{"newspaper_name": "State journal & flag.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 6093, "word_count": 1041, "ccnet_language_score": [0.968500018119812], "ccnet_perplexity": [679.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
foreign goods and m domestic manuIc- iurers, both in New York and Boston. The interogatores put to those merchants GOV. cred the whole ground of their knowledge of frauds or evasions of the revenue laws {; their belief in the existence of such frauds {; the information which they had received from others. and circumstances which might lead to the conclusion that such frauds and evasions had been practiced, to the injury of the revenue or of lhe honest importer. Of their own knowledge, not single wit ness called has testified to any fact which established, in any particular case, or any number of cases, the existence of frauds or evasion of the revenue laws. From rumors and yarious circumstances relating to the discrepancy in price be ween importers of the same description of goods, (some of these selling at price far below what could be afforded by others at a req sonable profis,) and speculative opinions, all agree that frauds have been practiced on the revenue. at different times 10 consider able extent. They also speak of the devices by which those frauds have been successful ly perpetraled. and by which they may be again: but of their own knowledge they do not profess to know anything; resting their opinion entirely on general reput utition and the course of trade. as it has existed under their avn observation. Many of the witnesses ex,mlned on ,hese points are domestic manufacturers or their agents, or mercha nts referred to by such manufacturers 10 establish ,he existence of frauds on the revenue, in order to place foreign commerce under he most rigid restrictions, 10 exclude the foreign fabric for the benefit of domestic goods of the same description. It may, therefore, be fairly presumed that if any positive evidence could be aJtuced to fix the charge of fraud on any number of foreign importers, il would have been, as the door was widely thrown open by the commissioners to the nlruduc. ton of such evidence. None s,rh. how ever, was adduced, and it is presumed there. fore, that none such existed"

 None, sir, "was adduced and therefore it is to be presumed none existed.'' Now l ask tEe clerk to read another extract from the same document. page 372, ihe report of three very experienced appraisers, long employed in the business in the city of New York. The Clerk read as follows:

 "The undersigned, late principal appraisers of the customs for lhe port and district of New York, beg leave to submit the following report, and respectfully solicit that it may be consider ed as a r. port of iheIr testimony. VIZ:

 From long and careful obs rvations and ex. amlnaiions of merchandise at the custom house they are fully satisfied that they have been no frauds of any consequence pracsistd on the re, enue by the undervaluatloD of cloth and cnssmeres al their entry

 Because there has been, in all Engli.b fab I,cs of that kInd, great uniformity in value on the invoice prices, when of similar quality, whether imported by American or forelgn me, cl ants.

 Becaose most of the woollens, particularly the mi ding and lower qualities, have not been subjected to dutns according to invoice value bu have, in most cases, been subjected to in CT as'd dniles through prjudlcc, caprice. or false valuation. by those acling as appraisers who were not the legal appraisers in the New York custom house.

 Because there has been no motive founder. value ihe goods on involce, since 1t was not ta- ken as the criterion of value on which the duties were to he computed and, consequently, the merchant on the other side of the water could not consider his invoice as guide 10 the duties to be imposed here.

 Because neither in our official capacities or otherwise have complaints been made of any instances Of suspected valuation, either by importers, or by persons engaged in the man. ufacture of domestic goods and had there been any such under-vaiuations, the vigilance of ri. valry and promptings of interest would have made the facts known.

 Because, in the sales of cloths and cassi- meres, when they have been made after seizure by consent of parties and without prejudice, they have rarely brought the invoice cost and charges, even when made under the most favo- rable circumstances and, in large majority of the cases, they have not brought to exceed two-thirds of the custom house valuation.

 That there were frauds by smuggling, com. mitted during the last term of Swartwout's in- cumbency, there cannot be doubt; but these were brought about by collision of officers of the customs with cer tain importers, but, wheth- CT by under valuation or otherwise, the under signed, not having seen the goods, are unable to say.

 We have confined these remarks to cloths and cassimeres solely, because no allegations of fraud in any other descriptions of merchandise or manufactures have eyer been made by the American manufacturers to our knowledge. But it is due to the public to state, (and we do it with great difference and respect,) that among the numerous cases of evasions and frauds that came under our observations, when acting as appraisers of the customs, whether by false or under-vauatlOn, or Otherwlse, much the greatest proportion, both in numbers and amount, were ofgoods other than those in which wool was a component part"

 Now sir, until this charge of fraud is sat. isfactorily proven. think, from the result of this investigation, it may may be safe. ly inferred it is wholly and utterly without foundation.

 Having thus disposed of the objection of fraud iE ad vaorems feel that have put down the principal argument in favor of spe. cifics, for do not know that ever heard any one express preference in favor of specifics, winch was not founded on the al- legation of frauds in ad valorems. The stereotyped objection of the proiectionists is, that as ad vaiorems cannot be relied on for revenue. necessity compels us to adopt spec ci6cs.

 Now, sir, not satisfied with establishing the fairness and equity of the former system, l propose to prove that for revenue, or for any other purpose, the latter is not entitled 10 conE1opco