New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-11-19
AN IMPORTANT CUSTOMS CASE.
SHALL REIMBURSEMENT BE BY THE COURTS OR
BY THE APPRAISERS?


Washington Nov. 10 (Specien.-In the suit OF
Aufmordt and others against Edward l.. Hedden. Col
ector Of the Port of New-York which was submitted
in the United States Supreme Court yesterday. counsel
for appellants raised several important questions which,
IL decided by the court, will either sustain or deny
the constitutionalty Of several provisions Of the law
10 simplify the collection of customs duties which was
anproyed June TO- 1890 as well as Of the old law in
regard TO appraisements and ACCOMPLISHMENTS Of the
value CT dutlabe goods. The case was argued In be
half of the appellants by Henry r. Tremain and by
Assistant Attorney General A. X Parker for the Gov
eminent. The plaintiffs contend that In case OF re
apprasement Of the value Of imported goods. over
which there Is "a controversy, the secondary proceed
ngs must be conducted In the same manner as suit
in court Counsel for appellants contended that the
phrase All reasonable ways and MEANS" in the pro
vision regarding the. duty Of appraisers and other
officers of customs in ascertaning the actual market
value of duabe goods had never been passed upon by
the courts and he also challenged the contitutionay
If the Office of merchant appraiser The constitu
tionality of the provision of the old law which pro.
vdes The appralsement thus determined shall he
final, and be deemed 10 be the true value was also
challenged by counsel for plaintiffs. The three points
noted 70 quote Mr.. Parker's words, Are plainly the
three principal questions presented by the case at bar
OF course If the supreme Court should decide in
favor of the plaintiffs in their contention that in con
sderng case Of reapprasal OF vaue the importer has
constitutional right To hold proceedings as In SUIT
in court. the importer would lie able TO bring the
question of the true value OF the disputed invoice be-
fore the United States Court to be there determined by
a jury and Sections 10 and - Of the act Of June 30.
1890, providing that rear.raisement shall be by a
Beard Of General Appraisers. would fail.
The decision Of the supreme Court In this case.
therefore Will be awaited with unusual interest and
anxiety, not only by every Treasury and customs
official from Secretary Window down. but by every
importer in the land. a, well by the American
agents OF foreign manufacturers. IL II understood
fiat counsel for appellants In several Other important
cages nave included their bills of exceptions the
same points which were argued BY Mr.. Tremain yes
terJay in Aumordt tase. 10 as 10 be the safe
side.
A SILVER OFFER FROM NETWORK DECLINED.
washington Nov. ia prominent National bank
~ New orl, CITY made offer 10 the Treasury De
nartment 10 day TO sell 100000 OF silver the
market rates Ii was refused on The general ground
that fine Department can consider offers only the
regular purchasing days-Mondays, Wednesdays and
Fridays.
4 RUMoR ABOUT REPRESENTATIVE BAKER.
Washington Nov Is (spccial.-Thc report tina. Rep
vespntatIyc Charles 3 Baker. Of the NXXth WORK
Congress District i tO lie appointed Assistant secre
ta,y OF the Treasury TO succeed General George >.
paclelIer cannot H. confirmed here. IL Il believed
that the Secretary OF the Treasury. who has been
bu,ly engaged the preparation Of hrs annual report.
has had no time 90 give any consideration TO The qaes-
ton OF General Daclcllcr's and II Is Under
stood that the President has never discussed the name
Of Mr. Baker In relation TO the vacant Assistant secrc'