The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1870-01-29
The Great Sugar Case.
Chnrge Of Judge Hoffman TO the Jury-Lu-
minOus Exposition of the Facts and the
LAW ia the Case.

minous Exposition Of the Facts aud the
We publish below the very able and exhaust
i've charge Of Judge Hoffman TO the Jury in the
case of the United States rs. 12,347 bags of sugar
"A case which excited universal attention., and
embraced questions Of fact and law of the highest
interes. 10 the commercial community
GentbMen Of the JuTy-The counsel for the
claimants has presented Instructions, 80 in num-
Der, with the request that / would give them to
you as the law of this case. | have not, according
to the State practice, marked upon the margin of
each 50 granted - or - refused, - but they may be
all treated as refused, except so far as they are
contained in what l am about to say.
/ approach, gentlemen, the discharge of my
duty IN this case with a sense Of responsibility,
not only because of the Importance of the pro-
ceeding, but because, IN the view L take OF it, its
determination must depend upon the instructions
given to you on the matter of law. / have been
unable to discern any matters Of fact that are Sc
riOusly cOntrOverted, and upon which you are
called upon to pass.
In the first place / desire to say that whether
the law on which this proceeding Is based be
harsh or Just, is no concern of yours, nor is the
disposition that is to he made Of the proceeds in
case of cOnfscatiOn, or whether the Collector or
the Consul has acted well or ill, or whether the
officers have been animated by a rapacious spirit
or simply by zeal to detect fraud and TO discharge
their duties. All these considerations are wholly
foreign 10 the purpose. You are are called upon
simply to decide whether certain matters of fact,
to which by law the consequence of forfeiture of
the goods is attached, have been established by
proof. What, then, is the law? The section
under which this prosecution is brought provides
8 If any owner, c~ODsignec or agent of any goods,
wares or merchandise shall knowingly make or
attempt to make an entry thereof by means Ofany
false invoice, or false certificate of any Consul,
Vice Consul or Commercial Agent, or of any in
voice which shall not contain q true statement of
all the particulars herein before required, or by
,xoo-g &c n-y I+Lor G,l-a or fpoT11nlanf dominant
or paper, or of any other false or fraudulent prac-
tice or appliance whatsoever, such goods, wares
and merchandise or their value shall be forfeited"
You will perceive that the ofiense to which the
penalty Of forfeiture is attached Is the making or
the attempt to make an entry of goods, wares
and merchandise = by means " of any false docu-
ment or false practice or appliance.
What, then, Is an entry? The term entry in
the Acts of Congress is used in two senses. In
many Of the Acts it refers to the bill of entry
the paper or declaration which the merchant or
importer in the first instance hands to the entry
clerk. In other statutes it is used to denote, not
a document, but a transaction a series of acts
which are necessary to the end to be accomplished,
viz the entering Of the goods. In the latter
sense it is used in this statute. The language is
- if any owner or cOnsignee shall make or attempt
to make an entry by means Of false documents,
false invoice or any other false or fraudulent APP
pliances.' 1t is the fraudulent use of means in
the attainment Of an object or accomplishing of a
result, to wit the entry of the goods, which the
statute here denOunces. The Acts which accom-
plish this result, and which, taken together, con-
stitute an entry, must have n beginning and an
end. There is n moment when the entry is at
tempted to be made or begun. There is IL moment
when 1t is accomplished. The entry may be said
to be commenced or attempted when the merchant
presents his declaration or bill of entry. When
this bill Of entry has gone to the requisite clerks
desks, when accompanied by the certificate Of the
Consul, the invoice and the oath, it is delivered
to the Collector and accepted by him, then the
goods may, in a Just sense be said to be admitted
to entry and the entry be accomplished. If in
the performance of any of those acts and as a
means of making the entry any false document
or fraudulent appliance or practice is resOrted to
then this statute applies and the goods 50 entered
are forfeited to the United States.
Whether, in the course of the proceedings one
document is used, or two or three are used, can
make no difference. 1t is also immaterial whether
there are one or two bills of entry indicating the
dispositions which the importer desires to make
OF the goods as of some to the warehouse and
some to be withdrawn for consumption, or whether
he takes one oath or two oaths. The entry con-
sists of the series of acts required by law to be
done to effect that object, and if in the course of
them the importer is guilty of any false or fraud
ulcnt practice, or uses any false documen what
soever, he comes within the law.
1t is urged in this case on the part of the Gov
eminent that in making the entry the merchant
in point Of law, may be said to present himself to
the Collector with his documents i'm one hand.
and his goods in the other, and if the character Of
the goods themselves is iraudulcntly disguised, if
any false appliance with respect to them is used
it may justly be said he has affected his entry
by means" of that. | think, gentlemen, it
would perhaps be stTaining the statute to say that
any false practice with reference to the goods
themselves could be said to be a - means" of
making the entry. He does not make his entry
by means " of that false practice or disguise.
be does make his entry - by means - Of any
document he may use or any false oath he
may take, If such document or oath be requisite
md necessary as n means and condition precedent
10 the goods being admitted to entry. Therefore,
{ this invoice, the certificate Of the Consul or the
he has taken, be false or fraudulent, then he
Ias made use of Il fraudulent means necessary to
fleet the very object he had in view. to wit the
procuring his goods to be admitted to entry.
1t is alleged that the oath of Mr.. DeRo was
alse. 1t is not pretended that Mr.. DeRo knew
he facts of the case, or was himself, personally,
,ither morally or legally culpable in any point of
new. But the knowledge of his principal is his
knowledge for such purposes, and that it must be
o is evident. For otherwise, any fraud could be
'erpetrated with IMMUNITY by procuring an limo
broker or agent through whom parties not
could effect the entry of their goods. 1t
therefore not the innocence or guilty knowledge
# the agent, but it is the knowledge Of the owner
lmself who has devised the fraud which carries
it the consequence of condemnation.
IECdltIRs lucTtIOTcS VI DSlbO ; OtJu us IL IL
we're made by the owner, it is claimed by the
that it is false. He swcars, gentle
men, that he has not III this invoice or entry
Oncealed or suppressed any fact whereby the rev
nue. of the United States might be deirauded.
1t is argued, with the ingenuity which has
characterized counsel throughout the whole case,
hat the suppression or cOncealmcnt of any fact
which the law does not call upon him to disclose
5 not wrongful, and that inasmuch as in this case
was not requisite that in the entry or the in
dice the color of the goods should be stated, the
Impression or cOncealmeut of the true color could
lot be an oliense. 1t is true, gentlemen that the
DIOR of the sugars is not required to be stated in
he invoice, but from the nature of the oath that
5 required to lie taken it appears to me plain
hat Congress intended by imposing so searching
n oath that there should be disclosed at the time,
nd not suppressed or concealed, any facts whether
equircd 10 be stated in the entry or invoice or
lot which 1t was important to the interest Of the
eyenue 10 be known, or whereby the revenue of
he United States miOht he defrauda1 Had IL