New-York tribune., 1874-06-10
WASHINGTON.
HE MoIETY BILL IN THE SENATE.

THE MOIETY BILL IN THE SENATE.
THE rssESr1,1 FEATURES OF THE BILL PRESERVED
DESPITE rnE OPPOSITION OF PROMINENT RE-
PuBLCANs-CoURsE OF THE DEBATE-THE SAL
ARIES OF CUSTOMS OFFICERS AT NEw-YoRK,
BOSTON, AND SAN FRANCISCO FIXED-sAI.ARIEs
AND CONDENSATION OF OFFICERS AT OTHER
PORTS NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. PROSPECTS OF
THE BILL Di
TBY rRLreRAPH To TUE rRIBUSEI ....r
WASHINGTON, June 9.-The importing merchants
Of the country will have 10 thank the Democrats of
the Senate for the of the essential feat
ures Of the Moiety bill No section of it that pro-
posed genuine reform escaped attack from some
prominent Administration leader. and nothing but
the solid front of the Democrats prevented these
attacks from being successful. No Senator except
Mr.. Edmunds had the courage to stand up boldly
and say that he opposed to the whole purpose of
the bill and only two voted uniformly against
every specific reform in the bill but careful anay-
ss of each roll-ca shows that in almost every case
a majority of the Republicans voting were not in
favor Of granting the relief the merchants
have with much justice demanded. though
that majority was not always composed OF
the same individuals. For example, Mr.. Conkling
voted with the Democrats against authorizing the
seizure Of books and papers and also on some other
matters while he supported Mr. Chandler in his at
undervauation of single article of an invoice work
the forfeiture of the entire invoice. In the same
way Mr.. Boutwell, was sometimes on the right side
and sometimes on the wrong; but on almost every
vote more Republicans voted wrong than right, and
the bill is saved by minority of Republicans whose
votes united with those of all the Democrats, made
majority of the Senate
The bill seemed TO have no really strong friends
on the Republican side of the chamber. Mr.. Sher-
man. who had charge of it, insisted. as he was
bound to- that no business of less importance should
displace it, but he was on more than one occasion
absent from his seat, and once when Mr.. Conklng
asked the Committee for explanation of some i'm
portant provision Mr.. Morrill, of Vermont in whose
charge Mr.. Sherman had left the bill, was
also out Mr.. Sherman was member of the Cur
rency Conference which explains his absence, but
It was remarked as very extraordinary that Sena-
tor who had an important measure like this in
charge should allow anything to call him from his
seat. Prominent among the spectators in the gal
lery was Col. Frank Howe of NewYork.
The first blow struck at the bill to-day was aimed
by Mr.. Chandler. who moved TO strike from the
amendment of the Committee the words which con-
fined the forfeiture of goods for fraud or under
valuation to the particular item to which the fraud
or undervaluation related. Mr.. Chandler supported
HI motion in an excited speech such as he is wont
to make. and was backed by Messrs. Pratt COnk-
ling, and Others. The false hypothesis on which
nearly all tie arguments of these Senators were
based was that this section related to smuggling,
and not 10 undervaluation any other fraud the
Government against which the Government has the
means 10 protect itself. This attempt failed by
vote ot 10 yeas 10 3S nays, those voting in the
affirmative being all Republicans, and including
such men as Bucking CHAM, Carpenter, Chandler,
Conkling, Edmunds, Frelinghuysen, and Hamlin.
MI COnkliuC next made an attack the 10th
section which empowers the Court its own mo-
ton and directs it, when requested to by either
party to a sut to enforce declare the forfeiture
of goods for violation of the laws to submit
10 the Jury. as a distinct and separate question:
whether OF not the alleged acts were done with an
actual intention to defraud The United States, etc.
aud require a special finding thereon by the jury
The object of tits section is to protect the reputation
of an honest merchant who may have innocently
BECOME liable under the revenue acts to the forfeit
ure OF hls goods. 10 fine or penalty. The Senators
who opposed il seemed generally TO believe
that the cases where the Court would be required to
make this charge TO the jury were criminal cases,
and so argIed thai If the section agreed TO the
United States would never be able to convict. The
fact ls as every merchant knows. that this charge
cny 10 be made in civil suits for the recovery
of goods OF fines or penalties, and that the finding
of the ary on the question of intent would not at
feet their general verdict which must be based on
the law and facts without regard to intent The
disagreement of the Senate 10 this very just provs
io s less important than it would be were it com
mou for such cases 10 to trial. and it was made
even less important BY the subsequent action Of the
Senate striking out the paragraphs foIbiddng COM
promises.
The bill az reported by the Finance Committee
IeaTTanges the salaries OF customs officers at nearly
allt Ia. 8 he al motion of
Mr. Sherman. this all stricken out except those
portions affecting the salaries of the officials at New
York Boston aud San FFanci CO. Al New-York
the salary Of the Collector fixed at $1,000; that
Of the Naval Officer. Surveyor, and Appraiser at
5000 each. At Boston and San Francisco, the Col
lectoIs are to receive $500 year each, and the
Naval Officers. Surveyors, and Appraisers 5000
each At al other ports. the salaries aud compensa-
ton OF officers are 10 remain now liked by law.
The last section OF the bi 70 which attention was
called yesterday was amended 80 as 10 make this
contain nothing To affect existing rights of the
United States. This throws out all the claims of in
formers foT moieties but when the Senate ad-
journed fOr want of quorum. Mr.. Conkling had an
amendment pending 10 save The moieties of inform
ers IN where suits instituted prior to May
], 1874. haf au hours work will probably COM
plete the ui.i tomorrow. and now stands it is
il much better shape than its friends feared it
tnign; be-
NATIONAL FINANCES.