former system the importer was entirely
at the mercy of the oustom-house officials. ALI
that was necessary was to procure some one to
swear that an importer had attempted fraud,
without stating any facts as ground for the
allegation, and a warrant could thereupon be
issued, directed not to an officer of the Court,
but to the Collector of the port, by authority
of which he or any agent whom he might
appoint could enter any place and seize and
carry away any of the importers books or
papers which he was pleased to think had
ANYTHING to do with that fraud or any other,
and keep them as long as the retention
thereof might be necessary, subject to the
control and direction of the Solicitor of the
Treasury"
Now, the seizure of papers has always been
considered one of the most delicate and dan
gerous exercises of power. The Committee
remarked upon this, referring to the constitu-
tional provision guaranteeing the security of
the people Gin their persons, houses, papers,
and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures" and they added that it was clear
that "to cause stores, drawers safes, etc, to
be opened and rifed of books letters, and
papers, etc, without other judicial inquiry
and determination than is implied in the for
NAL production of an affidavit and the formal
issuance Of a warrant, " ought to be held un-
reasonable. The report referred to one in
stance in which, under such a proceeding,
will and letters between man and his wife
were thus seized and held. The indignant
language in which the report reprobates such
action, and the state of the law under which
such action could be taken, cannot be said to be
undeserved. But the report might have
pointed out other abuses, and more especially
those attending the retention of papers so
seized. That was left entirely to the discre-
tion of the Government officials not to Judi
cial discretion, but to that of the Solicitor of
the Treasury before whom no judicial pro-
ceedings could be instituted, and from whose
decision there could be no appeal.
1t is natural and proper that when such a
state of things was once brought to the notice
of our Lawmakers, such dangerous powers
should be at once regulated and brought
within proper bounds.
Under the present law the warrant is to
issue, not to the Collector, but to the Mar
shal, the proper officer of the Court, and it
cannot issue unless the character of the
fraud, the importatiOns in respect to which
it was committed, and above all the papers to
be seized, are set forth by the complainant.
Moreover, the papers are to be kept, not by
the Collector, but by the Judge, as long as he
deems it necessary; the Solicitor of the Trea-
sury no longer has supreme power in such
cases, and the warrants are to be returned,
like other warrants, ''tO the Court of the Dis
trict within which such Judge presides."
1t is well that these changes have been made
in the law. How it has happened that the
courts have not long ago taken hold of the
matter, and determined that the constitutional
provision against unreasonable seizures
protected citizens against such proceedings, it
is difficult to say; but, indeed, as we happen
to know, the matter had been brought in one
case before the court Cf this district, and
though no conclusion of it has as yet been
reached, it is doubtless owing to the discus
sion of that case that the committee were led
to make the recommendations which they did,
and to secure the changes in the law which
have been made. d.
How such a statute as that of 1868 could
ever have been passed, or could have stood
so long, can only be explained by the history
of the times. We do not believe it was
owing to any weakness of respect for con-
stitutional safeguards, but only to the intense
occupation of the popular mind and heart
with things whose pressing importance kept
minor matters out of sight. While the people
were thus preoccupied, doubtless, many pro-
visions crept into our laws which would not
have been allowed in ordinary times; and now
that matters are coming back to their old
course, this section of the act of 1868 will
probably not be the only one in the legisla-
tion of the past few years which will be found
to need, and which will receive, thorough
Overhauling and remOdelling.
Foreign Policy of the Emperor Napoleon