The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1889-06-28
JUST IN TIME.
A Big Scheme Nipped in the Bud.
A Game Which. Had It Been Sue
cessful, Would Have
Taken $40, 900, 900 From the United
States Treasury.
Treasury Regulations About Draw
backs on Jute Bagging.
How the Would-Be Scoop Was Disclosed
and Brought to an Ingiorious End
Alleged Payment of 90, 900 for
Treasury Ruling.

New York, June PA Washington
special to the Evening Post says: The
Treasury Department has made an i'm
portant decision in regard to drawbacks on
jute bagging, which will change the regu-
lations so as to require that drawbacks be
paid only to actual exporters, and that
satisfactory evidence be presented to the
Department that the bagging was made OF
imported material. The statute relative
to drawbacks upon material Of that kind
requires this, but for some reason there
has been marked departure from the
technical language Of the statute for
the last three years, the practice
having grown up OF allowing draw
backs simply upon the presentation
OF ship agents manifests that certain
number OF bales Of cotton we've exported,
without any proof that the persons who
exported were the owners OF the cotton,
or that the jute Of which the bagging was
made was imported. The practice has
grown to great proportions under regula.
tion issued by Assistant Secretary May.
nard. There are good many indications
that airing has been formed which is OPP
Grating in jute-bagging drawbacks, and
that arrangements have been perfected to
contau these operations upon much
larger scale. The method Of operating
seems TO have been this The comb.
nation enter into an arrangement
by which they may obtain from
the ship owners or importing agents
copies Of the manifest OF cotton exported,
together with power OF attorney author
i izing them to collect drawbacks. So extern
give had become the operations OF this
combination that its members formed q
plan which, II successful, would have
taken millions from the treasury. This
plan was nothing less than TO endeavor 10
collect from the Treasury Department
drawbacks upon the jute bagging in which
every bale Of cotton had been wrapped
pd exported from the close OF the war 10
$50, or for period Of twenty-four
years. Tho scheme appears 10 have
been 10 obtain from all ship agents
Who would furnish them lists OF the
maniiests Of bales Of cotton exported, to
get from the ship agents or the exporters
agents, rs II they were the actual ownerS
OF the cotton, powers Of attorney 10 collect
drawbacks, without having any proof as
10 the actual importation OF the material oI
which the bagging was made. A very
hasiy estimate shows that the combina.
ton, II successful, might reasonably have
expected TO obtain Sl0,Oc0,000 from the
Treasury. But Assistant-Secreta Tiche.
nor, who has been investigating the sub
ject, has decided TO issue the new regula.
tons which will confne the payment o
drawbacks strictly within the limits OF the
law.
Attention was first called 10 this matter
In q peculiar manner. Most OF the owners
and shippers OF cotton In the South who
send their merchandise TO New York from
Charleston and Savannah, do not expect
10 exercise any further function OF owner.
ship after the cotton has been delivered "a
the factor, the latter from that moment
assumes 10 stand In tlfe relation OF owner.
Some Of the cotton producers learning that
considerable drawbacks were being paid,
ascer,ained that they we're the persons law.
fully entitled 10 the money, ifany one should
have II. and wrote 10 the Department M
20 ithcir rights. In somo instances Il
was discovered that the drawbacks had
already been paid TO other parties, where
upon llt ltfruuh lAWlulll tulltu W luc
drawback gave notice that they had q
claim against the United States for the
amount wrongiuly paid. In this manner
the attention OF the department was called
10 this drawback combination. There was
another circumstance which did not escape
fhe attention OF the authorities. In thC
element OF an estate here some months
no there was controversy between
Ac heirs, and one OF the items "a
Which objection was made was claim oI
5000 expended, Il was alleged, 10 secure
a certain ruling OF the Treasury Depart
ment relative 10 drawbacks upon jutc bag
ging. This item has never vet been ex.
plained In the court and the Treas.
ury authorities have obtained nc
further information about II, although thC
developments will be closely watched,
How s., 900 could possibly have been ex.
pended In connection with drawback
regulation cannot be understood. Tho
natural inference Is that some lobby agent
imposed upon the parties In question, and
claimed that ho had influence which he
did not possess.
Tho managers Of the combination hav,
not hesitated TO spend considerable sunni
OF money, a. thoy engaged ex.Unitet
States Senator William Pinckney Whylc
OF Maryland, 10 advocate the Claim tina
the Treasury should allow drawbacks L
be paid upon bagging exported from ia,
close OF the war 10 date.