The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1919-09-11

MS far as the Underwriters were concerned
Secondly, if the Customs Office said that
there was no duty on these goods, they
have misinformed you. A Mr.. Wilkinson.
of the Customs Office, told me personally,
also our office manager, that the full
amount of the customs on the peanuts was
$500 per ton and on the beans, 25c per
bushel. The corn, being the smaller per-
centage of the cargo. had no duty, but the
articles were mixed TO such an extent that
il would have been impractcable TO try to
sort the corn from the beans and peanuts,
and IL would have been necessary TO take
the full cargo.
| asked Mr.. Wilkinson If it were not pos
sible TO get TO a man of higher authority
than himself, and he said mot on this side
Of Washington. d.. c." | told him that
Washington wasn't so very far away; fur
thermore | told him that we would pay
100000 for the cargo and he said that
nothing less than the full amount of the
customs would be considered. All that Mr.
listed asked us to do was TO satisfy the In
spector of Customs and submit him a bid
on the rest.
notice another item in the Seattle Times
where the Customs Office said that no such
tender was made and in any event, could
did not put the tender in writing. but we
only had about three hours to make our
decision; the Health Department called us
and said that the stuff was about TO be
dumped, so we had 10 do most Of our work
by phone Mr.. Wilkinson cannot deny this
because | made this offer in the presence
of witnesses. over the phone. They do not
deny that the stuff was dumped, do they 4?
Nor can they deny that it would have made
IL. - IL. k.
portunity TO use it for such.
Furthermore. | want TO tell you that this
is 10 dream. | expected denial such as
this by the Federal Authorities. someone
trying to shift the blame onto someone else.
We took precautions TO cover up every loop
hole and am ready to face this with proof.
We have been up against this deal before
and have been informed by the authorities
that all goods landing on American SOIL
damaged or otherwise. must have the duty
paid. We are feeding now the latter part
of a damaged cargo Of rice that arrived
here last May and have few hundred sacks
left. On this cargo we paid the full amount
of the duty, $4,000 per ton; the Under
writer's were satisfied with $500 per ton.
while the Government demanded the full
amount of the duty, $1,000, or four times
the amount that the owners received for
| the cargo.
L trust that TINS statement VIII nelp cler
the matter up to your satisfaction. Thank
| ing you for your consideration in this, beg
| TO remain, Yours truly,
/. w. RINGER.
Now what do you know about that?
| As we said before, getting the truth Is
some ehore.
The fact remains that this 600 tons was
dumped into the bay when it should have
| been used as hog feed.
II was wasted instead of aiding to cut the
cost of living.
! Apparently the Pacific Meat Company did
| all il could in the matter.
Evidently the customs authorities differ
considerably in the conception of the law
and of their duties.
The Star has no quarrel with anybody,
nor does it seek an argument with anybody
over the case.
But The Star still insists that it is bad
business for foodstuffs to be dumped in
stead of being used as feed, and every time
such a case comes to its attention it will
publish the facts, as it finds them, for the
public benefit.