網頁圖片
PDF
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

• more agreeable at this moment; but believing that nothing in our situation or in our relation with other powers, however pacific at this time, can give a certain assurance of uninterrupted peace, a state which may exist in the imagination of the poet, but which no nation has yet had the good fortune to enjoy, I have deemed it my duty to present that organization which will most effectually protect the country against the calamities and dangers of any future contest in which it may be our misfortune to be involved. “Economy is certainly a very high political virtue, intimately connected with the power and the public virtue of the community. In military operations, which, under the best management, are so expensive, it is of the utmost importance; but, by no propriety of language can that arrangement be called economical, which, in order that our military establishment in peace should be rather less expensive, would, regardless of the purposes for which it ought to be maintained, render it unfit to meet the dangers incident to a state of war.” Mr. TAYLOR resumed. Let it be remembered [said he] that this was the language addressed to the House in 1821, a period in which the condition of the country called for retrenchment quite as much, if not more, than it does at F. The nation, in that very year, had been compeled to borrow five millions to meet its current expenses. I, too, [said Mr.T.] am in favor of retrenchment, and when the necessity of the country shall call for it, I shall ever be prepared to reduce the public expenditure, wherever it can with safety be reduced. But I am not for destroying: I am not for pulling down and laying waste what we have built up at so much labor and expense. To retrench useless expenses is one thing; to cut up the best defences of the country, and wantonly destroy them, is another. Retrenchment was called for when this report was made and adopted, more than it is now. There is nothing in the condition of the country at present, which requires us to reduce its establishment yet further than in 1821—nor can it be done without essential injury to the service. A remark was yesterday made by agentleman from North Caroof WILLIAMs] in reference to the Military Academy at West Point. If I understood him right, that gentleman said that the institution ought not to contain more than one hundred cadets; that that number would be sufficient to meet all the wants of the army, and to provide as many officers as could be needed for the existing establishment. Sir, can the gentleman have forgotten the report which was presented to us last session on this very point: The report of the Secretary of war (which will be found in the second volume of Executive papers, second session twentieth Congress, number 41,) states that the number of cadets graduated from that academy within eight years, was two hundred and eighty-seven; and a very singular fact was, that precisely the same number of vacancies had occurred in the army, so that the number supplied from that seminary, was just sufficient to meet the actual wants of the service—the corps of engineers having required eleven appointments, the artillery one hundred and ten, and the infantry one hundred and sixty-six. The respectable gentleman from Tennessee says that he will not consent to educate young men at the public expense, to make them officers of the army. Sir, he cannot help it. He must do it; he must educate them either as cadets, or as lieutenants. He has this choice, and this only. He must either educate them as cadets before they are commissioned in the army, or he must admit them igmorant, and educate them in the army as lieutenants; and which plan is the cheapest ? To pay them as cadets, or to pay them as lieutenants? Which method is most for the economy of the army Will he put the public property into the hands of men well disciplined ...? .. instructed in every part of their duty, or will he commit it to ignorant and undisciplined men ; The gentleman says,

