New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-07-27
MANY PROTESTS FILED.
CONTENTION OVER SATURDAYS DUTY
PAYMENTS.

IMPORTERS oRJEcT TO THE TREASURY RuLiN"
THAT THE DrNGLEY LAW COVERED ALL
THAT DAYS BUSINESS.
There were many inquiries at the Cus'o'''
House yesterday from importers as 10 "hee''.
the new tariff applied to goods entered on 'a.-
urday. Finally Collector Bdwell, on authoriS
from the Treasury Department in Washington
issued the following formal statement
The Department having advised this once n aud ud
has gons inta ha eject it is the opinion Of this office
that. under Sections and 80 OF that Jaw, al paid
on saturday the 2ith. are subject to duty undep e
the provisions Of the new law and shouio oe
lquldated accordingly
Many protests thereupon filed by im-
porters Of goods which were entered on Satur-
day These goods arrived by the Normannia
from Hamburg: the Paris. from Southampton
and the Umbria from Liverpool The duties
under the new tariff on the goods on these
three vessels amounted to about S0OOOOO Un-
der the Wilson tariff the duties would nave
amounted to about 100000. Accordingly the
loss to importers appeared to be about S3oo'VVV
La Touraine from Havre, with many pictures
and other works OF art. arrived on Saturday.
but the captain reached the Custom House 100
late to make entry for his vessel
The protests will first be passed upon by the
Board OF General Appraisers, and then appears
may be taken by either the importers or the
Government the United States Circuit Court
then to the United States Circuit Court or APP
peals and finally to the United States Supreme
Court.
AS has been stated the Government does not
recognize parts of day. The Dingley law
specifically states that its provisions apply 10
the day on which 1t went into effect Ihere-
fore the Government holds that the law was
in effect from 1201 o'clock Saturday morning.
The Government will base its contention on
Supreme Court decision at the time or the re-
peal Of the National Bankruptcy law. An as
sgnment fled the day the repeating act pc
came effective, but before the act was signed
was rejected because Of its being held that the
law applied to the whole day. The Court TOOK TOOK
this view. The importers whose goods were
entered on Saturday last and who are required
to pay Dingley bill rates on them. In making
their protests and in claiming the right TO haSe Az.
duties imposed under the Wilson bill, take the
ground that the Dingley bill was not signed
until the Custom House had closed for the day,
and they further assert that the decision on the
Bankruptcy law does not apply IN thelr
case They say the question has never Deen
passed upon in a customs revenue case, ana
that they ntitled to finding by the courts u;
This question did not arise when the wilson Diii
became operative for the reason that the VII
son bill lowered duties. and importers waited
until the bill became law before entering
their goods Neither did the question come up
when the Mckinley bill became law, because
a future date was al pointed for the law to
become effective
Receipts Of duties at the Custom House yes
terday were very light Following is COM
parison Of duty payments at the Custom House
the first two days under the Dingley. Wilson
and Mckinley tariffs
Dingley Tariff. 1897:
r,,,, "a -...........,......... 1851 ia 7f
yui; oe .....,............... 12s 775 o.
Wilson Tariff, 1894:
.r.u.. 90 ..................s s5i2 344 ~
Aucus, % observation-disclosures S0j ia Is
Mckinley Tariff. 1890:
o.,.,e s57s 100 "a
oC