The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-06-15
THE CUSTOM-HOUSE INQUIRY.
SMUGGLING.

A Communication on the subject fror
Mr.. BOnzanO.
A day or two ago we published an intervie,
with gentleman apparently thoroughly cor
verssnt with the duties Of the Commission i
session this city to inquire into the conduct &
the New Orleans Custom House, on the subject &
smuggling through the system of shipment
in transitu, to New Orleans, for Texas and othe
States.
Mr.. Hubert Bonzano, widely known and 70
many years Custom House broker, in referenc
to the subject. sends us the following communi
cation:
Editor Demoudt-I have read with atteptio,
the article in your issue OF the 11th referring t,
the subject Of alleged Smuggling under cover O
| Transportation entries to Texas.
Nthe modus operandi Indicated were pursued
| a. your informant says, the transaction would
stand thus: "The cotton goods pay the dut,
twice, but the silks have escaped impost charges
1. Cotton goods pay .. duty Of thirty-fve te
seventy or eighty per cent while the duty on silk
goods IL only sixty per cent. This would be
| rather Improbable smuggling.
2. But even II such smuggling could be done
at profit, tell-tale In the shape Of consular
invoice accompanied the goods in bond and ii by
chance fraudulent invoice should be sent, and
the Collector at the port Of destination, or the
custom houseofficer en- route, should discover the
goods to be manufactured OF silk, the property
weuld become forfeited to the United States
8. "The law making it optional with shipper
TO have his goods appraised either at New Or
leans or at another point beyond the city" ia not
defective, unless the informant means that the
ports Of Texas are entirely excluded from the
privilege of such entries Transportation in bond
without appraisems nt). rs they really are. The
smuggler, therefore, cannot avail himself of this
method. [See Treasury Regulations Of 1874,
articles 669, 670.1
We must acknowledge that Mr.. Bonz sno makes
some seemingly strong points in answer to our
reference Of the alleged style Of smuggling. The
gentleman with whom our reporter had the inter.
view with regard to the commissions duties ia,
however, not our informant in the matter.
1t was . suggestion made to him by our reporter
himself. and he seemed to appreciate the posi-
bility of smuggling under the law regulating
transportation entries to Texss," and he being
man we'll versed in such matters, q law-maker
in fact, our reporter felt himself strengthened in
his
ORIGINAL BELIEF,
created by conversation with merchants in Texas
on the borders Of the Bio Grandeur 1875.
The obstruction referred to as sthe consular
&g60t6 lQVOlC6 10 VOU Ulm6y Nh OD6tTuCuOu TO
smuggling las Mr.. Bonzano knows well enough)
to be entertained.
Now let us take his first proposition and exam
inc it carefully. Remember, Mr.. Bopzano, that
whilst "the cotton goods pay the duty twice, the
shipper ships one bale Of cotton goods Containing
1000 yards. costing ten cents yard, equal to
500, the value Of the bale. Eighty per cent
added for impost charges would make the cost of
the bale $3.50.
Now supposng, according to our idea, that .
bale Of silk had, unknown to the customs offices,
been substituted (between New Orleans and
some point In Texas) for the bale OF cotton goods
we would have . bale Of one Thousand yards
Of silk arriving At the "point OF destination, and
being delivered, after having paid in New Orleans
only $50 impost duties, as cotton remember the
bale for which it is substituted on the way was
appraised in the city,.
Let US then zee has much the
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LOSES
by the operation. The SINE bale OF silk, con.
tanning 1000 yards, a. 81 yard, would be $4,000.
sules charges Ssn which
would have to be paid on that bale Of 81 k, would
1t not2 Now subtract $50 paid on the bale of silk
as cotton goods from $1,000, which should have
been paid on it as elk goods, does it not strike
you that the government has neatly been done
for to the tune Of $l120 on single bale Of goods?
Say 1000 bales are thus Struggled, instead of one,
does not the government lose on the consignment
$112. OOO2 And what is quite 40 bad, the New Or
leans merchant, whose goods are all appraised
here, suffer to that extent 10 their trade.
For shrewd business man like Mr.. Bonzano,
THE ERROR
which he makes in his statement is unaccounta-
BILE, and we must lay the cause to some new
trouble in his big toe, for his head ia ordinarily
very clear. As TO Mr.. Bonzanos third PROPOSE.
ion, We will not discuss 1t until we shall have
,een him, for we are not certain that we UNDER
stand it clearl, enough to do so now.