New-York tribune., 1890-05-01
THE CUSTOMS ADMINISTRATIVE BILL.
SERIOUS DISCUSSION OF 1T BEGUN IN THE
sENATE-MR- VESTS AMENDMENT REJECTED.


SERIOUS DISCUSSION OF 1T BEGUN IN THE
sENATE-MR- VESTS AMENDMENT REJECTED.
Washington, April so (Speciall.The scrious dis
cussion Of the Customs Administrative bill was begun
in the Senate to-day. and after long debate No'e
was reached the first Of the amendments hos'ic
to the purpose Of the with which IT. opponents
on the Democratic side are seeking to weigh II down
to the point OF absolute ineiciency. The atach a.
was expected. made chiefly on the fourteenth ana
fifteenth sections-thosc dealing with the mechanism
Of appeals from the decision Of a single appraiser 10
board of three appraisers and from the decision OF
that board to the United States Circuit Court Mr'
Vests amendment-which was pending hedrN tlc
whole aftcrnOOnpr that no appraiser WHO hiu
given decision values in the irSt instance sho"u
sit a member OF the Board OF Review on the same
case. This seemed plausible enough at first sight :
but when it pointed ont that there Wcr" u Dc
only nine general appraisers and that the services OF
every would probably be in demand continuously
il became evident that such proviSo would operate
simply to clog the machinery OF thc Doain' ana III
every port. except that of New-fork MAKE IL I'M
possible to go with the work of settling an appeal
on the valuation of imports. By subjcctins the
decision of appraiser u the judgment O tlrce "l
his colleagues instead OF two ~ real bchcht wonid
TO the appellant; while the process OF getting
final result would be uSclcSNly numbered ana
elaborated and the evils of the present 'dlla'orE
! system would be renewed.
Mr. Yes, and Mr.. Gray spent an hour apiece Trying
| to convince the senate that an appraiser VINO nad
already made decision would naturally takc the
part of an interested advocate, and not OF Judge
| while sitting on a Board Of Review. senators NJ
lisOn, Aldrch and HiscOck, of The Finance committee
ably defended the provisions OF the Dill showing u
| the adoption of the amendment proposed by Mr.
Vest would simply lead TO annoying delays IN 'he
transaction of the business OF the Board of Appraisers
/ and would at the same time be OF no possible al
| vantage 10 the importers. senator Mcpherson, oi
! New jersey a minority member Of the Finance Com
mittee also spoke against Mr.. Vests proposition. and
| he and senator Payne voted with the Kcpubhcah'
/ 10 reject it. The roll call showed 20 for ana -
! against the amendment
The second attack on the bill was made under Mr.
Gray's leadership. though Mr. Vest remained at hand
to help the Delaware senator along Mt Gray
wants TO throw overheard the sixteenth section en-
tirely, substitute for the final appellate juiis
diction created hy it suit at common law on inc
part OF the importer. This Is To be brought against
the Collector in the United STATES Couit,. much Is
under the present svstcm The importers right Ia
jury trial insisted upon by Mr. Gray. IN spite
Of the fact that the supreme Court had decided that
the Government could dispense with II If IT seemed
necessary to do so the efficient collection
OF the revenues Mr.. Allison replied that the jury
trial system had resulted in the ping up Of a va>t
mass Of appeals the dOckc;s Of the courts and in
| tHc disbursements OF damages 10 importers anu
! lawyers years after the duties had been paid and
already made mp in the added prices CHARGED 10
| consumers. Mr.. sherman and Mr.. lil~co'k also
made forcibe speeches against the Ie'urh To thc Oh
| system.
senator Evarts said he would vote against the
| amendment. but announced that he favored a )ufN
trial in the United States courts under certain r>tc-
| tOns, which would hasten the conclusion of rUch
| cases. Mr. sherman went further than any # the
others. and said that for himself he preferred The
| original section ID came from the House. TIE
amendments OF the senate committee vcrr almost too
generous concession T. the Importing interest which
nevertheless seemed still in measure dissatisfied.
| The Mckinley section, he argued would have been
the most effective and satisfactory solution OF the
question of appeal.
The clause stricken ont Of the House bin which
gave the importer right 70 be present. with coun-
sell az the review % an aupTai cr~ De- i~iou 'aWo 40
for good deal Of discussion. though no propo-f! 10
covering this point before tl" ~Iat'. Tn pcu"
cratic spOkesmcn called the cXc~ipu outrage. hut
Senator'S Allison, Aldrch and Ili>cOck again showed
that no such right had evcr been given 20 an m-
porter since the beginning If the Government and That
the presence Of an importer az hearing had ALWAYS
been left 10 the discretion Of the appraisers them cyc,