let their parents educate them, and not the public Shall we listen to the gentleman, or shall we listen to the voice of experience, which has taught us an effectual lesson on this subject { Sir, we have tried the gentleman's plan. We did for: merly appoint those who had educated themselves, and we found that their education, however good, was not a military education, and did not fit them for the wants of the army. Nor is a military education to be obtained in any other way than at a military school. The gentleman has also expressed his regret that places in the army are given to the rich, and not to the poor; and yet he is for giving those places to such only as have been able to obtain a good education for themselves. Does not the gentleman see, and must not the House perceive, that the tendency of his plan must effectually exclude the poor Should such a plan prevail, you must either put ignorance in commission, or confine your commissions to the sons of the rich. The gentleman's plan is a plan pointed directly against the poor, but the existing system throws open H. military employments of the Government alike to poor and rich. Like the gentleman, I am not in favor of a provileged order, but I am equally opposed to making a privileged order of the poor as of the rich. The son of a rich man has as good right to be admitted to the service of his country as the son of a poor man—as good, and no better. But let us have no privileged order, either of rich or poor; and I insist that there is no plan which can be devised, that is so truly and perfectly republican in its principle as that of our Military Academy. How is it supplied with its students : Every congressional district in the United States is or may be there represented by one cadet. That is the principle of the institution. There may at some particular time be a slight departure from it, but that can be only because there have been no applications from particular districts. There never has been but one cadet educated at that institution from my district. He is now there, and in the senior class; and, when appointed, there was no other candidate for appointment belonging to the district. Can the gentleman . a system better calculated to spread its benefits equally over every part of the United States? For my part, I can conceive of none which provides such an entire exclusion of every thing like an aristocratic principle. But, sir, if there be abuse, such as the gentleman apprehends, it is not for us to correct it— there is another and a higher power, which will do that effectually. I refer to the sovereign people at home, who have both it and us in their hands. If a member of this House gets a warrant for his son or other relation, when there are more worthy applicants within his district, doubt not that he will hear of it. The people who are the sovereign depositaries of power, will take good care to tell him of it, and that in a way that he will remember. We need not trouble ourselves on the subject. There is a far more powerful principle that will regulate that matter. Sir, the gentleman's plan of an army, with a reduced number of officers, and with no major general, was before this House when it gave the army its present organization. A plan something like that did pass this House, and was taken up in the Senate; there it was met by the plan of the Secretary of War. That body compared the two, and after mature deliberation adopted his scheme in preference to ours. It was sent back to this House in the form of an amendment, and here it was long and gravely debated, and, notwithstanding the extreme pressure of the times, this House concurred in the judgment of the Senate, and finally adopted the Secretary's scheme. In 1815, when we were cheered with the news of peace, and were permitted to reduce the army, a question arose between the two Houses as to the number to be retained in service. This House passed the bill fixing the military peace establishment at six thousand men, with one major general.

The Senate amended it, by raising the number to fifteen

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

thousand, with two major generals. This House disagreed to the amendments. The Senate insisted. The House insisted on its disagreement, and asked a conference, which was agreed to by the Senate. The brave and patriotic gentleman from Kentucky, who sits near me, [Col. Johnson] was a member of the committee of conference. That committee agreed on the number of ten thousand, with two major generals. Their report was confirmed by Congress, and the peace establishment was fixed accordingly. It continued thus until 1821, when it was reduced to six thousand, with one major general. If that number was only adequate then, it is certainly not too large now. With so great a number of posts, and an army dispersed in small detachments over so wide an extent of territory, it is inJispensable that we should have a large number of officers. Let any gentleman deliberately weigh the reasoning of the Secretary's report, and he must, I think, become satisfied that an army on the present system is better adapted to the situation and wants of ...this country, than one either larger or smaller. I, for one, am prepared to be contented with whatever the House may finally conclude to do. It may, however, seem somewhat extraordinary that the gentleman from Kentucky, and his friends, should be endeavoring to put down the strength of the army, when they are in power, when I, who am considered as being opposed to the reigning administration, should be found endeavoring to sustain it; but it is with a view to the interests of the nation at large that I take the ground I at present occupy. In a matter of such moment, we should all consider ourselves as called to act for a great people— for this free and powerful nation; and not for any partic. ular administration, which may happen this day to be in power, and may lose it to-morrow. The great sovereign predominating power is in the people themselves. It is their interests, and not those ..". administration, that we are sent here to sustain; and we ought to provide, according to our best judgment, for their safety and happiness, without regard to any ephemeral fluctuation among those who may chance to be in the possession of political power. [Here the debate closed for this day.]

COLLECTION OF THE IMPOSTS, &c.

On motion of Mr. MALLARY, the several bills which by special order came up for consideration to-day, were postponed; and The House went into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, Mr. MARTIN being called to the chair, and took up the bill reported by the Committee on Manu. factures, “in alteration of the several acts laying duties on imports," [the more effectually to enforce the collection of the duties. Mr. MALLARY, chairman of the Committee on Manu factures, who reported the bill, rose to address the committee in explanation and support of the bill. I will now, [said Mr. M.] with the permission of the committee, endeavor to assign as briefly as I can those views which have been entertained by the committee who reported the present bill. I am aware that the subject has an important relation to the policy of the country, but, as to the present bill, it does not involve any of the princi. ples or questions which grow out of what has been denominated the tariff policy. Its one object and only purpose is to provide a remedy against an abuse of the laws of the country. I shall not disguise the fact, that the o al object of the bill is intended to enforce the tariff aw of 1828; but there is no need, in discussing it, to en. ter into the policy of that law. It has passed. It has be. eome a law of the land. It has received the sanction of this Government; and the question now is, shall it be carried into execution, or shall a law, thus solemnly and deli. berately sanctioned, be suffered to be every day violated with impunity, when the Government which passed it is aware of the violation ? This question each gentleman

