Omaha daily bee., 1916-02-27
Mrs. Whitney Warren's Five Trunks

up her hair and arranging herself for
luncheon, she might occupy her 'mind
and fingers quite well. After luncheon
she might put in the afternoon taking
down her hair and doing It up again and
preparing a very elaborate evening
toilette for dinner. She would then find
herself In an elaborate evening dress sit
ting on the edge OF her narrow bunk
eating her dinner from q table Of rough
boards. and reminiscing to herself as she
stirred her coffee In the tin mug with an
old tin spoon.
But this picture OF a woman Of social
position and wealth, who has been accus-
toned to the soft comforts of a we'll
servanted home would probably strike the
Judge as q cruel and unusual punishment
Nowhere in the United States II there
any such spectacle TO be seen. Is II
impossible and preposterous to imagine
such thing as Mrs. Whitney Warren In
jail. even if she is convicted?
There are four separate things which
the Grand Jury accuses Mrs. Whitney
Warren OF having done.
The first count accuses her of bringing
certain merchandise into the United
States by means of a fraudulent and false
by means OF false and fraudulent prac-
tises and false statements, verbal and
written, In that she stated, in her decla-
ration, that the value OF the merchandise
was $1,000, whereas she we'll knew II was
actually worth much more, and there
after she stated verbally to the customs
examiner that three of the gowns had
been previously bought In France and
imported into the United States, and duty
had then been paid ON them, whereas she
EnaW kad ka
fore been imported into the United tSates
nor the duty paid on them.
The second count accuses her Of at
tempting to introduce the same merchan-
disc into the commerce Of the United
States by means of fraudulent and false
declaration In that the value of the mer-
chandise was largely In excess Of the
$1,000 stated in the declaration and by
means of the false verbal statement TO
the examiner.
The third count accuses her of fraudu-
lently emitting from her declaration the
value OF three gowns, as a result Of which
omission the United States might be de-
prived of the lawful duties thereon.
The fourth count accuses her OF at
tempting to introduce into the commerce
OF the United States certain imported
merchandise by means OF a false and
fraudulent declaration, in that her decla-
IaCoh btated mat the foreign cost price
or actual foreign market value Of the
merchandise was 81 500, whereas the
actual cost or foreign market value was
largely in excess of $1,000 as she well
knew,
These four counts are framed so as 70
bring Mrs. Warren's conduct within one
or more OF the various Federal provisions
against smuggling and evasion OF the
customs. Stripped Of their legal verbiage,
they accuse Mrs. Warren of two definite
violations of the customs law, namely,
differentiation Of her declared merchan-
disc and a false verbal statement to the
customs examiner.
II 10 claimed by the government that
the wearing apparel which Mrs. Warren
said cost her only $500 was actually
worth nearer $4,000 and that Mrs.
Warren knew H. When she was con-
fronted with the valuation put upon her
apparel by the government appraisers,
Mrs. Warren is accused OF having tusti-
ned her own figures by explaining that
three Of the gowns in question had
previously been imported and that she
had paid duty on them. and that, there
fore. she had not included their value in
the $1,000.
The government claims that these
three gowns had never before been Inn
ported. and that, therefore, Mrs. Warren
not only made a false verbal statement
TO customs examiner, which, IN itself,
Is violation OF the tariff act. but, By