Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

"The First Comptroller of the Treasury shall hereafter be known as Comptroller of the Treasury. He shall perform the same duties and have the same powers and responsibilities (except as modified by this Act) as those now performed by or appertaining to the First and Second Comptrollers of the Treasury *** and all provisions of law not inconsistent with this Act, in any way relating to them or either of them, shall hereafter be construed and held as relating to the Comptroller of the Treasury."

It appears from the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of The United States v. Bank of the Metropolis (15 Peters, 377, 401) that the accounting officers may in a proper case entertain an application for a rehearing of a claim or account which has been finally adjusted by them.

To the end, therefore, that the practice to control in granting rehear ings in all cases of claims and accounts that have been finally adjusted and settled at any time in the office of the Second Comptroller of the Treasury may conform as nearly as may be to the practice which prevailed in that office, it is ordered that hereafter all applications for such rehearing shall be made to the office of the Comptroller of the Treasury, which rehearing will not be granted unless it be shown that mistakes in matters of fact, arising from errors in calculation, have occurred, or unless it be the case of a rejected claim in which material testimony has has been subsequently discovered and produced, and such newly discovered evidence must relate to facts, that were material to be considered upon the former hearing, which, if it had been presented and considered with the other proofs on the original hearing, might have led to the allowance of the claim. Cumulative evidence will be held insufficient to reopen a claim.

[blocks in formation]

Oranges Imported in Barrels not in Bulk, but in "Packages."

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 10, 1895.

SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 10th ultimo, in which you state that in the case of certain eleven barrels of oranges imported at your port you assessed duty thereon at the rate of $1.50 per 1,000, and in addition thereto 30 per cent ad valorem on the value of the barrels containing the fruit, under the provisions of paragraph 216 of the act of August 28, 1894, the importers claiming that the duty should have been assessed on the oranges imported in such condition at the rate of 8 cents per cubic foot of capacity, and in addition thereto the 30 per cent ad valorem on the barrels.

In regard thereto, I have to state that the claim of the importers appears to be correct, inasmuch as the paragraph of law referred to provides that oranges in packages are dutiable at the rate of 8 cents per cubic foot, and in addition thereto 30 per cent ad valorem upon the boxes or barrels containing the same. Oranges imported in barrels are

not imported in bulk.

If the entry referred to has been liquidated at the rate assessed by you your action is final in the matter, unless a protest was filed by the importers within ten days from the date of such liquidation under the provisions of section 14 of the act of June 10, 1890, in which case you may reliquidate the entry in accordance with article 43 of the Regulations of August 7, 1890, and send statement of facts to the Board of General Appraisers.

[blocks in formation]

Surety Companies to be Accepted as Sole Surety on Bonds Given Under Act of June 5, 1894.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 10, 1895.

SIR: The Department is in receipt of a letter from Mr. William E. Keyes, secretary of the American Surety Company, dated the 24th ultimo, in which he requests that, as said company has complied with the requirements of the act of August 13, 1894, it be accepted as sole surety on the bonds required by the act of June 5, 1894, known as "General Special Lay Order Permit Bonds for Indemnity."

The regulations issued June 11, 1894 (Synopsis 15054), prescribe that two sureties are required on such bonds; but inasmuch as the first section of act of August 13, 1894, provides that—

"Whenever any recognizance, stipulation, bond, or undertaking conditioned for the faithful performance of any duty, or for doing or refraining from doing anything in such recognizance, stipulation, bond, or undertaking specified is by the laws of the United States required or permitted to be given with one surety or with two or more sureties, the execution of the same or the guaranteeing of the performance of the condition thereof shall be sufficient when executed or guaranteed solely by a corporation incorporated under the laws of the United States, or of any State having power to guarantee the fidelity of persons holding positions of public or private trust, and to execute and guarantee bonds and undertakings in judicial proceedings".

you are hereby authorized to accept as sole surety on all bonds companies of the character specified which have duly complied with the requirements of the act of August 13, 1894.

You will therefore be governed accordingly.

Respectfully, yours,

(7540 g.)

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York.

CHARLES S. HAMLIN,

Acting Secretary.

(15534.)

Free Entry of Cattle which have Strayed or been Driven Across BoundaryNo Limitation as to Time.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 10, 1895.

SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 28th ultimo, transmitting the application of Thomas A. Canfield et al. for the free entry of certain cattle under the provisions of paragraph 373 of the act of August 28, 1894.

Said paragraph provides that

"Cattle, horses, sheep, or other domestic animals which have strayed across the boundary line into any foreign country, or have been or may be driven across such boundary line by the owner for pasturage purposes, together with their increase, may be brought back to the United States free of duty."

