The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-01-14

half Of them were in hands of a single legal nrm
in New York, the practice being for these broker
age lawyers to 90 to merchants and induce them
TO appeal nom the decision OF the Collector, and
II they succeeded the merchant got half and
these lawyers the other halt The whole amount
of money depending on these decisions was
Mr. WoOD-It Is the revision affecting the tariff
that has created these evils
Mr.. ScaoFIELD-The gentleman is mistaken about
that. do not wish to make any insinuation
against the honesty OF that form of customs
brokers or OF anybody In the Treasury Depart
ment Anybody who has suffered from unjust
charges viii be extremely cautious about making
them against others. l only know that there Is
near Kindred between one OF those gentlemen
who have very large proportion OF the appeals
and officer whose duty 1t Is In some respects to
decide upon them IN the Treasury Department
than they used to be, and hence the complaint
There may have been more rigid examination of
the cases, and something which may have APP
peared to be an Overtarning, 10 some extent OF
cases that had formerly shipped through 1t is in
this way, think, that all this trouble which has
attracted the attention OF the gentleman from
New York has originated
Mr KAss0M a ep3 ont Of ,s precisely
NEED OF REPoRM IN THE CUSTOM HOUSE.
MIR. CHITTENDEN, 1ndl Of N. T., declared that
there was no department OF the government
which 80 much required investigation and reform
as the New York Custom House. The compiled.
TONS the confusion the craft and the difficulties
which prevailed there were disgrace TO the GOV.
eminent. The revision or ratification Of the tarir
laws had but intensified the trouble. II was the
last straw that Dlo ke the cancels back. He ap-
pealed to the House TO ret that inquiry go on; 1t
could not be much longer concealed or avoided.
good number Of the merchants OF New York were
no better than editors, but still he thought that
thought however that the changes Complained Of
were not the fault OF the revision OF the laws.
That revision had only brought the laws
together had thrown around the hone st
merchant so many hampers, so many legal
technlcantles, 30 many dlnlcultles That there
SUB
Committee of the Judiciary Committee was trying
to perfect taas legis1ate9 and You'd soon be
should be made TO the fraudulent merchant OF the
utmost stringency. yet where an honest merchant
everything should be done to lacllltate him IN
presenting his case to the department or the
have three or Tour millions OF their money locked
up in the Treasury awaiting their cases on appeal.
THE HONEST MERCHANTS WOES.
Mr.. DAWES, repo OF Mass, remarked that
while IL might be very hard on the merchants to
have s3ooo,OOo or si,oOoOoo locked up in the
Treasury 1T was little worse on the Treasury to
have that money always running out without
the knowledge, OF anybody which was
Session He arree Tas with 0p ns
that there were very many complications sur
rounding the honest administration of the Customs
laws, about which the honest merchant had good
reason to complain, and that they were more
veXatious and burdensome than the duty itself
was, and mad brought tarln duties INTO Odlum !;
but the merchants lad 10 take soms oil the blame
on themselves. The Committee on Ways and
Means nad often asked them TO put their CON-
plants on paper ana to write out the law Just as
they wanted it administered, and the committee
would consider II, but the committee had got
nothing rom them but the complaint. 1t had got
no advantage or their eXperlence-nothing out
complaint on one side and devices TO evade the
duty on the other.
Mr. BUTLER remarked that 1t was the business
Of committee to know enough TO draw Dill TO
remedy wrong.
Mr.. DAwES-NObOdy has asked the merchants OF
New York to draw hill
Mr.. BUTLER-I understood you to complain that
Mr.. WOOD remarked that the proposition was
only TO change the reference OF the secretary's
oommunicatlon. No class Of people was more op.
the laws themselves and then by the manner IN
which the laws were administered. But when
they found that new duty was imposed IN the
absence OF any legislation by Congress they had
o right TO complain. The merchants OF
oew Teputaop mef Tbev Wers
for SIMPLE justice and when they found themselves
injured they did complain. Since the passage Of
the Revised Statutes alterations had been made
which had affected individual firms In New YORK
to the amount OF over 81, 100000. Inc Committee
facts OF the case and to find out whether the fault
was in the new law or in its administration.
THE ORIGINAL vs. REVISED LAW.
Mr.. cox, (dem OF N. Y, argued to the refer ence
| OF the question to the Committee on Ways and
Means, ana read rom the New York Times a state
ment Of the increase OF duties put upon certain
| articles since the revision of the statutes.
Mr.. POLAND, OF Vermont, remarked that thai
Mr.. KELLEY. oil Pennsylvania, remarked that the
! statement was made upon decisions OF District
| Courts, which decisions had been overrued by the
Supreme Court, and that revision OF the laws had
| been made 10 harmony with the tnal decisions.
Mr.. Cox protested that no man or set or men
had authority In revising the laws to cnange the
tariff IN any particular.
| Mr.. KELLY-Tne committee did not change It,
Mr.. Cox-We win see whether the gentlemen on
the other side can raise the tariff by indirecti0n.
Mr.. SAYLER, (dem.) OF Ohio, member OF the
Committee on the Revision OF the Laws, argued
that that committee should first have an opportu.
ty Of examining the Secretary's report He did
not cons der 1t important to the welfare OF the
self by the Committee on Ways and Means He
! had learned pretty we'll In the course OF the
| Congress that there was not much Of the
! House except the Committee Ways ana
Of the Committee on the Revision OF the Laws thai
| that committee mas labOred earnestly in the mat
| ter, and II there were any errors or supposed
errors in the revision That committee should have
the first opportunity OF examining It. The revision
! tratiOn OF the ola statutes 1t had opened up q
great many leaks in the Treasury Department.
! and he believed That the changes complained OF
were not the result Of changes IN the law but the
result OF bringing light to bear on the dark places
in the law. lie was not In favor of nigh tarin,
having the law enforced.
Mr.. RANDALL tdem.l OF Paid the Committee
| on The Revision of the Laws change In any par.
tcular any law IN relation to customs duties9
Mr.. SAYLER-We did NOS, II We knew It,
! Mr.. KASsON argued that 1t was the rule that in.
formation sent in response to the call OF com.
mittee te referred to the committee calling Tor It,
ana that the report, having been called fOr 0y the
! Committee on Ways and Means, should be referred
| to that committees.
| MIR. POLAND, (rep.) OF VT. Chairman OF the Com
| mlttee on the Revision Of the Laws, argued that
| Mr.. Woods own statement that there had
| been no tariff legislation unless the committee had
made 1t, was a reason why the report should go to
| tnat committee. The committee had certainly not
! made the slightest change 10 the tariff law. 1t
was not q question from what committee the reso-
! luton calling Tor information had come, but what
committee was the proper one to act on
the subject. 1t was due to his COMMITTEES
that after all the allegations made In the New York
press on the subject the communication should
| 90 to ana be considered by the committee, so
that If there are any errors in the revision they
! may be corrected.
! Mr.. KASsON remarked that the way to ascertain
whether there was any error IN the revision Was
| by comparison WIFI the laws. What TIE Com
mittee OF Ways and Means mad asked the Secfe.
! tary to report upon was whether by any new con-
strnctiOn of the law the rates OF duties had been
! changed, and that was certainly subject Tor the
consideration Of the Committee OF Ways and
! Means:
| Mr.. wooD-The gentleman from Vermont OR.