of the coins of the various foreign countries. If there has been no depreciation in the foreign currency, the value in currency of the United States is readily ascertained from the fixed values given to the foreign coins by the act of Congress. There was a proviso to this act, intended to meet the cases when the foreign currency was depreciated. The President of the United States was authorized to cause to be established fit and proper regulations to ascertain the depreciation of foreign currencies. The regulations established in pursuance of this act were, that the consuls of the United States where the invoices were presented to them were required to give a certificate of the depreciation of the currency in which the invoice was made out.

The act of 1846 fixed the value of the silver florin at 483 cents, and repealed all laws inconsistent with it. An invoice was presented which stated the value of the merchandise in the paper florin, which was a legal tender in Austria. The consular certificate stated the depreciation of the paper florin. It was claimed that the act of 1846 repealed the proviso under which the depreciation was stated in the consular certificate. The courts held that there was no inconsistency between the proviso of § 61 of the act of 1799 and the act of 1846. The latter act, like the body of the act of 1799, § 61, gave the assumed value of the foreign coin, which was to govern if there was no depreciation. The proviso of § 61 furnished the means of ascertaining the value if there was a depreciation. The value in paper florins was first reduced to the value in silver florins, according to the depreciation at the time, and this sum reduced to federal money was the dutiable value. A presentation of this certificate is a prerequisite to any correction of the invoice, or relief founded on a depreciated currency. When produced it is only prima facie evidence of the intrinsic value of foreign currency, and may be contradicted by evidence for the importer. If the invoice state the value in paper currency and also in specie, a difference between the specie value and the appraised value made on the basis of the paper currency does not constitute an undervaluation.5

The value of foreign coin is now regulated by § 3564 of the Revised Statutes, the original of which was the act of 1873, the first section of which provides that the value of such coin, shall be that of the pure metal of such coin of standard value, and that the director

'Gordon's Dig. Rev. Laws, 90, 91; Act of 1799, § 61.

'Grant v. Maxwell, 2 Blatch. C. C. 220; 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 66, 67; Treasury Circular, No. 2029.

Dutilh v. Maxwell, 2 Blatch, C. C. 541.

4 De Forrest v. Redfield, 4 Blatch. C. C. 478. Fielder v. Maxwell, 2 Blatch. C. C. 552

of the mint shall estimate the values of the standard coins in circulation of the various nations of the world annually, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall make proclamation of their estimated values. The second section fixes the value of the pound sterling of Great Britain at four dollars and eighty-six cents and six and a half mills, declares this rate to be the rule in appraising merchandise imported where the value is stated in the invoice in pounds, and makes it the par of exchange between Great Britain and the United States. The third section repeals all acts inconsistent with these provisions. It was claimed that the first section of this act was not inconsistent with the act of 1846, which fixed the value of various foreign coins, which might be used in the invoice of importers, requiring the collectors in imposing duties on imported merchandise to be governed by the rates fixed. The act of 1846 had reference solely to the imposition of duties at the custom house, and it was claimed that the first section of the act of 1873 referred to another subject, its object being to regulate the value of foreign coins, when received by the government or by individuals, in discharge of contracts, and furnish a means of estimating correctly the par value of exchange between the United States and foreign countries. The Supreme Court of the United States considered the act as establishing a universal rule applicable alike to the contracts of individuals, of the government, and to duties imposed on merchandise imported from foreign countries. The rule is that foreign coins, in United States money, shall be measured by the amount of pure metal contained therein when of standard value; this amount is ascertained by the superintendent of the mint, and when proclaimed by the secretary, becomes the rule for ascertaining the value in all cases. The second section of the act fixes the value of the pound sterling according to the rule in the first section. The amount of pure gold in the pound sterling being 113.001 grains, and that in the gold dollar of the United States 23.22 grains, an arithmetical calculation gives the value of the pound sterling as fixed in the second section. The amount of pure metal in the pound sterling has been the same since it was first used as a coin in 1817, and estimating the guinea at twenty-one shillings, the relative amount has not been changed since 1717. Regarding the amount of pure metal in the pound sterling as fixed, no inquiry was directed as to the value of this coin. All duties are now assessed on this principle. The relative value of the gold coins of foreign countries to the gold dollar of the United States is determined by the director of the mint according to

1 The Collector v. Richards, 23 Wall. 246.

its intrinsic value, or the amount of pure metal, and this value as proclaimed by the Secretary of the Treasury is the guide of the collector.1

It is the duty of the collector to make the reduction of the foreign currency stated in the invoice to United States currency. It often happens that the triplicate sent by the consul from the port of exportation does not reach the collector until after entry and estimation of duties by the collector. The collector does not in practice wait for the triplicate, although required so to do by the express words of the statute, the department finding it impracticable, and allowing the entry to be made under regulations of the secretary, authorized by § 2858 of the Revised Statutes. If upon the production subsequently of the certified invoice, it shows less than the entered value, no reduction is made in the duties, while if it shows an excess, duties are levied on the excess. The importer is in a position to know the actual cash or market value, and it is not to his interest to overstate it, and § 2900 provides that duties shall not be assessed upon less than the invoice or entered value, therefore the importer having made the entry at a specified amount, is estopped to deny its correctness. But if the certified. invoice reduces the value ten per cent. below the entered value, it is not the practice to impose the twenty per cent. penalty for undervaluation.5

