properly belonged to other schedules. The Commission has relegated 99 of the sections to the chemical schedule, 25 to the provision schedule, 26 to the metal schedule, and the remainder to the respective schedules to which they belong, and the free list. This, with some consolidation, will reduce the number of sections in the present sundry list to nearly one-third of its former proportions. It has been revised, and the wording in many cases simplified and the duties reduced on an average fully 20 per cent.

STATUTES RELATING TO DUTIES OF COLLECTORS.

The Commission recommends the adoption of substitutes for sundry sections of the Revised Statutes, and appends to this report drafts of the proposed substitutes. These substitutes are recommended for the reasons following:

The proposed substitute for section 2499 seems necessary, as without it non-enumerated articles are dutiable under the general clause, notwithstanding the fact that they are substantially in material and use the same as other articles which are on the free list. That is to say, a special enumeration of the precise article must be found in the free list to exempt it from duty. The Commission is of the opinion that the same rule should obtain as to the free list which is applied in other parts of the law, and that articles similar in material and use to those specifically named in the free list should be free of duty.

The change proposed in section 2626 is for the purpose of saving unnecessary duplication of work, as it seems only necessary that the final adjustment or liquidation of duties should be verified by the naval officer, and that it is entirely unnecessary that he should countersign any papers issued by the collector, other than debenture certificates; the check by the naval officer on the accounts of the collector, it is believed, will be complete without the other requirements of the present law, and the proposed change will save unnecessary annoyance to importers.

The proposed changes in section 2627 are to strike out the words "if American vessels," in defining the duty of the surveyor as to ascertaining whether masters of vessels entering have complied with the law in regard to manifests of cargoes, so that this section may conform to other provisions of the statutes and the general practice; and to require the appraiser to report to the surveyor the respective degrees of proof of imported liquors, so as to avoid the present practice, which requires an ascertainment of the proof both by the surveyor and the appraiser. This frequently results in differences between the reports, and as in case of such difference the practice has been to take the report of the appraiser as more likely to be correct, we see no purpose in requiring the proof to be ascertained by two sets of officers.

The change proposed in section 2648 is to do away with the system of petty charges for stationery blanks in the collection offices on the northeastern and northwestern frontiers, where the entries are ordinarily small in amount and there is great complaint on account of annoying small charges.

We think the government should furnish these blanks free of charge, as the expense would be very small, and the effect would be to avoid what is now regarded as an annoying exaction.

The purpose of the proposed amendment to section 2654 is also to avoid annoying small fees. Instead of the present system of small fees for each service performed, we recommend an entry fee of 50 cents, which is intended to cover all the charges enumerated after the fifth clause of

the present section. This will probably operate as a reduction of fees on the average of entries, but it is believed the amount will be sufficient to compensate for the services. There is great complaint on the part of importers of the annoyance occasioned by the present fee bill, and we do not doubt that they would generally prefer even a much larger entry fee if they could thereby avoid the vexation of the present system of numerous small fees.

The Commission recommends the repeal of section 2658, because it would be rendered unnecessary by the adoption of the provision for a general entry fee as recommended in connection with section 2654.

The proposed change in section 2770 is for the purpose of relieving against what is believed to be a hardship in the importation of bulk cargoes, such as iron ore, coal, stone, and other heavy materials, where the small value in proportion to weight makes reshipment or lightering unreasonably expensive. To illustrate, the port of New York is, as we understand, limited to the lines of the city, and the unloading must be (at least as to all foreign vessels) within those lines, or at some port of delivery in the district, and there seems to be no good reason why the owner of a forge or furnace within the collection district should not be permitted, under inspection as provided for, to land ore or coal at his own wharf, although such wharf is not within the lines of a port of delivery of the district.

The purposes of the proposed change in section 2785 are (1), to require the entry to be in accordance with the provisions of section 2870, and the bills of lading, and (2) to do away with what is believed to be a useless and annoying formality, which under the present law requires the production by the importer of the original invoices, or other documents received in lieu thereof, to the naval officer as well as the collector, and the signing of the same in the offices of both the collector and naval officer.

The purpose of the proposed change in section 2789 is to clear up a doubt as to the right of the collector under the law to take merchandise into his custody until the quantity, quality, or value thereof can be ascertained when the defect in the entry arises from an imperfect description of the merchandise in the bill of lading or invoice. We understand that in general the practice has been in accordance with the draft of the law recommended by the Commission, but that there is such doubt on the subject as to require the insertion of the provision recommended, for the protection of collectors.

