collector to grant the allowance, unless he had good
reasons for suspecting the accuracy of the claim.

Other Jamaica merchants asked the Board to inform
them as to the precise limits of the port of Kingston
(perhaps on account of Darrell and Barclay's case).
The collector was directed to inquire, and replied that he
had failed to find any specifying document except an
island Act (Cap. 39, 8 Vict., reaffirming a provision of the
repealed statute, Cap. 39, 41 Geo. III.), which stated
that the harbour included the waters ' between the shores
in the parishes of Kingston and Port Royal, and the
shores in the parishes of Kingston, St. Andrew, and
St. Catherine, and the shores in the parishes of Port Royal
and St. Catherine, and extending from the head of the
harbour to a right line from Gallows Point, in the parish
of Port Royal, to the southernmost point of the Twelve
Apostles' Battery.'

Cap. 95, 13 and 14 Vict., amended the Customs laws,
providing that the rules, orders, and regulations issued
* See p. 313 for another case.



1850] LITIGATION AND GRIEVANCES 311

by the Board should be valid until rescinded by the
Board, even though the statutes that influenced their
issue might no longer be in operation ; also that no
superannuation allowance granted to a Customs official
should be legally assignable. It allowed the importation
duty-free of goods from the Channel Islands, provided
they were goods of Channel Island growth, or manu-
factured from materials produced in the Channel Islands,
said materials being of a kind not dutiable in the United
Kingdom. The importation into the United Kingdom
of extracts of coffee, chicory, tea, and tobacco, was pro-
hibited. The only remaining export duty — that of
4s. a ton on coals exported to foreign countries in foreign
ships — was repealed.

The Board regularized the system of dealing with small
quantities of tobacco and cigars brought by passengers.
If the quantity were under half a pound, and the passenger
not a frequent traveller, the goods might pass duty-free.

The ways of petty legal practitioners were illustrated
by the case of a Liverpool tide-waiter named Thomas.
He had been arrested for debt, and the collector advised
the Board. It appeared that a London solicitor had
apprised Thomas that his wife had been left ;^i54. The
various legal expenses swallowed all of the legacy except
£23 los. This remnant Thomas expended. Then the
lawyer sent in a bill for ' proctor's charges,' amounting
to £20 7s. 2d., sold him up, and threw him into gaol.

The Plymouth tide-waiters petitioned the Board, stating
that they were sometimes kept on small foreign craft for
preiods ranging from forty to eighty days. (This must
have been an utterly barbarous and useless formality.)
Thus they suffered in health, and had few opportunities
of seeing their families. The Board did not lighten their
lot to any great extent. It was merely directed that
when a tide-waiter had been on duty seven successive
days and nights he should be allowed a night's rest before
being boarded again !

The inspecting commander of Coastguard at Seafield,



312 TOWARDS FREE TRADE [1850

Miltown Milbay, Ireland, reported an extraordinary riot
in that locality. The brig Andrew White, laden with
timber, went ashore on the coast, and the rabble of
Miltown Milbay (described by the officer as ' the most
unruly population in the kingdom ') mustered, on plunder
bent, armed with reaping-hooks, hammers, axes, crow-
bars, sticks, and stones. The officer asserted that some
of the wealthier inhabitants, who desired to profit by the
plunder, supplied the mob with whisky. The police and
Coastguard did their best, but it seems that the rabble
carried off most of the cargo, and that certain responsible
citizens purchased it from them.

Part of the correspondence connected with this case is
ludicrous. One of the rioters fell and broke his thigh,
and then put in a claim for ' salvage ' ! One of the
' receivers ' sent the following modest though garbled
petition to the Board :

' The police seized a cross-cut saw of mine which was
in care of one of my laborers, and in his absence it was
taken by some men who the police found on the shore
and also found the saw. I sent to the Sergeant, who
said it could not be given without your authority. I will
feel obliged your ordering him to return it to me.
' And you will oblige,
' faithfully,

' Thos. H. Morony.'

On February 19, 1850, the U.S.A. Consul at St. John,
New Brunswick, applied to the controller of Navigation
laws for enlightenment as to the state of affairs under the
recently-amended Navigation Acts. Below are the ques-
tions and replies, the latter sanctioned by the Board :

1. ' May American vessels trade coastwise in the pro-
vinces ?' Reply : ' No ; but they may trade between
province and province, to and from ports provided with
custom-houses.'

2. ' May an American vessel from a foreign port trade
to a colonial place other than a " free port," or load at



1850] RIOT AND EVASION 313

such place for foreign ?' Reply : ' She may trade to or
from such place if the place be provided with a custom-
house.'

3. 'May an American vessel be made British?'
Reply : ' Yes ; the full conditions of registry, etc., being
complied with.'

