not themselves agreed, can be justified on no plea of public necessity. "What is morally wrong cannot be politically right." To place the trader in uncertainty as to his calculations; to surround the transactions of business with pit-falls and red tape finicalities; to overlay the real difficulties of his own calling with technical mulcts and official obstructions, on the pretext that they are necessary to the collection of the duties, is to forget that the revenue itself is productive only in the ratio of the extension of commerce; and that obstructions which discourage trade, and therefore diminish revenue, for the sake of making levies of duties strict and of impossible evasion, is in point of fact to mistake the means for the end, and to diminish the public income, for the sake of more precisely collecting it. 6. But perhaps the chief objection to the principle of ad valorem duties is that they place the merchant at the mercy of the Customs' officer, and afford enormous means of bribery and partiality. Value being a quite indefinite term, it is open to the authorities to pass the goods of one merchant at his own appraisement, and to stop for seizure the very same quality and kind of goods, imported by his rival in business, as being undervalued. One consignee secures a monopoly of the tea market by having the good fortune to clear Fokein Bohea tea at ls. 6d. per lb., while the rest of the very same cargo is seized for under value, because it is not entered at 2s. 2d., or an excess on the actual quantity imported of £8301 6s. To-day silk purses entered at £29, are seized for under value-to morrow a second consignment of the very same quantity and quality is entered at £28 10s., or 2 per cent. less, and passed at once. One merchant may "make things easy," and expe rience no difficulty; while his competitor in the very same trade, and entering his values at the very same rate, may be arrested in the process of his whole business by capricious stoppages and vexatious conflict of practice—while a total want of uniformity in the interpretation of the same tariff and orders by different officers, renders the most experienced merchant or agent totally at a loss to manage his trade with any reliable certainty of procedure or calculation. It may be useful to premise that wherever condensation could be advantageously applied to the cases as originally stated in the Reports, it has been attempted. To promote this very desirable object the Committee have not hesitated occasionally to avail themselves of the more laconic as well as lively abstracts of the original Reports, which have from time to time appeared in the periodical press, where these substantially transferred the facts and spirit of the actual statement of the party. For the convenience of reference it is considered useful to distinguish the various examples by numbering of them, and adding in parentheses references to the original Reports. A correspondent from Hull, thus quaintly and curtly introduces— No. I. It is a case of harps, Jews' harps, we mean, on which we and other Christians delight to perform. It was entered for the ad valorem duty at £30 -seized, as it was clearly worth twice as much. What was to be done; the harps were wanted at Zion, or some other inland town, and the delays and vexations of Customs boards were greatly to be deprecated. The parties who entered them at their just value agreed to put £5 more on the case, and pay some 20s. more duty, rather than be sub. ject to the trials of patience which the Customs required. The offer was rejected with scorn. The next resource was to give the goods up, and send in an invoice. Now came the time for play. The box was emptied; there were 3,000 gross of Jews' harps therein, and away went the Customs' officers, each with a pocket full of harps, harping about town, in toy shops, ironmongers' shops, market stalls, &c. &c., to find some one green enough to buy their harps! No, no one liked their music, no one would make a bid, "let them harp ever so sweetly," and silent and dejected they returned to their homes, and, like the daughters of Zion hung their harps upon the willow! At last they gave them up, and were even scornfully refused the 20s. extra duty which the importers had at first offered to get them free!-(9th Report, Case 96.) A scarcely less ludicrous instance of official "oriental scrupulosity," is furnished by II. A box of German fuzees, for lighting cigars, was entered for duty at £6. It was seized for under value, and the partics told that, in the opinion of the surveyor, it was worth at least twice as much. The receivers, to prove the correctness of their entry, were able to show not only their own invoice, but also that belonging to a London house, which had ordered a similar quantity of the same article. This was not sufficient; there was no remedy but re-entry at double the value and duty, giving up the article, or applying to the board in London. This last was tried; a memorial was forwarded, along with a sample of the cigar lighters, to the young gentlemen of the Board of Customs, who, after testing their value themselves, and making the necessary enquiries among the trade, came to the unanimous decision that the case was undervalued exactly to the extent of 6s.—that it ought to have been entered at £6 6s., and not at £6: that the seizing officer was consequently justified in his seizure, and that Her Majesty's Customs, by his promptitude, vigilance, and superior knowledge of the value of German cigar lighters, had escaped being defrauded to the value of 7d., which was the difference of duty the consignees had, after all this solemn trifling, to pay!