must settle in his own bosom. Because he happens to be. opposed in sentiment to the policy of that act, ought he, as a good citizen, as a member of Congress, entrusted by the people with the solemn duties of legislation, to withhold his aid toward carrying the laws of the country into execution I present this simple inquiry to every candid mind. The tariff of ’28 was enacted for the protection of the domestic industry of the Union. Have not those for whose benefit it was passed, a right to come to this House, and ask and demand of us that the faith of the Government shall not be violated, nor its benefits lost, for want of our vigilance and care : Is it not derogatory to the honor, of this Government, that it should pass an important law on which the people have relied, as it was their duty to rely, and then the law should be flagrantly violated, and that the people, disappointed and deceived, shall ask in vain that we will enforce our laws? I need not say that the faith of the Government, that its dignity and honor, all forbid such a disgraceful state of things. Would not the world declare it degrading for legislators to reply to such a demand, that all that they have solemnly done means nothing; that when they passed the law, they knew and intended that it should prove a delusion, that it should carry the appearance of doing something for the domestic industry of the country, while the real purpose of those who passed it was to confer no benefit, but to practise a delusion on our fellow-citizens? Sir, there is no man on the floor of this House would dare utter such language to the people of this Union. They would teach him a lesson that he will not readily forget. But we have not yet arrived at such a crisis, and I trust we never shall. I have said that the tariff law is grossly violated; and the interposition of this House is called for, to put a stop to its violation. I acknowledge that it is ot on those who make this assertion, to show that it is true. It is for them to prove before this House that its laws are evaded and violated, and that the evasion and violation can be prevented. I place the cause of this bill on that ground; and if I cannot make out such a case as will prove that this bill, or something like this bill, is called for by the state of the country, let it be rejected. On that issue, I am content that the question shall rest. But if I can and shall show that the law is violated, violated grossly, openly, and in the most shameful manner, then I appeal to gentlemen to say whether they can reconcile to their sense of duty, rendered doubly sacred by the high station they here occupy, to vote against a measure whose only object is to prevent the most alarming evils. I have alleged that one of the most important laws of the country is violated. To prove this, it may be proper to show that both disposition and interest exist to do so, to show who they may be who have that interest and disposition. On this point I will make a few brief observa; tions. They allude, chiefly, to other nations. In this, it is not my intention to examine minutely their domestic policy, but shall refer to views and feelings which exist among them in relation to the domestic policy of this country. If we look to France, we find her pursuing her own way— executing her own policy, undisturbed. She has taken a firm stand for herself, and remains unmoved by the flattery or menaces of any other nation. Her Government and people allow others to do the same. This may be also said of Holland, of Prussia, of Russia. These nations undertake to judge for themselves of the best means to promote their own interests. They are willing that all others should enjoy the same privilege. They are not en: gaged in harassing all the world with their doctrines of political economy. But can this be said of England? All know the course that nation has pursued towards this country, and all other countries, for the last twenty years, when the encouragement of domestic manufactures was discovered. When the United States were her colo