While the invoice is required to state the value in the currency of the country of exportation, the purchaser is required to declare that the currency in which such invoice is made out is the currency which was actually paid for the merchandise by the purchaser. Goods were purchased in Germany, but paid for by draft on London in pounds sterling. The invoice was required to be made out in the currency of Germany, the terms "currency of the country," and "currency actually paid," being regarded by the Secretary of the Treasury as equivalent terms, even though in settlement no money actually passes, or the transaction was closed by a draft. Subsequently this ruling was modified. Iron was imported from Sweden, where krones was the currency of the country, but the payment by the purchaser was made in pounds sterling. The invoice stated the value in pounds sterling,

1 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 91, instructions of the Secretary of the Treasury to collectors at Philadelphia and San Francisco, as to the value of the mark in Germany; 22 Int. Rev. Rec. 5, values of the foreign coin fixed by the director of the mint, January 1, 1876. 222 Int. Rev. Rec. 71; Treasury Circular No. 2593.

R. S. U. S. § 2857; 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 68, 69; Treasury Circular No. 2053.

4 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 139; Treasury Circular No. 2146.

22 Int. Rev. Rec. 71; Treasury Circular No. 2593. 621 Int. Rev. Rec. 203; Treasury Circular No. 2262.

and in krones, and the consular certificate showed the value in dollars of the United States. The collector rejected the invoice because it did not state the value in krones only. His action was disapproved, and the ruling previously made was said to be confined to cases where there was no actual payment in a different currency from that of the country of exportation, as in this case, and the invoice was directed to be received.1

The triplicate invoice, or certified invoice, contains the certificate of the United States consul nearest the port of shipment. If goods. are purchased in France, and shipped to London and thence to the United States, if it appear from the face of the papers that the original destination was a port of the United States, the voyage being a continuous one, the fact that the vessel touched at London would not require a certificate of the consul at London. But if the goods are purchased in France, and it does not appear from the manifest or other papers that the shipment was destined to the United States, if the goods are landed at London, the packages opened and repacked and finally shipped to the United States, the shipment will be considered as made from London, and the certificate of the consul at that place required. Where the certified invoice incorrectly states the port to which the merchandise is destined, and contains other errors, the importer will be required to give bond to produce a correct invoice. The discount stated in the invoice as made at the time of purchase is the usual discount to the trade, and not an extraordinary inducement held out to the purchaser to buy that particular shipment.1 If the invoice does not state the weight of each package as well as the gross weight, the goods are stored at the expense of the owner, until particulars are furnished, or ascertained by appraisement.5 Consuls of the United States are now required to certify on the invoice the items of dutiable value, such as market value, cost of transportation to the port of shipment, and cost of shipment, the amount of packing charges, commissions, etc."

157. Estimation of Duties by the Collector-Appeal from his Decision-Warehouse and Bond System.-The provisions which we have been considering are to enable the collector to make the assessment of the tax on the merchandise imported, or to estimate the

1 22 Int. Rev. Rec. 23; Treasury Circular No. 2536; R. S. U. S. §§ 2838, 2854. 222 Int. Rev. Rec. 192; Treasury Circular No. 2750.

22 Int. Rev. Rec. 185; Treasury Circular No. 2716. 4 22 Int. Rev. Rec. 182; Treasury Circular No. 2684. 522 Int. Rev. Rec. 74; Treasury Circular No. 2625. 622 Int. Rev. Rec. 334; Treasury Circular No. 2975.

duties. The decision of the collector as to the amount of duties to be paid is final and conclusive, unless an appeal be taken from his decision. It is usually spoken of as the liquidation of the duties. Within ten days from this period, a notice in writing must be given to the collector by the importer or his agent, setting forth distinctly and specifically the grounds of objection to the decision. Within thirty days an appeal must be taken to the Secretary of the Treasury, and the decision of the secretary is final unless suit be brought against the collector in ninety days from the secretary's decision. If the decision of the Secretary of the Treasury is delayed, suit may be brought without waiting for the decision longer than ninety days, if the entry is at a port east of the Rocky Mountains, or five months if the entry is at any other port. The notice is to be given in ten days. from the period of liquidation, but no definite period is fixed within which the liquidation shall be made, and no provision is made for giving notice to the importer that the liquidation has been made. Prior to the general adoption of the warehouse system, which will be noticed more particularly hereafter, the duties were estimated and paid before the merchandise was unloaded. There was no difficulty under that system about the importer having knowledge of the liquidation. But after the adoption of the warehouse system, the importer was privileged when he made his entry to enter his merchandise for consumption or for warehousing, and in the latter case he did not pay the duties at once, but gave a bond in double the amount of the value of the goods, estimated as near as might be from the invoice, conditioned to pay the duties on the withdrawal of the merchandise from the warehouse. This mode not requiring the payment of duties until the goods are needed for consumption, was almost universally adopted, and the actual liquidation did not take place until long after the entry. The practice at the port of New York is, "after warehouse entry is made, the goods, or the portion of them required by law, are sent to the examiners, who examine and report to the collector by making notes on the back of the invoice; upon this report the collector fixes the rate of duty; after the duty is fixed, the papers are sent to the naval officer to receive his check, and then to the bookkeeper of the warehouse to be entered. No notice of the duty as fixed by the collector is given to the merchant, and such time is taken up in the various steps of examining the goods, reporting to the collector, and fixing the rate of duties by him, as the exigency of the

1 R. S. U. S. § 2931.