New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-04-20

Fulton" April 49, 1851 that protest is attached to IT,
apparently signed by James Isler covering in rs terms
both the items Of charges and commissions ms pro
test by its appearance is not one which would com
mend itself for genuneness being COMPOSED OF TWO s
uppermOst paper being protest against 9s me
charges To this document appears the signature OF
James Isler The entry, however, Is made by James
Iser CO.. and tho oath . taken axe ra Sy taiye
OF the house in this country James ser never having
tesis were NOT attached to entries Up the Fall OF
1859 that had been the practice but at that Tune tne
cnnsec9tiyely said numbers together with
the names Of the importers and vessels WIN the chaac
ter Of protest being recorded in hook kept Tor tat
purpose. No record can be found Of any protest by
James Isler Co.. or james iser after June, lS1 i
At that date they protested a9l
The record also that In July 1881 they protested
against commissions speccaly 9nt ~ angus. i've
protests, but only against commissions. ..,
te tioveTpment Though Mr. CriswJld; and lind that
they have received refund for eXactons the duties on
missions from 1857 to the time the present claim com
mences But nave not as yet been aDie 10 niu aUS
commencing of the present claim except as tsalhst
commissions alone. The protest entry IN inc eaSe u
and that in the against Schell Is also miss me
@ptrrS ar, described as follows: Against Redfeld
entry Der Arctic November ,, 1903 Against Schci
eniry per Vanderbilt, July /, 1857" ~
believe this entire claim - fraudulent anu that so
rnuch of the money has been heretofore raid rs ic
fund on charges procured through fraudulent means
General Curtis also read his report 70 DistrctAttorney
WCodford the Of VI. Mitchell " Co. against itu
field Collector In this ease the protest on each entry
WA confused Of two distinct pieces Cf paper, a. IN that
Inst described A. to the why this protest was
"dororeI" General Gurus says: "Atcr the rciund' III
the first instance on October 10, 1861 at which time
WAS probaby discovered that shipping charges were not
construed rs To include land freight and freight the
necessary steps were taken 10 remedy the defect ahh
then rcopcn the case Tire defect Tcmedied, IN my
oniuon nv taking portion Of another form, conforming
to the decisions Of the courts, when was plO-pcir
i'm ia terms. attaching to OF the old protests
or aihcr the portion which the SIGNATURE Oh thc
firm was written and the whole being passed 10 one oi
tine first entries OF the firm They accomplished TWO or
cts to wit: Laying the foundation For refund on &c
cou1t of land freight being uciuded, ana oF tEe
prospective Claims bringing into life those eHulh 10
which protests had been attached at the time OF p!ius
duties. In view Of the foregoing tlnk aul NI"ht'n
In druounrug this clam fraudulent ~ it, character
ana believe that II anything Is due SAID hTin ny rrlS"
OF the protests actually made by tcu AT thc Time VI
making their entrees IL Is but an rsi-ulhclnt sum-
FEW or THE FIRMS INvOLVED.
IGENFRAL PRESS DlsPtCHl
WASHINGTON, April 19.--Thc cases embraced
in General Curs's statement far, in when large pay
mcuts have been made involve the Grms OF Sampson
& Baldwin who were paid $4,000, 50 600 of which 1t
Il alleged was fraudcntly obtained by Douglass strong
and smith, who were paid about $1,000 L. b. Coddin2
ton 4 Co.. 500 900; wilson & Brown Sll 900; Ackcr
A. Harris. - COO; Chamberlain, Phelps Il Co.. $1,000
Other eases which have been made NJ and forwarded to
tlc DEPARTMENT for payment but which have not been
pqid are rs follows: william DODGE d Co, Sl7,
l9s NJ. Mitchell, S77ii; james Iscr, 500; a
Friedman, 81 10.