nies, they furnished her with one of the best markets in

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

... the world for her various manufactures; after the war of

the revolution, our markets were again thrown open to her
trade. This continued until our late restrictions on com-
merce, and war closed our markets against her. In the
mean time, most of the great nations of Europe became
determined to rely on their own resources, and sealed their
markets against English manufactures. When our late
war had terminated, the market of the United States be-
came doubly interesting to England. Her people poured
into this country their immense surplus of manufactured
goods, which could find no other market in the world.
She discovered that our people and the Government show-
ed strong determination to give aid and encouragement to
our domestic industry.
She was alarmed, and we were soon overwhelmed with
her doctrines of free trade. Our policy is represented by
Englishmen as absurd, old-fashioned, and that it would be
monstrous folly to continue it. It is denounced in every
corner of England, and its violation and evasion openly re-
commended in every town and city in the kingdom. It
seems as if all classes of her people considered they were
doing God's service to render ineffectual the protecting
laws of the United States, and prostrate all our manufac-
turing establishments. Under such circumstances, influ-
enced by the most powerful considerations of her mighty
interests, we can well comprehend the exertions her peo-
ple would make to accomplish the ruin of the rival indus-
try of this nation.
I shall now [said Mr. M.] proceed to examine some of
the provisions of the existing revenue laws, under which
the alleged frauds are perpetrated. They have been
found, in practice, to be wholly ineffectual. By the fif
teenth section of the act of 1823, “the collectors of the
revenue shall cause at least one package out of every in-
voice, and one package at least out of every twenty pack-
ages of each invoice of goods, &c. which package or pack-
ages he shall have first designated on the invoice to be
opened and examined; and if the same be found not to cor-
respond with the invoice thereof, &c., a full inspection of
all such goods, &c. as may be included in the same entry,
shall be made; and in case such goods, &c. be subject to
ad valorem duty, the same shall be appraised, and subject-
ed to the penalties provided in the thirteenth section, in
the case of suspected or fraudulent invoices,” &c. I am
sensible, sir, that this is a dry subject, and somewhat diffi.
cult to be understood by those who have not devoted to it
their particular attention. I will endeavor to make my-
self understood as well as the occasion will permit. The
collector designates one package of goods out of every in-
voice at least, and at least one package out of every twenty
packages of each invoice. These selected packages are
sent to the office of the appraisers, for them to examine and
appraise, according to the provisions of the sixteenth sec-
tion of the act of 1823. The collector, also, if fraud was
suspected, might send all the goods to the appraisers con-
tained in the same entry.
The appraisers are bound by law “diligently and faith-
fully to examine and inspect such goods, &c. as the collec-
tor may direct, and truly to report, to their best know-
ledge and belief, the true value thereof.” &c. On their re-
port the duties are computed.
By the thirteenth section, the penalty is prescribed in
ease goods are invoiced below their true value. It pro-
vides that “if the value, at which the same shall be so ap.
praised, shall exceed, by twenty-five per centum, the in-
voice value thereof, then, in addition to the ten or twenty
per centum, as the case may be, laid upon correct and re-
gular invoices, according to law, there shall be added fifty
per centum on the appraised value,” &c., By the tariff of
1828, the difference between the invoice price and ap:
praised value, in order to incur the penalty, was ten per
cent. But this seems to have been as inoperative as the
difference of twenty-five per cent. in the act of 1823.

It will be observed, and to this I would call the most steady attention of the committee, that on those goods which have not been appraised, no penalty is incurred, if the entry were ever so fraudulent, were the law ever so flagrantly violated. The committee are most respectfully requested to bear this in mind, as, by the practice at the most important custom-house in the United States, it will be shown that the penalty can never reach any goods except the package sent to the appraisers' office. Here arises one of the great causes of complaint. It would be inferred from the law itself, that the collector retained the custody of all the goods contained in the entry until the appraisement was made. But this proves to be a mistake. Neither the collector nor any officer has the control of any except the package which has been sent to the appraisers. The penalty reaches these, and these alone. This will be more fully explained before I close my remarks.

I will now proceed to explain the proceedings at the custom-house in New York." The information I possess is derived from the highest sources of respectability, and on which l feel confident the fullest reliance may be placed. Indeed, it may be substantially obtained from numerous American merchants engaged in our European trade. That our laws are evaded, and the manner by which it is done, are well understood by a vast proportion of the business men of New York. It is a common remark—it is in the mouth of almost every one in that city. , But being in possession of full, ample, and aeeurate information, I will present such as the time and oecasion may require for a full understanding of the subject. It will not be required of me to give a history of a vessel from a foreign port, from the time she is first boarded by an officer of the customs, until the goods imported in her are sent into the market. I will give all that is necessary to a full understanding of the subject. After the bond is given in an estimated amount of duties, an order is made to send the designated packages to the appraisers' office, which is done; a permit is then granted for all the goods not ordered for appraisement. Before the appraisement is made, and F. any fraud can, conse

uently, be detected, if any exists, } . well informed that most or all of the goods contained in the entry and invoice, except those in the public store, are sold, and distributed in the shops throughout the city, or sent in various directions out of the city, and, of course, out of the control of the collector. It should also be observed that a large amount of goods is imported into New York on account of houses in Philadelphia, Baltimore, Boston, Albany, &c., and these are frequently taken directly from the vessel in which they were imported, in vessels destined for those respective places. . So far have delays taken place in presenting invoices to the appraisers to have sample packages examined, that instances have occurred of their being left for eight or nine months in the public store before the appraisers were called upon to make the examination. It is also to be observed that the appraisers make no examination until the invoice is presented to them, and that the final adjustment of duties cannot be made until they report to the collector the result of such examination.

