Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1881-12-23
"a
rNafe Tobacco Inspections.
BALTIMORE, Dec. 10, 1881

BALTIMORE, Dec. 10, 1881.
Editor Of the Times:
In the Baltimore Sun of December ?.
from Brothers Boninger, of Baltimore, to
His EXcellency Governor HAmilton-in
which they say I've executed last year
for Messrs. Galline & Co., OF Lyons, a house
of the highest responsibility in France,
a contract with the French Government
tor eleven thousand five hundred 500
hogsheads of Maryland tobacco that
they have lately received samples of nine
| tyfour (94) hogsheads which We're re
iected by the French Reggie as entirely un-
tit for use, being SO far inferior to the b al
timore samples that good many bear
hardly any resemblance to them, and they
request us to obtain n Just compensation
for the severe loss they have sustained 10y
this incorrect and most shameful inspec
ton" Brothers Boninger further sat
that fair valuation OF the difference be
| tween the Baltimore samp eS an these Of
| the French Reggie has resulted in claim
against the inspectors of tobacco amount
ing in the aggregate 81 ,o30,39. AS his
whole matter was referred To Gov. Hamil
ton in August last by brothers Boniugrr.
and is now paraded hefor. the pubic eye
on the eve of the assembling of the Legs
ture with manifest design of casting dis
credit upon the honesty and efficiency OF
State inspection Of tobacco, proper APP
probation Of what is due to ourseve. re-
iquires that the charges preferred Will
such self eomplacency 10y Brothers Bon
iinger against the STATE inspectors shall l.,
Il, 4 a 4
! Dogmatic assertion is one thing-drmon-
stration is quite another. Admitting the
statements of Brothers Boniuger to be
trHe both as regards the number OF sam
| piles rejected as unfit for use and the val
uaion of the difference between thr Bal
timore samples and those Of the French
Reggie, we fail entirely to appreciate the
! correctness of their conclusions s. set
| forth liner in the matter of "severe loss
sustained" or of dereliCtion of auty on
the part OF the State inspectors of to-
bacc0. Ninety tour samples rejected from
a contract of II. 500 hogsheads OF Mary
| land tobacco will hardly lie deemed a la
! sis sufficient to warrant the conclusion IT
incorrect and most shameful inspection :
/ On the contrary, The unusually small mum
Der Of reflections in so large a contract Is
that of last year may well be accepted a.
| a matter II Congratulation on the part Of
| the State inspectors, amounting. accord
| ing to the exhibit of Brothers Bon;nger
to the inconsiderable proportion of four
| titshs of one per cent. The actual loss
however. on the ninety four rejected sam
lples, estimating each hogshcad fifty dol
lars, (Which Is considered tair va'ua
tiNp \ IL shawn arpDr,ljp,r -, Ia,
/ hibit of brothers Boninger, to amount I.
the insignificant ratio OF one third of on
/ per cent on the entire contract Yer
lily, in this mus re1tc"iHs' affair, we are
ISdmonished by Brothers Hauinacr not o
lcspise the dav OF small ;hirr<. and the
|roodlv admo.i,i the more beautifully
Ih4rmonizes with the xy,r.try and Tho ~
ness Of ,hinrs nv rras.n of .rc t,c, ,l.,
the contingency If a pos,ii.}. -, had Il
ready been provided for IA ~, mtrkc,
valuation at MaFl isud to', Cco involving
a reduction IN price IT iuilk sixteen per
cent. on every hogshead ~ suhsiautI-
arc the truth If this aIiega:',,u aai 20 ay
bare the utter ho!!owTess 81 The lrctense
set up 10y BoninGers :uT c"mprHs .tina for
loss sustained under their c".ir.srl - last
year, | quote from memorial 4adr ssei
10 the Mary land legislature d. Teicrtacc
to the Tobacco" iTade al Ia i'fs. Ic. IN sch-
ruaTy le'S- signed 10y many 81 tie sellers
and buyers oi tobacco, and pr"1nlre;.ty
among them tind the name "t Brothers
iisninEer. The reader Wi please csr@.
fully note The language at tie quotation
which Is as follows:
The direci loss from 5.rf T.. .-..-,s.4. j
not OF course really borne l.y IA. R,l,i.
more tIade. rs the averarc las rcr hogs.
head from false packing. g Il;,.t,d 81 3
nee ,ssarily enters into ito market y,l,.a.
ton, and thus falls upon the n ntinp in
INC Mary3aHsi -szsa---.'
tween 10000 Hnd 32.eoo h"Ishsa'is. ;"
that tie tdFs q frdas atnn iN muic' he
! planning interest IN about : "so,ou", lie
cause oil tue f"Hun'en' P'"- '',S 81 s''h'
OF tue growers rue H"ueSt F'AHt'i pAA'
Tue peRA.'! an" premium" > set upon
knavery
Thus we have here the distinct .llcys-
tion set forth under the signatures OF tie
Brothers Bsninger, the identical parties
now claiming compensation FOR al eyed
incorrect and most shameful inspections
that the direct loss from bad Inspections
(even admitting the existence OF such in
spections) docs no, fall upon tho bal,i
more trade 10y reason OF the fact that T
duc;ion of IS is laid u on every hngshea,i
as n protection against every possible loss
accruing to the Baltimore tr,dr In til,
light OF such revelation by BROTHERS
| Boninger where, submit. is the Justice
"a - g. 49,, -, - -.
10 ''''.'u ~ - - ''' -
/ oaeo"' l'i euS"''"'4 i"i US -