The changes proposed in section 2795 are intended as a relief in cases where an excess of sea stores were taken on board by permitting, to a limited extent, their entry and sale on payment of duties, after the taking of the oath that they were truly taken on board as such.

The proposed changes in section 2799 are (1), to include in the section all the articles free from duty according to law of persons arriving in the United States as emigrants; and (2), instead of the present indefinite word "shortly" to fix the time within which they are expected to arrive, limiting it to one year, in accordance with the next section.

The proposed changes in section 2800 are (1), to make it conform to the recommendations as to the preceding section, and (2), to limit the time for the making of the oath described to three months after the arrival of the emigrant.

The proposed changes in section 2801 are intended to remit to the collector the duties mentioned in the section, as in the judgment of the Commission there is no purpose in requiring the naval officer to participate therein.

The proposed change in section 2803 allows the baggage and personal effects of persons arriving in the United States to be forwarded by the collector to the collector of the port of departure. At present the collector can lawfully only retain the baggage or effects until the departure of the owner to his foreign destination, which must be from the same port at which he arrived; whereas we think the law should permit them to be forwarded, say, from New York to San Francisco, if the latter city should be the port of departure of the traveler.

The proposed changes in section 2837 are intended to relieve against the requirement that the weights and measures in invoices shall be the legal weights and measures of the country from which the importation is made, which are often little used, and to require that the invoice be made out in the weights and measures in general use in the country in which the goods are procured for importation into the United States. The section at present provides that the weights and measures shall be those of the country from which the importation is made, and it is often difficult to determine what country is meant by the expression, as goods are frequently obtained in some small inland state and transported overland to a port in a different foreign state or country, whence they are shipped by vessel to the United States, in which case questions arise as to whether the place of original purchase or the place of maritime shipment is the place from which the importation is made. It is believed that the change recommended in the wording of this section will relieve the importer and customs officers from these doubts, which, as we are advised, have been the cause of very frequent trouble and annoy

ance.

The proposed change in section 2838 is intended to require that the invoice of merchandise subject to an ad valorem duty shall be made out in the currency actually paid therefor, as well as that of the place or country from which the importation is made, which is regarded as nec essary in arriving at the true price or value, because of the varying character of the currency of different countries, which it is said frequently operate to the disadvantage of the government in ascertaining the actual value on which the duties should be paid.

The proposed changes in section 2841 are, (1) to conform the oaths to the proposed change in the mode of levying duties by excluding inland freights, packages, charges, and commissions from being the subject of duty; (2) to require the oath to show that the invoice and declaration are in all respects true, and were made by the person by whom the same purport to have been made as provided in other sections, and (3) in cases where part of the invoices or bills of lading covering merchandise to the person making the entry have not arrived, to allow him to enter those invoices which have arrived, and permit the others to be entered on the receipt of the invoices and bills of lading which cover them.

The law now requires that the oath shall state that the entry covers all the goods, wares, and merchandise imported in the vessel for the consignee, and as he can not enter lawfully without the production of the invoices and bills of lading, it seems necessary to make this change so as to permit him to enter the goods for which the invoices and bills of lading have arrived, with the right to enter the remainder of the goods consigned to him, where he can lawfully do so, without sending the whole consignment to the general orders stores to await the arrival of the papers which will enable him to make a complete entry of the whole consignment.

The proposed change in section 2846 is intended to allow the personal representatives of deceased persons and the assignees of insolvent per

sons to make entry of merchandise owned by their decedent or assignor, whether the same are subject to ad valorem or other duty. At present the right, according to the statute, only attaches where the merchandise is subject to ad valorem duties.

The purpose in the proposed amendment to section 2853 is to limit the requirement of triplicate invoices to articles subject to ad valorem duty or duty based on value.

There seems to be no necessity for these triplicate invoices in the case of articles subject to specific duties, as their only purpose is to verify the price paid, or value of the goods, and we have therefore deemed it proper to recommend that they shall not be required except in cases where the goods are subject to ad valorem duties.