When the Newfoundland Customs were handed over
to the colony, the gauging and testing instruments,
stationery, etc., went as well, under stipulation that the
colony should pay for them. In 1850 the controller of
Navigation laws wrote to the Board thus : ' It will
surprise your Honours to learn that, although these
articles were actually necessary to the colonial officers,
the House of Assembly twice rejected the proposed
vote, and it was not until after a third application
had been made by the Executive that the amount was
granted.'

The Jamaica revenue Act alluded to at p. 309 had
been replaced by another statute — a statute drafted
rather more carefully, for it provided that the tariff
should expire on December 31 , 1850. It was not passed
until several days after the previous Act had determined,
but it was made retrospective. Messrs. Scott and
Leaycraft, Kingston merchants, refused to pay duty on
certain goods imported by them during the interval.
Thereupon an American resident, rejoicing in the illus-
trious name ' Benjamin Franldin,' followed suit. A
decree was obtained against Scott and Leaycraft, with
costs, in the Vice-Admiralty Court of the island. They
gave notice of appeal, but did not persevere. A decree
was also obtained, with costs, against Franklin, and he
deposited the duty and costs in the Customs chest, stating
that he intended to lay his case before the queen. A deal
of trouble was gone to in the United Kingdom to provide
defence against Franklin's expected appeal, and there
was much discussion as to whether the imperial or the
island Customs should bear the expense if he carried it
into the higher Court. All this, it seems, might have



314 TOWARDS FREE TRADE [1850-51

been spared, for there is no record of any further steps
taken by him.

Questions from foreign shipowners, as to the purport
of the amended Navigation Act, continued to trouble
the Board. One, transmitted by the Jamaica collector,
was from the British consul at St. Jago de Cuba, asking
whether a Spanish vessel might trade as a mail-packet
between Cuba and Jamaica. The consul was doubtful
on the point, as the Spanish regulations were not recip-
rocal. The Board told him the vessel might trade, and
hinted that the collector might have dealt personally
with so simple a matter.*

An account of the finance of the colony of South Aus-
tralia appears in one of the returns. The total revenue
for 1850 was £147,455- Of "this, £80,000 was raised by
Customs, the duty taken on spirits and tobacco alone
realizing £42,000. There was a ' bonded debt ' of
£15,000. The Customs expenses were extremely moderate.
The collector had but £500 a year. The total charges on
the Customs estabhshment were £3,719 for salaries, and
£455 for incidents. Another return states the nature of
New Zealand products exported from Auckland during
1848-1850 : 1848, £15,525 ; 1849, £27,092 ; 1850, £45>765-
The chief articles exported were cordage, flax, grain,
' houses in frame,' black oil, sperm oil, spars, timber,
copper ore, and potatoes. The exports of copper ore
had increased in value from £500 in 1848 to £14,887 in
1850 ; of potatoes, from £121 to £5,780. Another return
states the trade and revenue of the port of Geelong in
1850 : Imports, £40,883 ; exports, £359,687 ; Customs
revenue, £11,348. (In 1851 the Geelong return was :
Imports, £113,672; exports, £392,950; Customs revenue,
£16,037.)

The only revenue Act of 1851 was Cap. 62, 14 and 15

* The best definition of the new state of affairs that we have
been able to find is that furnished by the London ' Bench Officers '
(Customs) in 1850. They stated that all limitations were re-
moved, save that foreign ships might not trade with or in the
Channel Islands, or coast in the United Kingdom and the colonies.



i85i] TRADE AND COINAGE 315

Vict., which reduced the duty on foreign coffee and several
kinds of foreign timber. The goods in question, when
imported from British possessions, had been previously
admitted at low preferential duties. The Act abolished
such preference, and made the duties equal.

During 1851 the mayor and burgesses of Cork memorial-
ized the Treasury, stating that the copper coinage in the
south-west of Ireland was defective, much bad coin
being in circulation, and a number of ' tokens ' issued by
irresponsible persons. It was suggested that the collector
of customs at Cork should be allowed to sell £1,500 worth
new copper coin. Copper coin to the value of £500 was
sent to the collector at Belfast. The officers were directed
to remit in all £2,000 to the Bank of England, to the
credit of the Master of the Mint.

The Customs return to the Census officers in 1851 was
as below :





Established
Officers.


Temporary
Officers.


Superannuated
Officers.


London

English outports
Scotland . .
Ireland


. . 1,736

. . 2,236

.. 528

476


367

533

59

193


408
645
131

177




4.976


1,152


1,361



Late in 1850 one of the Southampton officers reported
to the Board that a sealed bag had been shipped by a
vessel for Lisbon ' by a Spanish gentleman.' The bag,
he thought, contained letters, but he had not presumed
to detain it, although he intimated suspicion that the
postal regulations with respect to foreign letters might
have been evaded. The Board communicated with the
Postmaster-General, who referred to the Spanish minister
in London, who in turn applied to the Spanish consul,
who denied knowledge of the transaction, and sent an
indignant demand for explanation, which the minister
transmitted, along with a few severe remarks on his own
account, to the departments interested. Early in 1851
it was found that the bag had been sent from the Portu-



3i6 TOWARDS FREE TRADE [1851

guese Legation, under the Portuguese Consulate seal, and
quite in accordance with official routine.

