The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1870-01-29

: TTTVTTI. TJTI ~ TUTNE UTVIT VTU TTTTTt . V|V -
lector Of the false or fraudulent appliances il
wholly immaterial whether or not he believed IL
the device or statement, whether he was colludlDs
with the party entering the goods, or knew, IL
advance that a fraud was intended or was to be
attempted is wholly immaterial. As well might
it be said Of one indicted for perjury that the
magistrate before whom he had appeared and be.
fore whom he was required to take his oath, did
not believe the story or knew he was swearing
falsely. Such a defence could not for a moment
be admitted, and the case is nearly Identical witt
this. The charge here is, the production or use
+ and empIoyment of n false document or the use OF
! false and fraudulent means TO accomplish a certain
object. If the party has used those means, ne
il clearly guilty of the offense, whether the col
lector knew of the commission of the otfense at
the time it was committed, or only discovered II
afterwards. In either event the statute operates,
and confscatiOn follows as n consequence OF the
employment Of the fraudulent means to effect an
entry of the goods. Nor does the character OF the
device, whether fimsy or transparent, readily or
with difficulty to be detected, provided it be fraudu-
lent, affect the question. The degree OF skill, In
genuity or cunning with which the fraud Is con-
trived, can make no difference. Nor, gentlemen,
is it true as cOntended, that the forfeiture IN such
case is limited to the mere goods in relation to
which such fraudulent practice is used. The Ian
guage of the statute is too explicit to admit of any
doubt as to its meaning. Ii any owner or con-
signee of any goods, wares and merchandise shald
kllDHlllgl Ildhc q IN " NUM- N
by means Of any false invoice or traudulent Prac-
tice such goods, wares and merchandise shall be
forfeited"
What are the goods, wares and merchandise
that shall be forfeited =? Plainly, the goods entered
MT the Custom house. There was but one entry,
but one invoice n this case. The acts done, taken
together, constitute an entry of the goods an en-
try of this whole invoice or importation of sugar.
If, in the attempt to effect that object, fraudulent
means have been used, the goods so entered are
forfeited. 1t is therefore the whole invoice that
is forfeited or nothing.
Having disposed Of these matters, We approach,
gentlemen, to the more serious part Of the case
and the real merit of the transaction. 1t will
strike you as curious that one Government should
affirm that Il practice had been resorted to which
is morally and legally fraudulent, and that this
practice or contrlvance should be admitted to have
been used, and should be defended and justified
on legal and, | believe, moral grounds, 1t is not
often that counsel of distinguished ability and high
character are so totally at variance upon moral as
well as legal questions. 1t becomes our duty,
therefore, to consider what is the true view to be
taken of this transaction.
You are aware that Congress has established
color as standard of duty, or the standard, rather
whereby to determine the duty upon sugar. 1t
has been stated to you, and the fact is not disputed,
that the adoption of this mode of assessing the
duties, was the result of very many experiments
and attempts to establish other bases or rules by
NillCu ~ uCICELlluC Vic bilOuIO VI III u NC
placed on this species of merchandise.
Mr.. Bridge informs us that he thinks this
standard is. upon the whole, the best and most
satisfactory over adopted, and such seems to be
the fact. What, then, was the motive of Congress
in adopting the standard Of color? 1t is plain,
gentlemen, that except SO far as protection is con-
cerned, color could only be nationally adopted as
indicative of value-not as invariably indicating
1t, but as generally doing so, and as affOrding,
upon the whole, the best, most convenient and
most appreciable test of the value and the quality
of the article. That it so in this case, has been
established by the witnesses for, though they
state that color is not the sole criterion Of value,
and that there are other considerations of great
to be borne in mind, yet they all ad-
that collar Is q very important circumstance
to be regarded in determining the value or quality
of sugar. 1t has been shown that sugar in its
pure state, is colOrless, and it would seem to fol-
low that the degree or depth of the color which a
article Of raw sugar possesses must vary
with the amount of impurities it contains and
the amount Of impurities contained must have an
effect on the value of the mass. 1t is
said that there can be no such thing as disguise in
color, that color addresses itself to the senses, that
that, which appears to be of a certain hue is of
that hue. that there is no difference between u real
and an apparent color.
The language of the acts of Congress in relation
to the tariff is used in Il commercial and popular
sense. 1t is addressed to practical men of busi-
ness, and intended to govern them in the daily
of life. There is some FEASIBILITY I'M
in the assertion, that there is no dis
tinction between real and apparent color; that
an object is presented to the eye and pro-
duces q certain effect upon the optic nerve, the
effect so produced constitutes, to all intents and
purposes, its color. But let us consider. 1t is
that if the Government were to impose
4 duty according to the color of a horse, you
could not whitewash him anG so change his color
the meaning OF the law or if Congress
should impose Il high duty upon rosewood logs of
l certain color, you could not by staining their
give to the logs 4 darker or lighter hue
in order to evade the duty. 10 this it has been
answered that Il horse or u log of rosewood has a
natural color, which may be disguised but cannot
De altered. But this admits that there may be
IN apparent color Disgusting the true color.
But it is said that sugar has no natural color,
only an artificial color that its hue is the
esult of its manufacture that it depends upon
he mode in which the manufacture has been
and upon the ingredients that are put
nto or removed from the sugar, and therefore it
annot be said to have Il natural color like Il horse
II Il log of wood. Let us see. Suppose wines
we're valued according to their clearness and
ightness of color, and suppose there were a drug
hat would give to the light-colored wine a
nurky, clOuded appearance, without, however,
the wine and that after passing through
he Custom-house, the wine could be restored to
is former clearness by the addition of another
Ingredient which would prccipitate the coloring
could it be said that such u practice
would be lawful? Do we not feel that the intro
Iuction of the first drug by which there was
mparted to the wine a color different from its
cal color would be a fraudulent attempt to dis
,uise and conceal the color of the article. True
t is, that it would have to the eye Il dark color,
'ut it would not be the color ~legitimateiy result
ng from the ordinary course of manufacture, to
which it has been subjected. / have used this
Illustration, for the color of the wine like that of
ugar may, in a great degree, depend upon its
reatment or mode of man ulacture.
What, then, is 50 color - in regard to sugar as
he term is used in the statute? 1t appears to
ne, gentlemen, that it is the hue or degree of
ightness which the sugar has attained in the
ordinary course of manufacture, and which indi-
ates the degree of perfection TO which the pro-
ess of Qualification has been carried. Undoubt-
dly while the sugar, or while the cane-juice
remains in the manufacturers hands, he
nay omit to take out the impurities, or may put
n Impurities if he 50 desires, for as yet it has
lot become sugar. The hue of the sugar, that is the
esult Of his operations, will be determined by the