— (9th Report, Cuse No. 95.) An edifying pendant to the foregoing, is supplied by the next case of a seizure of articles of a similar description. III. We have imported, ex Lord Strangford, Partridge, from Hamburgh, five cases of empty boxes, and entered such as usual at the rate of 1s. 6d. per gross. but which the Landing Surveyor, on examining to-day, stopped for undervaluation. As this article has always been entered by us and by the other principal importers thereof, at the above stated value, we beg that the goods be given to us, as per our entry. We We can refer to a great many entries of ours for that article, the latest of which was on the 2nd inst., for four cases by the Johanna Carolina, and on the 5th inst. for three cases per William, whose value at the rate of Is. 6d. per gross, has been approved of, and it seems to us rather extraordinary, that all at once they should be stopped, and we are satisfied that it will make the same impression on your Honorable Board, while being informed that these boxes when filled with 14,400 lucifers per gross, supplied each with a printed label, with the friction at the bottom, and bound up in parcels of a dozen of boxes each, are entered at 2s. 9d. per gross, whilst these, without lucifers, friction, labels, or even bound up in parcels, but laying loose in the case, are stopped at the value of Is. 6d. per gross. beg to remind your Honorable Board, that on the 17th October, 1845, we had occasion to make an application in consequence of the officer stopping six cases of lucifers, in such boxes entered by us, at 2s. 9d., and which by your Honorable Board's decision were then given up to us as per our entry, which proved that the opinion of the officer alone is not at all times to be depended upon, and we consider that this stopping the empty boxes now, after the decision against the same officer, as regards the filled ones, is a very obstinate proceeding on his part. We have not the least objection to produce our invoice for your Honorable Board's satisfaction, to shew that we have entered the goods at cost price, including even the expenses. But if your Honorable Board, after all we have stated, should be induced to sanction the officers detention of our goods, we beg they may be sent to the Queen's Warehouse, and that a certificate be at once forwarded, as we have neither intention nor wish to amend our entry, and we also declare our readiness to give up six more cases of the same article, valued at 1s. 6d., which arrived today, per Crosby, May, from Hamburg, and which we have entered on a prime entry this very afternoon! And should this officer require a further supply, we will give him five cases more, already duty paid, in our warehouse, at the same valuation, and twenty to thirty cases more in a month hence.—(7th Report, Case 07.) It will appear on hereafter reverting to the returns appended to the Minutes of parliamentary evidence, that the grossest errors in the estimate of goods subject to duty ad valorem, are of daily occurrence, dealing equal injury to the revenue and the merchant. Meanwhile a few plain figures of arithmetic will show that it is possible for the Crown, as well as for Irishmen to "gain a loss." IV. In November last a house in London received the shipping documents for 6 boxes of artificial flowers which they valued at £38 0 0 to which was to be added 25 per cent. duty 9 10 0 £47 10 0 10 per cent. additional to be paid by Government on £38 3 16 0 which under deduction of a fee amounting to £51 6 0 5 0 left to be paid by the Customs £51 1 0 At a public sale of the Customs these goods were exposed in 3 lots. One lot was put up and was unsold at £8 0 0 a second lot was sold at and another brought £13 13 0 27 6 0 so that more could not be obtained than £35 6 0 by which a loss will be sustained by the Crown of £15 15 0, or contingently of £23, being upwards of fifty per cent. on the amount paid to the importer, while the latter is exposed to great annoyance and interruption in the carrying on of his legitimate trade. -(5th Report, Case No. 49) That such what may literally be termed mis-takes are by no means rare, is apparent from the appended "Continuation of Rapin," as George Selwyn facetiously denominated a similar act. V. In the month of November we entered at Folkstone a case of sundries, containing amongst other goods 21 doz. silk purses, entered at value £29, as per our invoice. These were taken by Her Majesty's Customs for supposed undervaluation, and with additional 10 per cent, the value was paid us by the Board. In the following month the same lot of purses precisely was again imported and entered as value £28 10s. instead of £29. These, although in every respect the same, were passed by the Customs at a value nearly 2 per cent. under the former. The goods as inspected in November were put up for sale, and in the 115th sale, one lot out of three was sold, the other two were purchased by ourselves at the 116th sale, after having been put up at a considerable reduction by the Customs. As long as the present trading is allowed to the officers stopping the goods, so long will ad valorem' duties remain iniquitous. If the lots were put up for sale without being divided, the honesty of the importer would be then shown; but if the lots in seizure are subdivided, the officer alone is benefitted should they advance, while no case is made out against the importer, as a consumer of an article must pay more for such article than the importer of it. The following abstract from a contemporary of a case given at greater "length in our Reports we prefer from its succinctness. VI. A Mr. Henry T. "Hope has told a (by no means) flattering tale" of his importation of some foreign upholstery goods, which he entered at the price they cost him, necessarily the retail or highest price, because they were for his own private use, and therefore small in quantity. The proper duty was 10 per cent. on the value; but as the article could not be produced in England for double the oney, be was required to value them at double their cost, or in other words to pay £20 per cent. by order of the Customs, where the Legislature had clearly enough prescribed £10. He of course abandoned the goods, and with them all attempts to avail himself of the advantages which Sir Robert Peel's policy intended he should enjoy. Mr. Hope well observes : "The greater the superiority of foreign producers in any branch of manufacture, the higher (it follows from this rule) is the graduated scale of duty; and the more inferior the skill of the British manufacturer, the greater is the amount of protection. Where a considerable amount is displayed of that taste and fancy which foreigners add in their goods to fair workmanship, and which is so expensive in England, the duty attempted to be levied is almost prohibitory."