New-York tribune., 1902-05-10
BAGGAGE INSPECTION.


Secretary Shaw has earned the gratitude Of
every Atlantic traveller, especially Of every
woman He has given directions which ought
to infuse a new spirit into the custom house
service. Instead Of enforcing the tariff laws
in petty and aggravating fashion. he plans to
have passengers treated in a liberal manner
with regard to personal baggage inspection. 1t
is not intended 10 waive the collection of duties
on any goods subject thereto-and rightly-but
offensive and Overminute methods Of inspection
are TO be avoided, because they annoy the
travelling public TO a degree entirely out Of
proportion to the good accomplished In collect
ing revenue and detecting fraud The law
ought not 10 concern itself with trifes and
while officers should be vlgilant TO prevent
smuggling they may well deal reasonably and
literally with the average passenger, who has
no intention to defraud the government, but
has an intense desire to avoid trouble with his
baggage.
The new regulations provide for the private
examination of the baggage OF women who
desire 1t. This is only decent The habit Of
turning out on the piers, in sight OF curious on
lockers personal apparel Of women is most
Objectionable. So far as possible, such exami-
nation should be avoided altogether and when
il is necessary either to appraise goods or to
look for suspected violations of the law the in
spectiOn should be In private The Secretary
gives a somewhat broader Interpretation than
has hitherto prevailed Of the statute allowing
free entry to personal apparel purchased abroad
10 the value Of $1O0 There is no reason why
that exemption should not extend TO all the
articles which the traveller gets for his per
sonal use and adornment To limit il TO clothing
in the narrow sense Of coats and hats is unrea-
sonable. Another change In the rules which Is
plainly just is that giving persons who have
been abroad a year with fixed abode the privi-
leges of nOnresidents. Hitherto the residence
required has been two years. The average per
son abroad for year will naturally purchase
in the ordinary course of living more than 500
worth of personal effects. Unless he went away
with an extraordinary equipment he will need
them, and II is only reasonable that he should
bring them in without paying duty on them as
merchandise which he had gone abroad TO pur-
chase. In the examination Of baggage the rule
as laid down by the Secretary is that while all
customs duties properly collectible under the
law must be secured and intentional viola
"tions of the law detected and punished care
must be taken to avoid petty and extortionate
"exactions under a narrow Interpretation of the
"law and misapprehension of the purposes Of
"the inspection"
II these directions faithfully followed by
suDordlnates there Is no reason why the friction
over baggage inspection should not cease The
wisdom of the 800 limit on free personal effects
may be questioned. but It Is now the law Those
who have asked for more liberal regulations
have said that their purpose was not TO escape
duties, but TO avoid useless annoyance. All
whose motives are thus described will, we are
sure, be satisfied. The officials under the new
rules stand ready to take their word within
reasonable limits 10 their dutiabes, TO con-
duct necessary examinations with due regard
for personal feelings. and 10 make liberal
allowance for all the uncertainties which a
traveller may have about the petty details of his
baggage. With such a system nobody need find
hardship except those who object to paying