New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-12-27

LIABILITY or VESSELS FOR SMUGGLING.
In the United States Circuit Court, yester-
day, an important decision was given in the
case of the United States against the British
steamship Queen, ibeled for smuggling. This
case was originally brought IN the United States
District Court, before Judge Blatchford. to re-
cover from the owners of the vessel the penalty
for bringing into the port goods not entered upon
any manifest. The United States District Court
decided that the ship was liable to the pen
atty, and, from this decision, which was VIZ
tually a condemnation of the ship for SNUG
Cling. appeal was made. And it is now decided
by the United States Circuit Court that 1t Is the
duty of the master to make thorough ex-
animation Of the ship, and see that no duti-
able goods, not entered upon the mani
fest. are on board. 1t is held
that the subordinates might other
wise make the ship common carrier OF
dutiable merchandise, not entered upon the
manifest, while the captain, who is supposed
to act az agent for the owners, would be will
fully Ignorant of what was being done. Fur
thermore, it is held that, as the CustOm-hOuse
officers had no difficulty in finding the goods
illegally on board the vessel, the captain. had
he exercised proper vigilance, could have dis
covered the same.
The case, however, though important in
itself az settling the point rs to whether
ship is, under any circumstances. liable for
the misconduct of the officers or suboIdinates
on board, is not finally concluded. 1t goes
now to the Secretary of the Treasury, who, by
some fiction of law, has in these later times
been invested with the power of review of
the decisions of the highest Courts. That is
to say, the Secretary, by exercising the
authority given him by an act of Congress,
may virtually set aside the DEGREES Of all the
courts below by releasing the ships, inerchan-
disc, and other property seized and condemned
by judicial process. The practice has grown
I'D gradually, 80 that it is no longer question
apparently whether the Treasury Department
will snnul the action of Gthe courts by the re-
lease of property condemned for plain
infractions of the statute. 1t has become a
fixed principle that the decision Of the courts
is purely technical Practically, the equities
are considered to be with those who have
been convicted of plain violation of the law.
Judge BlatchfOrd held in this case that the
door to smuggling would be opened 30 wide
that tho statutes against it would be dead
letter if the master were not held re-
sponsible for smuggling carried on on board
his vessel. The Judge might have gone fur
Their, and said that the law is practically
q dead letter already 80 far as its
weightier penalties are concerned. These
are never exacted in any case. Few instances
of the conviction of any person, or the libel
ing and condemnation Of any ship, for Snug
Cling, are on record in these later years. We
venture to say that endorsements of the pen
alties provided for in the statutes Of the United
States against smuggling are fewer than
in any other case. 1t is clear that the ex
treme penalties are not now enforced; per-
haps they cannot be. IL they cannot. they
should certainly be expunged. and that
speedily 1t seems childish to eumber the
statute books with penal provisions which are
invariably ignored.