Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1902-04-10
CUSTOMS RULING ON
NAMES Of FIRMS

Treasury Department, March IS, 1902
iT;-The Department duly received
your letter OF the goth ultimo recon-.
m.Gding a revival of the paragraph in
article 1851 of the Customs Regula.
tons Of 1884. waving the insertion OF
the names Of copartners in certain sue.
toms bonds.
You state that "a greater part of the
warehouse bonds executed at this
(yCur) port are given by Chinese
firms, whose recurring lmportations,
mostly of rice, are entered for bond on
arrival by the three or four regular
monthly Hongkong steamers; that
the partnership lists of Chinese firms
comprise seldom less than Is names
and as high as 90 names and that
while no condition exists to such a
degree among copartnership import
/ ers, other than Chinese, some Of our
white firms comprise as many as l.
| partners"
The omission of the paragraph In
question from the regulations OF 1892
I is apparently due 70 an opinion of the
| Solicitor of the Treasury, published
in T D. 1907, OF November IS, 1891,
| IN which, after indicating how bonds
( ral uuties referred to in the act OF
lo,G, and customs bonds not within
the provisions OF that act. should be
| executed by firms, he said:
In all instances the names OF the in
diyidual members of the firm should
be inserted in the body Of the bond.
The act of June 20. 1876, on which
the aforementioned paragraph In ar
ticle 1851 of the Customs Regulations
OF 1854 was based, was extended by
section 20 of the act of August IS
1894, to all customs bonds.
The matter was submitted to the SO
icitOT of the Treasury, who, in lcttel
dated the 18th instant, advised the De
partmcnt as follows:
The word should" In the above sen
tence Gin all instances the names o
the Individual members OF the firm
should be inserted in the body of tn,
hOHdD seems racer to have beef
used in the sense Of advising as to tn,
prOpricty of having the names insert
ell in the body Of the bond, than In tn,
sense that the insertion of the names
was legally necessary or obligatory
As q matter Of fact, bond duly sign
Cl and sealed, would be valid withou
the insertion of the name or names O
the 0bigors therein. Certainly,
would be sufficient to insert the fir
or partnership name. 1t Is the signs
ture or seal of the party that fixes hi
liability on a bond, not the recital O
his name in the body OF the instr
ment, as one of the obligors. He
bound If he signs and seals, althOug
his name does not appear in the II
stTument as one of its parties. (MuI
free on Official Bonds, sec. y. Sc
no legal objection, therefore, to a r,
turn to the practice indicated by pari
graph of article 1851 OF the Custom
Regulations of 1884.
In view of this opinion of the Sol
citor of the Treasury, the DepartmeT
hereby amends article 15i5 of the Gu
toms Regulations of 1899 by addin
the following paragraph:
The insertion of the individui
names of corpartners in bonds eXecu
ca ny firm as principals, may /
omitted when written notice of the fu
names of all cOpartners embraced
such firm shall have been previousI
filed with the collector.
Respectfully,
o. L. SPAULDING,
Assistant Secretary.
Collector of Customs. San Francisc