The purposes in the proposed amendments to section 2854 are (1) to make the section conform to the proposed change resulting from the abolition of duties on charges and commissions, and (2) to require that invoice shall be produced and verified before the consul of the United States in the country of and nearest the place in which the goods were originally procured for exportation to the United States. Under the existing law the invoice may be produced and verified before a consul outside of the country within which the goods were either procured or shipped, and who may therefore have but little means of knowledge as to their value at the place of purchase, while the expression "nearest the place of shipment" is indefinite and has received different constructions, the term "shipment" being sometimes construed as the point of marine shipment, and sometimes as the inland point at which they were freighted. It is our opinion that limiting the production of the invoice and its verification to the consul of the country of and nearest the place where the goods were procured for importation to the United States will not only tend to make certain what has heretofore been indefinite, but will also tend to uniformity in prices and values and honesty of invoices.

The proposed amendment to section 2857 is to allow the collector, in cases where the triplicate invoice cannot be produced, to admit the merchandise to entry and liquidation on the invoice filed by the importer at the time of entry, without requiring the triplicate invoice or bond, when he is satisfied that there is no fraudulent intent or purpose. And the proposed amendment to section 2859 is intended to extend the privilege of entry and liquidation without invoice, where the goods are less than $100 in value, and the collector is satisfied that there is no purpose of defrauding the revenue.

The proposed amendment to section 2860 is intended to exclude from the operation of the section the entries provided for in the act of June 22, 1874, generally known as the "anti-moiety act" (as well as the four preceding sections mentioned), which is deemed necessary to preserve the rights of entry therein provided for.

The proposed amendments to section 2862 are, (1) to make it imperative that before certifying any invoice the consular officer shall require an oath, affirmation, or declaration that the invoices are correct and true; (2) that the oath, affirmation, or declaration shall be in accordance with the laws of the country where taken; (3) that the oath shall show that it was made in the place where the goods were originally procured for exportation to the United States, and (4) that the oath or declaration shall be attached to the invoice and certified by the consul. These amendments are deemed necessary to insure uniformity in the practice as to these oaths or declarations, certainly as to the place where they are to be made, and the solemnity resulting from the con

formity to the local forms of law. At present, as we understand, the oaths are taken frequently at the point of marine shipment, which is often far from the place of purchase, and where the person taking the oath can have no knowledge as to the facts sworn to, and are generally regarded as mere idle formalities.

The proposed amendments to section 2869 are intended to leave with the collector alone the estimate of gross duties upon entries and to dispense with the services and signature of the naval officer in granting the permit to land, simply requiring the verification by the naval officer of the final liquidation of the duties. The verification of the original estimate and the signature of the naval officer to the permit seem to be unnecessary formalities which may well be dispensed with, while the verification of the final adjustment is necessary as a proper check upon the collector's office.

In the proposed amendments to section 2870 it is intended to provide by law that the permit for landing merchandise shall conform to the bills of lading and invoices, and that where, from errors in the bills of lading (for which, of course, the importing vessel is responsible) it is necessary to send the goods to general orders store, the importing vessel shall, unless otherwise ordered by the collector, be charged with the resulting expense, because in that case the expense has resulted from the carelessness of the carrier.

The proposed amendments to section 2882 are intended to do away with the ambiguity resulting from the use of the words "proper officer" instead of designating the officer, and to do away with uncertainty in practice, by designating the form of consent. Our understanding is that the practice is not uniform, and that while the collector is usually regarded as the proper officer to discharge this duty, sometimes other officers assume to give consent to remove because of the uncertain expression in the law, and that controversies often arise because of the removal of goods on the claimed consent of some officer of the customs. We deem it advisable that this should be changed-that the consent should be in writing, and should be given by the collector.

The proposed addition to section 2885, requiring a return to the surveyor by the inspection officers of the quantity, kinds, and proof of wines and spirts, is for the purpose of furnishing to the surveyor the means of keeping his account of this class of merchandise, and is made necessary by the suggested amendment to section 2627, under which a single appraisement only will be had, instead of a double appraisement as at present.

The proposed amendment to section 2887 is intended to exclude the naval officer and surveyor from participation in the inquiry as to whether merchandise has been landed since it was taken on board, or whether the disagreement is by accident or mistake. The collector is the proper person to examine into these questions, and the participation of the naval officer and surveyor is understood to be merely formal and seems unnecessary.

The proposed amendment to section 2898 is intended to do away with the necessity for consent of the consignee before estimating the tare according to the invoice. In our judgment the collector should be permitted to estimate tare according to invoice in all cases except where it is evident to him that the tare, as stated in the invoice, is more or less than the actual tare.

The proposed amendments to section 2900 are, as it will be perceived, radical and important; the law at present merely permits the appraisement, and in practice, unless there is some cause for suspicion, the in