St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-01-25
TO LEGALIzE ROBBERY.
The Administrative Customs Bill
Tinkered in the Lower House.

ltnkefeu In the Lower House.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 24.-The time of
the house was almost wholly taken up
in discussing proposed amendments to
the customs administrative bill
in committee Of the whole. The
pending amendment was that Of
fered by Mr.. Payne. of Pennsyl-
vania, to section Is, providing that, dur
ing the pending of any controversy or
litigation about the amount of duty to
be paid by any owner, agent or importer
or consigee on any imported merchan-
disc in the courts, the merchandise in
question shall remain in the govern
ment warehouse and under the
control of the Secretary of the
Treasury and in all actions brought
against the collector of customs by own
ers, agents, importers or consignees the
plaintiff shall be required to prove be-
fore he can recover that said mer-
chandise at the time of trial Is in the
custody of the government. Mr.. Flower,
of New York, read a telegram from
Charles Landon IL Co., of New York,
protesting against the Bayne amend
ment. Mr.. Mills, of Texas, supported
the amendment. He spoke in behalf of
the taxpayer: If an importer paid a
higher rate of duty, and then sold his
merchandise, he made the taxpayers paw
the duty. Then, when with one hand
he had taken money out of the pocket
of the taxpayer and had paid it with the
other to the treasury, he went into the
courts and secured re-rating of the
duty at the lower rate, thus again taking
the money from the taxpayer. If the
amendment was agreed to and the goods
required to be kept in the warehouse
pending litigation. the taxpayer would
at any rate be required to
PAY THE DUTY BUT ONCE.
Mr.. Carlisle, Kentucky, thought t hat
the amendment did not strike at the
fraudulent importer, but at the honest
importer. A fraudulent importer never
wanted to go into court. The amend
ment was an indirect provision that no
honest importer of goods should be
allowed to appeal to the courts for the
correction OF any wrongs. Owing to
the crowded docketS of the courts a de-
cision in an import case may not be
rendered for three or four years. If,
in the meantime, the goods were re-
quired to be kept in bond, it would work
hardship on the importer. The rem
edy was for congress to make it's stat
utes plain and simple, so that the Off
GERS of the government might have no
difficulty in constituting them. and the
courts might be more diligent in the
trial of import.cases. Mr.. La Toilette, of
Wisconsin, offered an amendment to the
amendment providing that perishabe
goods may be withdrawn pending Iiti-
cation. This was agreed to, but the
Bayne amendment as amended was de-
feated. Mr.. Breckenridge. of Kentucky,
submitted an amendment, the effect
of which is to give the circuit court the
right to determine questions of fact as
we'll as questions at law, AMI pleaded
for the right of every citizen to have his
case tried before jury of his peers.
Mr.. Chapman, of Michigan. favored this
amendment, but after further discus
sion the amendment was rejected. Mr..
Carlisle offered a substitute for the
whole section proposing to allow the
courts to determine questions of fact as
we'll as law. This was rejected. Some
further progress was made with the
bill, when the committee rose and the
house at 1850 adjourned.