-6th Report, Case No. 51.) VII. On the 17th April, observes another victim of this system, I paid duty for constituents of mine on five bales Turkey carpets, valued at £210 giving 9s 14d. per square yard. On the 21st I found the officers had determined to stop the five bales for undervaluation. I explained to them what other duties the same friends had latterly paid-one giving 8s. 6d. per yard, and another of a fine carpet for the Exhibition 10s 6d. That my principals considering the present a full and fair valuation would not amend the entry one farthing. They required one half hour to reconsider the matter, and finally determined to keep the five bales. Thus the affair remained until the 29th April, when the officers having reported the seizure to the Board, it was decided to release them. The law, I believe, allows the Customs officers seven days to consider and determine similar questions. Here was a lapse of twelve days. In most cases of this kind, principals rather than suffer the inconvenience of being deprived of goods wanted for positive orders, will amend their entries a trifle, and then follows an award to the officers by order of the Board. The attempted extortion in this case did not produce the desired effect, but regardless of the delay, and of the law thereby infringed by themselves, they coolly order a restitution of the goods after a lapse of twelve days. Now the inconvenience to my principals I know has been severely great, because when they found the five bales were seized, they immediately gave me orders to look after a parcel of fifteen bales as a substitute. Then again they suspended the purchase of the fifteen bales, knowing from experience the doubtful uncertainty of the ultimate fate of the five, so that between the one and the other they remained entirely without the goods they so much wanted. This and other matters continually occurring tend to prove that the Customs officers as a body are wholly unfit to exercise the discretionary power entrusted to them by the law of duties per valuation. No proof of cost can be asserted to protect the goods from seizure. It engenders a speculative disposition in the officers to trade with the public money. They seize wholesale, and sell retail to the very customers of the tax-paying householder and dealer. If the speculation succeed, the officers are benefitted. If not, they may get a reproving admonition from the Board to take care and do better another time.-(6th Report, Case No. 52.) We again avail ourselves of the choice presented to us of preferring the subjoined version from a contemporary, to our own. VIII. Mr. Boyd, the Surveyor-General, in his examination before the Select Committee, calls the Custom-house Sales Room," our shop." Our "slaughterhouse" would have been the more apt designation. Seventy-two cases of Shanghae China ware were warehoused, and sold for £200. The ad valorem duty was paid on the amount realised at the sale. The goods were stopped for under-valuation, and that the officer might get a fine, the importers were required to amend the entry, but not informed to what amount. The object of this was, that if the second entry should prove less than the value fixed in the secret mind of the officer, he would have required a new amendment of the second entry, to extract another fine. The importers gave up the goods to the Crown at their original entry value; and required the price, with the additional 10 per cent. awarded them by the statute, and thereby made payable, if the stoppage was not removed within seven days. After waiting for a fortnight they were refused either their goods or their money; and it turned out that the seizing officer had stopped another parcel of similar goods, with which he wanted to try the chances of the Custom-house sale, before finally committing himself to this second seizure. A memorial to the Board, and daily applications for an answer, produced no reply. In about a month after the date of the stoppage, the Shanghae goods were actually put up at the Custom-house sale; but not realizing the amount of even the original entry, they were withdrawn; and three weeks thereafter, or in seven weeks, in place of seven days, they were returned to the importers at their original entry value, with a declinature to take them at the price. The importers, who had lost their original customer, again demanded payment of the amount awarded to them by express statute,but were summarily denied with the usual easy assurance of those who set all law at defiance; and their victims conclude, "We bore the loss, rather than have the trouble of an action against the Crown."―(5th Report, Case 42.) As a commentary upon these and several succeeding examples, our readers will thank us for interposing the masterly exposition of the Times. According to the present practice, the Custom-house officer is a Sphinx who summarily devours all persons who cannot guess the answer to his riddles. The merchant points to his goods, and takes a random shot at the Prices Current. The officer shakes his head, says nothing, but places an embargo on the goods. One would suppose that at this point the officer would hand back the tender to the merchant with some such words as, "My good Sir, this will never do—you must mend your bid.” Not so the merchant who failed in guessing the Sphinx's riddle is instantly brought in guilty of mala fides, and his goods are seized. His only remedy is to petition the Board for leave to amend, which is graciously granted on payment of a fine. The fine is called a "satisfaction," and goes to the seizing officer. It is the "amount of the duty" says Sir Thomas Freemantle (130), "which the Crown would have lost altogether if the goods had been passed at the merchant's valuation." We may suppose the merchant to have paid the "satisfaction" and to have amended; he may straightway subject himself to a repetition of the process, or to the total seizure of his goods. These are thrown into a Mincing-lane sale, and there is an end of the matters unless the importer should be so ill-advised as to carry the business, before "my Lords" at the Treasury, and finally before the Barons of the Exchequer. We need scarcely add, that few men are found of sufficent "spirit" to run the gauntlet to this extent. The whole system rests upon this basis, that if the importer falls short of the "value" which the Board of Customs may declare to be the wholesale market price in this country, the Board is perfectly prepared to take the goods off his hands at his own appraisement, and an additional 10 per cent. But the importer is in all cases left to pay the costs of importation. He is placed in this dilemma, that he knows not whether to value for his customers or for the Board of Customs. If his valuation be made with a due regard to the interests of the consu |