New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-08-26
, QUESTION UNDER THE TARIFF ACT.

4 QUESTION UNDER THE TARIFF ACT
avpopTs RESPECTING THE DUTY ON CHARGES FOR
PACKAGES CONTAINING IMPORTED MERCHANDISE.
WIsHIyGToN, Aug. 25.-Tbe reports of the
commission appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury
% consider questions arising under section OF the
Tadd act of March 3, 1885, which repeats the duty on
hrss. for paekagcs containing imported merchandise
have been made puolic. The commission consisted OF
u James chief Of customs division, Treasury Depart
mani tcharman) A. p. Ketchum, appraiser at New
York; I. G. Rice, appraiser at Boston, j. M. rlske
Seouty collector Of customs at Boston; 4. b. MOORE
suuraiser at Philadelphia H. Ii. Goidsborough, ap
praiser at Baltimore and Joseph Treoar representing
the collector Of customs at New-fork Ihree reports
were made by the commission.
The first which is signed by Messrs James, Colds
borough and Treloar, takes the ground as matter OF
,,w that tue purpose Of section OF the new law Is TO
repea only that portion of the preex!sng law which
added to the actual market value or whoe ale price OF
the merchandise the cost and charges incident to the
shpmeni OF the goods after they were put IN condloh
for the market as usually sold.
The second report which signed by Messrs Ketchum
Rice and Fske effect that the law abosnes duties
on coverings any kind and that the dutabe value OF
imports is TO be determined by aseertauing the
value OF tue naked merchandise without reference 10
any other elements of cot whatever
The thIrd report, which is signed by Mr.. Moore main
ta.s That the repeating clause OF section eXempts
everything from payment OF duy tna can fairly be con-
sidered a covering incident to the transportation ana
"oRside or inside coverings or both. The report
while admitting tnat the power 10 include the value OF
any legitimate covering for purposes of transportation
snd sI1pment the value OF merchandise Tor duaOle
purposes been repeated says tnat great care VIII De
Secassary TO aistn gush between what should be
s~eeprd "a covering transportation and Shipment
asd What should De accepted as merchandise.
Commission unit in the view thst IN any event
,e value OF tie exterior package covering, whether II
sontaine tie goods bulk whether cont aims mum
her on smaller packages in which the goods packed,
should be excluded under section OF the new act from
ihs category Of duiiaOe value, and that too. without
,eie-pce 10 the question goods were bought
IN buk and packed by the purchaser or were bought In
he packed condition by tie party making the shipment
10 tie United states 49, . - -, g.
Mr. James, in transmitting the reports TO the secre'
t,ry of tue Treasury and commenting upon the dls-
agreement " the Commission, says; "Thercls mid
al erouad which might be taken, In which certain kinds
Of inner packages might be considered as exempt from
duty which are mainly those which are readily srpar-
able from goods aey contain This nela OF discus
atom bowcyer Is q very broad one. upon which We do
NOT attemrt 10 present but am ced by
tne Commission to state It's Willingness 10 reasseinDe
ana consider tnat Of the subject and what pack
as snail be considered duiable aud those which are
no. UDon further ructODs that you do not cOnstrue
,ne law as necessarily fixing either OF the extreme limits
slated 10 the reports su0uiited' ..
The question Of proper Interpretation or section
7o Tariff law will be referred 10 the Attorney
General for opinion