{"newspaper_name": "State journal & flag.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 5757, "word_count": 1021, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9563000202178955], "ccnet_perplexity": [790.9000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
detecting every attempt at under valuation. Articles paying specific duties, on the con trary are delivered into the hands of sim gt officer. for the purpose of measuring, weighing, or gauging; and when measured, w'ighed, or gaugcd, this officer sums up ihe amount of duty, and returns the article to the importer. In this case no forfeit ures can accrue and hence there is no other vigilance than such as arises from a regafdto the interests of the Government.

 Now, sir, ask, in the name of common sense, under which system is there the most chance for mistake and fraud Sup posing the weigher, gauger, or measurer, equally honest and uigiiant withom the in. ducements arising out of iorfeitures as the collector and other officers are with it. which system will give rise 10 most mis. takes and most frauds Suppose the impor- ter should attempt collision, in which would he be most likely 10 succeed? In the one case he would have to buy up a score of officers already bought up against him by the Government, through hopes oi forfeit ure ; in the other case, he would only have to propitate single individual, having no

 

 to resist the appeal. Sir, am surprised that gentlemen who are so jealous in pre- venting frauds have never complained of lhIs "one.maD power" under the specific system, where single man in weighing and returning hundred ton of iron,, ,may,by false weight or false return, make it fifty or sev. enty-hve tons, and thus defraud the Go- verument not of from six 10 twelve hundred dollars on single article.

 But suppose this one weigher charged with an importation of silk, how easy in an article so valuable and so light, to defraud the Government out olive times the amount which he could on iron, either by tripping the beam, if he weighs it all at once or, if he weighs it in different parcels, by lea. wing out, or under stating the weight of these parcels. If the ingenuity of man can find system better calculated than all oth- CTS to promote frauds in the revenue, it is this much boasted system of assessing du. ties by measure and weight. Compared to the mode of assessing them by the value of the articles, the chances of fraud cannot be less than twenty one.

 But, admitting that the custom house of. ficers make no mistakes and commit no frauds, is 1t not more difficult 10 detect an under.measurement in piece goods than an upder. valuation in an invoice What, then, is to prevent frauds at present on cot, ton baggng, sal duck, carpeting, flannels, bookings, and baizes all of them piece goods, paying specific duties, and which pass the custom-house without being unrolled or measured. What, ask, is 10 prevent still greater frauds in nder-measuremcnt, when all piece goods are made, as gentlemen con. tend all ought to be made, to pay specific duties7 To open and measure them at the custom house, even il it were possible, all admit, will destroy their marketable value, and reduce them to the condition of dama- ged goods. To reject therefore, the evi- dence of sworn invoice as to their meas- urement, is to reject the only possible evil dence You can have, and to open a wide door to iavoritism, collisions, and frauds, on the part of custom-house officers.

 Third. A further objection to specific du ties is. that they go on progressively increa. sing, relatively as compared to the value of lhe articles on which they are imposed. There is no process more rapid than the re- duction in the price of most manufactured articles. This is the result, mainly, of i'm. provements in machinery, bringing about easier and cheaper modes of producing such articles. lt has been eminently the case for the last twenty years, and conse- quence has been that specific duties, impo- sed with view to protection or revenue to the extent of 50 per cent. upon the value of the article paying them, in a few years becomes tax to the amount of 100 per cent. upon such value. The further conse. quence is, the augmenting duty soon be-. comes prohibitory, and yields no revenue, or we are forced to do what some gentle. men regard with so much horror-we are forced 10 be every few years tinkering with the revenue. Sir, under system of spe- cific duties, no rate of duty can survive more than four or five years without the necessity of change. Ad valorem duties, on the contrary, decline with the price of the articles on which they are levied, while the revenue in most cases if reimbursed by increased importation and consumption. i Fourth. Another objection to specific du- ties is, tfat they impose an equal tax on coarse and fine goods. Now. sir, we were told few days ago bya Senator on the o,h. CT side of the House, that this was high recommendation to specifies, inasmuch as they encouraged an importation of the finest and best goods. If we were all able to pur. chase and consume no other than the finest and best, and consequently highest priced goods, the remark might he just but as nine. .tenths of the great body of the people are compelled 10 consume the coarser and lower priced goods, although not the best, to discriminate against the cheaper and coarser goods is to discriminate against pov- erty--a against the masses--against the ma ny for the benefit of the few. This is an injustice in our tariff laws of which we have always com ,lained. The act of Is42 is full of such unjust and iniquitous discrirnina. lions, few of which shall now drag out from under the disguises of tbe specific sys- tenn. for there they are all to be found, to expose to the full gaze of the Senate.

 Silk pays specific duty agreeable to welght, the finer articles, of course, weigh. ing less. l am informed. on good authori- ty, that lady's shawl was lately imported through the New York custom house, which

 f Al Al- "A