New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-03-18
THE IMPORTERS ALARMED.
AFRAID OF THE UNDERvALUATIONs BILL


SWEEPING CHANGES PROPOSED BY The SENAiE
coMMIrTEE-sOME OBJECTIONS
The large importers Of this city and other great
cities Of the country have been the anxious seat
for some time in consequence OF the new ohuer-
valuations bill now before the United States
Senate This measure, as is generally KNOWN Is
rho outcome of the investigation made by the
Senate Committee on Customs Affairs some time
ago IL aims to secure n better reguiauOh Vi
foreign importations and more uniformity ia Vne
classification and valuation OF such merc""iloise.
10 do this necessarily involved some ueclucu
alterations in the present system. Inc oeha'orS
have not only made these, but they propose soinc
Of such a radical character as to alarm the H'er'
chants and lead them to protest moS' s'FcnuouoiS
oonst the passage of the bill in its present FORM
As originally drawn, the bill involved among
other things several sweeping changes IL pro-
ros,d 10 do away entirely with what are khO"n
rs Merchant Appra.s,rs whose junction IL ID
under the existing laW to determine, III c0hJuhc-
ton with the United States General APPRAISERS
ON reconnaissance the correct valuation OF lorei5"
merchandise subject to al valorem duty. III pro-
posed also to Withdraw from the United States
courts all jurisdiction whatever over matters re-
hitting TO the classification for duty oil dmporteo
merchandise.
As a substitute for the present ReappIalsenehC
Board and the United States courts IN the relations
general APPRAISERS, five of whom under the existing
Administration would be Democrats and four Re
puDncaus Three of these oHicals were 10 De
stationed at this port, constituting p""Iu! am Si
vested with appellate and lnal jurisdiction III "a,
questions respecting vance, ii "a, ~
OF duty arising under the customs Law
NV I'M LAM w"uLD WORK
An importer dissatisfied with the action VI thc
local appraiser in thu advancement Oi his invoices,
or in the classification OF his goods might appeal
that officials verdict, he might then appeal to the
Hoard Of General Appraisers, whose decision would
be llnal. mus Who're now single appear IIOM
the local appraiser TO the Board o. he"pp "'seHyhC
Ia sufficient to settle dispute as 10 value, uuuer
the proposed system Two dpiralS are piofIueu'
Iua,Inuch a. there how nearly 3,VOO f'"ppIdI'e-
menis yearly at this port, the Nc" ld"' ~ 10
argued would in all probability dOuDic lhiS mum
bcr linus increasing instead OF cssenIhe tHc pAcseh'
evils A., 900 i,,+ar
shall h,. r,,uircd to pay the duties IN cAcess eA-
ncfed bv the eN pdrtr action of the local appraiser
: before lie should have the ueht TO appel may
is he would be cut OF pocket al lne ou'S'I' anu
obliged to undergo great laror ana expense 10
grt his money back I'm case OF iaNoripie ue-
csiOn on reappras mcnt As the law 10" sl"nus'
no additional al NHlOrcm dHt.cs are r'4',,i'u "
be- paid on the basis OF an appraiser auNahc''
until the importer has had the privilege Of teNuhY
the correctness Of that advance by hearing ana
decision on rcappraiscm
Tho amendment to this bill, which. In con-
! sequence of the molchanlS protsl' WIS pr
tcnted 10 me N,'1'I Oh linn, 10 nornent as
| n is now dependent on the result 81 the re"P
/ praisemcnt Inc Hmchdu'hl aiSo p.JP1 ,ha
change, to n limited extent WIN r's%i" ~
ri ht OF an importer 10 bring INTO the Onlteu
States courts questions 81 clAsshcatioh. Vuie-
tons of law tlc ainrndrn'nt alIu"5 y" III ,ns
mittod 10 the United states courts puu gu ~ -,
tons ~ fact must he settled by the Board on
General Appraisers aud certified 10 DIV mem 10 inc
| court Tbs prov Sion Is objected % Nv the M
/ nor,crs who maintain that in thus dividing the
/ subject matter up between two tribunals II c.n,
sidcrs the Interests 81 me mere t"I'o W a,,,ont
/ account compared WIN ,n''- VI .' cj"n'i 4 y
Kctcham. the legal rcpresc ila'Ne 81 - ,,"-t
/ Crecry ~ Co. ard many other pronlIrht iIPg
/ crs in the matter re Siiu rt,,' l. h.atan
! cuS-iug the SUBJECT: II 'hS ,ol,o an
! in The Circuit 'ouff. ne is loI"''"'n 90, bt,
/ HlIrH 'l. Il t.,,t.n is vyiliing 20 cert fy
uat thc question involved IS OF slrh 'n'!r. In
T ps 70 require n r-,l'T d" ~, ,"or his o,yn de.
/ other words. the Jld-r SIS Il"" "'1 f.n tba
cI>i,u and mus y.ed MS gir,bcr aopeal
rlrr Gov.r>vr>T~ sErtr ADV 'NIA"f'
- J. IT, IN n, with tho Govern
mont I'm c..,. Of an adverse decision for the
/ ,..,,l,,,.,t ,r,,il.s that I'm that event an ap-
+ peal shall %" allowed on lhe t".l Oh 1"' ~ -
States Whenever ine ATTORNEY ''h,lHl 80" - -
u'y for % wItun ilI-ty Gays UI'rI ''f t -
r - 81, decision. What Justice Is there vi su sun /"
. ou.sdod prov sl.nt A-aih "nc '"v I,pic
mrLt LAs relieved ne 70. ma "'I ~" -
appeals. 30 far ~ c''ho. cations a. tt,TI II
. 10 l'a|'s ID H7 " vas an - 80 min the
'alor,n appeals, ID, 9h5 vi'S ~ ,',.,' ..n,cnt
"N ii.... amin. ono annual mp
'.... a,r a.,. Pole ir~toal u 5000 AS at present.
y, the ant muirty law Of 1874 mcr,hhh'' W, xxx
believed - c-N'n rpirs'1r,, dat.,ti,cs and
hni ca I'd down upoh GOV '''il ,ld riri-
/ H. oriArfN th' thIi-i. ',,' 81" ' -, ,-. h,en
] I,n' N.h'' 'l'l, '' f'.c.fIr. ,',il,f fns mer-
/ "n"t,h ", p'YS'" . i, has no su,pi.ion 81
ll". ''.' 49,, barlis. - In is hands 10
lF'up "hi' -, +, ,f,.r honIin., IL over
,,,,t'r Nnofhrr reform elected by eN-
y" ."' 't ~ ,iot o.l,n the Government proceeds
''.,,o " i'.,.I n.r.heudise for forfeiture, IL
n,n..so b ani,m,tiNc,y on The trial the face
III li'f fr,irut intrnf m the entry Of the goods.
" p.tL ~ fh,se reasonable and lust prov sions