To illustrate this subject still further, I will present still further evidence, which I will read from the per before me. It is derived from a source on which, I assure the committee, the fullest reliance may be placed. It is contained in answers to questions proposed, in order to ob. tain full and precise information. “If, on examining the sample packages, the goods be found invoiced below their value, can the collector order the other eighteen packages to be sent to the public store, they having been bouded under the permit?”

This requires a word of explanation. The present collector, for a time, sent two packages out of twenty to the

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

appraisers for examination. He was determined to execute the law. He had reason to believe that frauds were perpetrated, and he wished to use all reasonable means to prevent them. He therefore sent two packages out of twenty, instead of one, as had been the practice before. But from the clamor of the importers, and under the advice of the Secretary of the Treasury, he had to return to the old practice. [Mr. CAMBRELENG here interposed, and inquired on what authority the evidence alluded to by Mr. MALLARY rested. Mr. MALLARY replied that the authority was of the most unquestionable respectability. Mr. DRAYTON made a question of order. The gentleman from Vermont was about to read a document to the House, of the most important character. When the authority is demanded on which it rests, the gentleman pledges himself that it is good and respectable. I do not doubt that such is his opinion, but I have a right to doubt the act; and I inquire of the Chair whether any member of this committee has not a right to demand on what authority a er rests, which is used for the purpose of having an j on the action of this committee ? The CHAIRMAN decided that a member, while addressing the committee, might read in his place any paper containing respectful language, and could not be re*. to give up the authority ou which it was founded. t was for the committee to judge of the value of what is disclosed. Well, [said Mr. M.] if the coast is clear, I will proceed. I stated that the authority on which the evidence is founded, gentlemen might be assured, was of the highest character. The subject was one to which I have paid the strictest attention, and, for the present, my representations, it is presumed, may be sufficient. ow, sir, the answer to the question to which I referred some time ago, will be given: Answer. They cannot; for the goods are not under his control, and no provision has been made by law for him, in such case, to enter the warehouse of the merchant, and take away the goods to be appraised. Q. May not the eighteen packages, as soon as they are landed, be sent by the consignee to auction, and sold A. They not only may be, but frequently are, put on board of packets or steamboats direct from the ship, and forwarded to the purchaser, owner, or ultimate consignee. Q. What remedy has the Government other than by adding the penalty of fifty per cent, and that, too, though the goods are invoiced at one-fourth of their value ; A. The Government has no remedy—not even that which you seem to suppose it to have; for the fifty per cent cannot be added until the goods are examined, appraised, and declared to have been invoiced below their true value. This answer has reference to the acts of Congress to which I referred in the former part of my remarks. Q. Does not each package of woollens usually contain goods of different qualities and value, often varying in the invoice price from fifty cents to two dollars and fifty cents or more, in the square yard A. o do. Of late, whole packages are frequently invoiced, all at one price per yard. On this, [said Mr. M.] he would give a brief explanation as to the effects. By including in the same invoice different qualities of cloths, and then making an average of the price, the whole package is brought, for instance, under the dollar minimum, and charged with duty as having cost a dollar the square yard. The effect is obvious. By placing in a package a few pieces—five or six, costing not more than fifty-five or sixty cents the square yard, the same package may be completed with goods which cost above one dollar the square yard and legally chargeable with duty as having cost two dollars and fifty cents

