.

Navigating the Lower Saint Lawrence in the 19th Century.

Quebec Gazette #3814 03/01/1828 Page 2, Col. 3B.


	Quebec, Saturday, 1st December, 1827.

	Court of Vice Admiralty. Honourable M. H. Percival, Collector of Customs, qui tam^G. &c. and J. C. Reiffenstein, claimant. Two cases containing foreign silks, &c. and ten cases books, &c.

Judgment was pronounced this day in this case by the Honourable F. W. Primrose who officiated as judge, under a deputation from the Honourable James Kerr, whose son James H. Kerr, Esquire, was interested in the seizure in question: "This is an information filed by the Collector of the Customs for the port of Quebec, against certain goods and books as forfeited for an infringement of the regulations of the late Imperial Statute, 6 Geo. IV. c. 114, by which the laws of the customs affecting the British possessions abroad, have been consolidated and amended. "The information contained eight counts, which in substance allege that the forfeiture has accrued from the goods and books seized, having been imported from ports beyond the seas, and unladen at the port of Quebec without having been duly reported or entered, and contrary to the regulations of the statute before referred to. There is also a count alleging them to have been imported from the United Kingdom (a certain advantage being attached thereto) without its appearing upon the docket that they had been duly cleared outwards. J. Reiffenstein, a merchant in this city, having claimed the whole of the goods and books, has by his plea generally denied the allegations contained in the information, and upon this general issue, proof has been given on both sides. "In this case there are circumstances of fraudulent intention on the part of the owner of the goods, which leave no doubt as to the merits, it is therefore without reluctance that I find myself obliged to condemn the two cases containing the foreign silks and other articles as forfeited, for not having been duly entered at the Custom House at Quebec, and for having been imported here contrary to the regulations of the 6 Geo. IV, c.114. "The facts of the case are, the claimant, by his son and agent J. G. Reiffenstein, enters the goods by the general description of "silk bands, &c." and claims both from the Collector of the Customs, and afterwards by a petition to the Governor in Chief, an exemption from duty, under an order of the Lords of the Treasury and Commissioners of the Customs endorsed on the docket, permitting them as well as the books to be shipped to Canada free of duty. The goods are described in the docket as silk, velvets and church ornaments, and books for the use of the Catholics in Canada. I have been unable to discover any legal authority by which the Lords of the Treasury and Commissioners of the Customs are vested with the power of making such an order, but I conceive it to have been exercised under the provisions before referred to, by which they can remit all seizures under such conditions as they deem proper. It is however apparent that this order was made under the impression produced by false representations of the nature of the articles, and that these goods were supposed to be dresses, and church ornaments for the use of the Roman Catholic religious service, and as dedicated to such purposes intended to be favoured. It never could be the intention by such an order to give the claimant an advantage over all the other importers at Quebec, for the sale of his merchandise. It is in proof that there was not a single silk bank among the articles, and that, with the exception of some trifles, they were an assortment of ladies' dresses and fancy goods fit for a store in Quebec. There are a few priests caps and nuns veils spoken of by some of the witnesses, and the velvets are stated to be some of them such as might be used for decorations in the churches, but they were all in the piece and applicable to other purposes. The books, with the exception of a few prayer books, were works on law and general literature. It must be remarked that the law by the 60th section of the Act imposed upon the claimant the onus probandi^G of legal importation, and the claimant in this case having had possession of the goods by a writ of delivery issued out of this Court, he was bound and had it in his power to prove the correctness of his own description; if therefore I have been unable to distinguish any of these articles, either as to the quantity or value, the fault is imputable to him. It has been contended for the claimant, that the duties having been paid and accepted, the forfeiture was waived, but I am of opinion that the forfeiture was perfect the moment the false entry was made, as the Act directs the duties to be paid at the time of entry, such payment could never have any effect upon a forfeiture, the proof of which must necessarily be obtained by an examination afterwards. Such a construction as is contended for by the claimant, would go to the length of rendering it necessary to examine every package imported; whereas the Legislature by their severe regulations intended, by the fear of discovery, if there was any fraud, to facilitate the landing of all goods about which there was no suspicion. The wisdom of these apparently hard technical enactments is illustrated in this case, for if the officers on duty had not examined these goods, they would have passed as corresponding with the description in the entries and docket, and the claimant would have probably successfully reaped the advantage of his fraudulent scheme, by a petition to the Government at home for a remission of duty according to the previous order. My judgment therefore is, that the two cases containing the foreign silks, &c. are condemned with costs against the claimant upon his claim to them, and as they have by appraisement been valued at £570 8s 11, he is ordered to pay that sum forthwith into the hands of the Collector of Customs for the Port of Quebec, under the 58th section of the statute. The books are ordered to be restored, but under the fraudulent circumstances before alluded to, I shall think it my duty to certify probable cause of seizure under the 65th section of the same statute, if required by the informant's counsel against such certificate. Mr. A. Stuart declining to be heard, the certificate of probable cause of seizure was added to the judgment. J. Stuart, Esquire, Attorney General for Informant. Stuart and Black, for claimant. (Star)

G.R. Bossé©1999-03.

Posted:
Dec. 3, 1999.

Updated:
July 15, 2003.