It appears from the affidavit submitted in the case that in the year 1885, on account of scarcity of grass in Texas, where the cattle were then ranched, the owners were compelled to leave that section and secure pasturage elsewhere; that the cattle were driven to Presidio County, Tex., but being unable to find sufficient grass and water either there, in New Mexico, or Arizona, the cattle were driven into Sonora, Mex., where land was leased and where the cattle are now ranched; that all the cattle now owned by the applicants were the cattle taken there by them, and their increase, and that they are the original and only owners of the same. They also state that they have purchased no cattle since going into Mexico.

In view of the above provision of law, which is without limitation as to the time when cattle may have been driven across the boundary line, the Department is of opinion that free entry of these animals may be allowed if no evidence is procurable by you which convinces you that the affidavit of the applicants is false or shows other and sufficient grounds for denying them such privilege. You will be governed accordingly.

[blocks in formation]

Examination of Claims in which Suits may be Pending in the Courts.

(Superseding circular of June 15, 1891, Department No. 91.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 10, 1895.

The following regulations are hereby promulgated for the information and guidance of all concerned, in order to guard against the allowance

and payment of claims by this Department for which suits may be pending against the Government :

1. Whenever notice or information has been received of suit pending in the Court of Claims, or in any circuit or district court of the United States, for a claim against the Government, if such claim be then pending in any Bureau of this Department, or shall be thereafter presented to the accounting officers, it shall not be entertained by them, but will be left for determination by the proper court.

2. Calls of the Court of Claims on the Secretary of the Treasury for certified copies of papers, and requests of the Attorney-General for information as to matters of counter-claim, set-off, or defense, in cases of suits against the Government, accompanied by copies of the petitions, will be referred to the respective Bureaus to which they appertain. Upon receipt of such references a proper record of suits pending against the United States will be made in the respective Bureaus to which the references are made, and the copies of the petitions will be retained and filed in such Bureaus; and diligent examination should at once be made to ascertain whether any claim covering the matter in suit, or any part of it, is then pending in this Department, or has been allowed and paid. Such requests from the Attorney-General as relate to matters in the accounting offices of the Department shall be sent to the Comptroller of the Treasury, and by him referred to the office of the Auditor to which they relate. A full and complete answer will be promptly prepared by the Auditor in the manner indicated by the Comptroller, and forwarded (with the copy of the petition) to the latter officer for transmission to the Attorney-General with such further information or suggestions as he may deem proper.

3. Notifications from the Attorney-General of judgments rendered for or against the United States will in like manner be referred to the respective Bureaus to which they appertain, and a note or entry thereof will be made in the record kept in such Bureaus. And if in any case the necessary examination has not already been made, inquiry should be made at this stage to ascertain whether in such case the claim on which judgment has been rendered, or any part of it, is pending in the Department or has been allowed and paid, and also whether an appeal should be recommended.

Such notifications from the Attorney-General as relate to matters in the accounting offices of the Department will take the same course as is prescribed above for requests for information relating to the accounting offices.

4. To carry out the provisions of section 4, paragraph 4, of the act of July 31, 1894, when suits are to be instituted for the recovery of debts finally certified by the Auditors to be due to the United States, the proper Auditor will have prepared and certified copies of such papers as may be necessary, and transmit the same, together with such statement as may be deemed, advisable for the information of the attorney

representing the United States, to the Comptroller of the Treasury for his action thereon.

J. G. CARLISLE,

Secretary.

(15536.)

Sugars the Product of Spain Subject to Additional Duty of One-tenth Cent per Pound.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 11, 1895.

SIR: The Department is authoritatively informed that under the laws of Spain a bounty is directly paid on the export of sugar from that country when the exported sugar is the product of the refining of sugars proceeding from its colonial provinces and possessions; that the bounty is equivalent to the tax which may have been paid for the raw materials, plus 20 per cent, and that in cases where no bounties are received by the exporters official certificates to that effect may be obtained.

In view of such information, the Department is of opinion that sugars the product of Spain and her colonies are subject on importation into the United States to the additional duty of one-tenth of 1 cent per pound under the provisions of paragraph 182% of the act of August 28, 1894.

You will be governed accordingly.

Respectfully, yours,
(6604 g.)

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York.

S. WIKE,

Assistant Secretary.

(15537.)

Reliquidation of Entry for Additional Allowance of Drawback of Copper, Ascertained Originally by Wet Assay, the Fire Assay to Govern.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 11, 1895.

SIR: The Department is in receipt of your communication of the 3d instant, transmitting a letter from Messrs. Lewisohn Bros. by Amerman & Patterson, attorneys, in which they request that you may be authorized to reliquidate certain enteries covering exportations of refined copper produced from imported ore and matte.

It appears that the entries in question were liquidated on the basis of the duties paid on the contents of the imported ore and matte, as ascertained by the "wet assay," which is by 1.3 per cent in excess of the contents, recoverable by the "American fire assay," and the best commercial processes, and that, as a consequence, the drawback com

« AnteriorContinuar »