whereas the whole package is charged with duty as having cost one dollar the square yard. The result is, that goods costing fifty-five or sixty cents, and legally chargeable with duty as having cost a dollar, are employed to bring down under the dollar minimum goods that should be charged as having cost two dollars and fifty cents. The evasion is so plain, that further comment is totally unnecessary, Q. What evidence does the sample package afford of the quality and actual value of the other packages included in the invoice # A. None at all; nor does it afford any evidence of the quantity beyond this—that if a man is found honest in one transaction, it is a fair presumption of his integrity in others. Q. Is there good ground to believe that invoices are made out in fraud of law, by some agent of the owner in New York, without the direction or knowledge of the owner himself : A. No doubt but that fraudulent invoices are made out in New York; they have been detected by the appearance of the writing, paper, &e. Latterly it has become more difficult to detect those cases from the appearance of the invoice, as the paper is sent out with the caption either engraved or written in Europe. The committee [said Mr. M.] can at once see the operation of the existing laws, which I have presented, both on revenue and manufactures. One package in twenty sent to the office of the appraisers, the officers of the Government have no control over the remainder, but they are scattered to the four winds. They are beyond the reach of Government. The duty is therefore paid on the nineteen packages, according to the invoice price, let the en: try be ever so fraudulent. If the appraisers should find that the sample package was invoiced at fifty per cent. below actual cost, that single package alone can be made subject to the penalty. It is clear that this might be wholly sacrificed, and the importer would still gain a profit. . But, as I shall explain hereafter, that single package is in no danger, according to the practice of the appraisers. It has seldom or never happened that they have made an appraisement by which any penalty has been incurred. Such, sir, are the facilities which exist under our laws, for the commission of fraud and evasion. The door is as wide open as the warmest advocates of free trade could desire. It would be marvellous if they did not occasionally pass through it. I shall now proceed to show that the facilities have been pointed out, have been well improved, and describe the means which have been employed. It cannot be expected that a full development of all the evasions can be made. Those concerned are not among the most ready to make disclosures. But I am in possession of some facts which most clearly show that fraud and evasion do exist, and how they are managed. The ship Silas Richards entered New York last spring. It was believed that many of the goods imported in that vessel, as in all others, would be found invoiced with a view to evade the legal duties. A rigid examination was desired and allowed, and suspicions were fully realized. I have before me a letter addressed to the collector of New York, signed by several of the most respectable merchants of that city, which will explain the re-sult of that examination. The names will be given to any member of the committee who may desire to see them. I will read what may be material.

New York, 9th July, 1829.

DEAR siR: We were invited a few days since to examine at the public store, a quantity of broadcloths, just inported in the ship Silas Richards, and which, we were informed, were invoiced at less than one dollar per square ard. After a careful examination of several bales of said goods, we are decidedly of the opinion, that, although a few

[ocr errors]

pieces in each bale might possibly, under the present extreme depression of trade, have been bought in England at a dollar per square yard, yet that the principal part of them could not have cost less than one dollar twenty-five, to one dollar and fifty cents per square yard. We have been informed that these goods have been admitted to an entry with an addition of but nine per cent. to the invoice, and that this addition will bring but a few pieces of them over the minimum of a dollar per square yard. We are also informed, that, of the two appraisers called in to say what addition, if any, should be made to the invoice, one was an agent of the British manufacturers, who is constantly receiving and selling large quantities of cloth at auction, the other an auctioneer, both of whom have a strong interest in passing goods at the custom-house at less than their value. Now, sir, as we are constantly in the business, and have been for years past, of purchasing in England for cash, on our own account, or of receiving goods to sell on account of our friends, and feeling confident, as we do, that the goods referred to were invoiced at from twenty to fifty per cent, below their yalue, we cannot refrain from most respectfully inquiring if it be true that but nine per cent. has been added to the invoice, thereby screening the owner from the penalty which would have been incurred had ten per cent been added, and still leave the consignee to pay a duty of but forty cents per square yard on the principal part of these goods. If it be so, our friends and we must abandon the business of importing cloths, for we are paying a duty of one dollar per square yard on the same quality of cloth, as a large proportion of the goods in question are, while the foreigner is sending them in and paying but forty cents per square yard. We deem it a duty we owe to our Government, flS well as ourselves, most respectfully to protest against such

- a course of business; a course which has driven many, and

will drive every honest man, out of the importiug business, and by which Government is defrauded of the revenue.

SAMUEL SwanTwoUT, Esq.,

Collector, doc., New York.” -

I shall. now proceed to give the committee a few instances, out of hundreds I possess, of evasions of our laws, and the manner by which they are accomplished. My authority is derived from most respectable merchants of New York. I shall not use their names on this occasion, in public debate. I see no necessity, at present, to make the designation; yet they will not be withheld, on the application of any gentleman of the committee who desires to see them. I shall read the printed statements which have been placed in my hands. The authenticity, I am confident, cannot be denied. My authority, as I have be: fore stated, is ready to be disclosed.

“A dealer of this city purchased at auction a case of goods, which were sold entitled to debenture. , Having made previous purchases of the same kind of goods at pri: vate sale, and being thus acquainted with the original cost at the place of manufacture, he could judge, with consi. derable accuracy, what amount of debenture they would yield to him on their shipment to a foreign port. After making the necessary entries at the custom-house, for the purpose of shipment, he was much surprised to find the amount of debenture so small; and on a further examina

• tion, found that this was owing to the very low price at

which the goods had been entered at the custom-house, It appeared strange to him that one foreign importer should be able to buy the same article in the same market thirty to thirty-five per cent cheaper than another, both having received the same kind of goods by the same vessel. To test the matter, however, as to the actual cost of the goods in question, a pattern was cut from several of the pieces, specifying the number and length, the vessel by which they had been received, &c. &c. These patterns were sent to Europe, to the place where the goods were made and purchased, and very particular directions were given

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

to ascertain the actual cost paid by the agent of the importer. The information returned was of the most positive and unquestionable character. It stated, among several particulars of minor consideration, the time when the goods were bought, by whom, and of whom they were bought, and the exact nett price paid for them. The result was (as anticipated by judges) that they actually cost the importer twenty-five to thirty per cent. more than he had paid duty on at the custom-house.” “A merchant of this city happened to go into the store of an importer, who does the bulk of his business by auetion, and, seeing a package of desirable goods, inquired the price of it. The invoice was exhibited, through a mistake of the importer. It happened to be that by which the goods had been entered at the custom-house, and by which they had paid the duty. It was at least thirty-five per cent, less than many other importers paid for the same description of goods at the same time. As a proof of this, and to try whether the cost exhibited was fictitious, the dealer offered to the importer twenty-five per cent. profit on the cost exhibited. This was refused, with his assurance that at that rate he should lose money, which he could not afford to do. Had the custom-house invoice been the real cost, would he have refused this enormous profit? This act speaks for itself, and does not need further elucidation.” “It is a common custom, and one well understood by merchants, that many foreign importers, resident in this country, and who do nearly all their business by auction, are in the constant habit of receiving two invoices of each parcel of goods. One of these is made out at a very low rate, and is used to enter the goods. The other contains the actual cost. . A foreign importer, by accident, sold a package of goods at a certain advance on the cost, and this cost unfortunately happened to be that by which they had been eutered and the |. paid. Shortly aftermaking the sale, he discovered that he had sold the goods at an advance on the fictitious cost, or, in other words, on the custom-house invoice. He therefore goes to the buyer, and informs him that he had made this mistake, and insists that he should make up the difference between the actual and false cost. The buyer, who had got a good bargain, and was much surprised at the novelty of this request, refused to allow any thing, and informed him that, if he persisted in this claim, he would go to the collector of the customs and expose him. The importer was [..." enough to pocket the affront, and went about his usiness.” “The foreign importers of woollen goods drive an enormous trade by means of auctions. Indeed, they searcely sell any thing at private sale. When they do so, their invoices are never shown. In a confidential conversation (as regards names) with a man of integrity, dependent on a clerk's salary for support, I obtained some insight into the manner in which these woollen dealers manage their frauds. The common custom amongst this class of importers is, to enter goods on an invoice made out expressly for this purpose, and which is always much less than the

tom-house entry, but from an invoice of this description, during the time that he had been so employed. These in: voices he believes to be thirty-three and a third per cent. at least under the real cost at the place of manufacture. “As a proof of this, and most conclusively proving that goods are entered at the custom-house on spurious invoices, the following fact is given: “A piece of broadeloth, costing four to five shillings per yard, as entered at the custom-house, and paying a duty of thirty per cent. under the old tariff, would frequently be bought in at auction, on account of the inporter and owner, at two dollars and a quarter to two dollars and, a half per yard I Would not any person, in his

senses gladly sell at this price, if the piece of cloth did

actual cost. He assured me that he never made out a eus-,

[ocr errors]
« 上一頁繼續 »