A Bideford ship cleared out from Westport for the
North American colonies with sixty-seven emigrants.
She displa3^ed her proper complement of boats when the
collector made his inspection, but when she arrived in
the colonies the Customs found she was one short.
Inquiry was made, and the Westport collector ascer-
tained that the captain borrowed a boat prior to inspec-
tion, and returned it * from sea ' after leaving port. The
matter was allowed to drop, the vessel having gone into
the foreign trade.

On January 17, 185 1, the Emerald Isle, with emigrants
from Sydney to San Francisco, left the former port
without Customs sanction. Clearance had been with-
held, and a tide-waiter put on board to insure detention,
because the Emigration agent had declared the vessel
unseaworthy. She took the officer to sea with her. The
governor reported the affair to the Privy Council for
Trade, and intimated that the colonial law officers opined
that no proceedings could be taken, the law being de-
fective on the point at issue. The matter was referred
to the London Customs lawyers, who opined differently,
pointing out that prosecution might be effectively sus-
tained under the following Acts : Cap. 33, 12 and 13 Vict.,
against the master, for sailing without the Emigration
agent's certificate ; Cap. 13, 9 Vict. (New South Wales
Act), for sailing without Customs clearance, and also for
carrying the officer away. These proceedings should be
taken in New South Wales, but if the master came to the
United Kingdom, he might be prosecuted under Cap. 8y,
8 and 9 Vict. (The vessel was not liable to seizure.)

Meantime the Emerald Isle put in to Honolulu, and
landed the officer, who in course of time found his way
back to Sydney. She proceeded to San Francisco, and
her company promptly deserted her, except the chief
mate, who after a time succeeded in obtaining fresh
hands. She was in England in 1852, and the new captain



i85i] THE PASSENGER LAWS 317

furnished a statement to the Board, from which it
appeared that the previous skipper had not been much
to blame, for it was shown that he had an independent
survey made at Sydney, under which the ship was
declared ' tight, staunch, and strong, and fit to proceed
to any part of the world '; that he offered to put the
officer ashore along with the pilot, but the officer would
not budge ; that when he landed the officer at Honolulu
he gave him £20 to pay his expenses back ; and that the
consul at Honolulu surveyed the vessel, and testified to
her seaworthiness. The matter was dropped.

The first section of the imperial Act 59, 13 and 14 Vict.,
liad decreed the separation of Victoria and New South
Wales. This exercised the minds of the New South Wales
Crown lawyers and the collector of Sydney. The lawyers
thought that only goods which were shipped from Vic-
toria after date of separation should be charged with
duty. Other\dse, they held, duty-paid goods shipped —
say, in Melbourne — prior to separation, might arrive at
Sydney on the day after separation and have to be
duty-paid again. (The mere la3^man might think that
it would be an equal hardship if the merchant shipped
such goods after separation. In either case he would pay
twice.)

On November i, 1851, the collector of Melbourne in-
formed the Board that the governor had made substantial
increases in the pay of all the inferior officials, ' under the
present unprecedented circumstances, consequent upon
the discovery of gold in this colony.' Many officials of
other departments had deserted and made off for the
diggings, but the Customs men had pledged themselves
to stick to their posts.

During this year the Board of Customs furnished
Government with various accounts of large shipments
of arms and ammunition to the Cape. The foreign office
directed that inquiries should be made as to the ultimate
destination of these goods, and the Cape Town collector
furnished in reply a statement tending to show that the



3i8 TOWARDS FREE TRADE [1851

smuggling of arms and ammunition across the boundary
of the colony to the Boers, Kaffirs, ' bastard Hottentots,'
and Portuguese, had ceased years ago. Yet he failed to
explain satisfactorily the deliveries of gunpowder from the
two colonial storehouses, Craig's Tower and Amsterdam
Battery, which during three months of 1851 had reached
41,200 pounds. Later he seemed to think that most of
this went to the Boers, and was used in protecting their
stock and in killing game. ' The Boer and his gun,' he
stated, ' are constant companions, and to deprive him of
the use of it would undoubtedly be deemed a great
grievance.' He also procured statements from vagrant
traders, which went to show that if the sale of weapons
and powder to natives had ceased it must have ceased
rather suddenly. Said one : ' I have seen black people
(bastard Hottentots) bartering for gunpowder, giving in
exchange corn, skins, ostrich eggs, ostrich feathers, etc.
I have seen a trek-ox bought for half a pound of gun-
powder, and three oxen for a gun ' (worth about five
dollars). Another expert stated that twenty Boers
bought 1,000 pounds of powder from him in one lot ; and
another stated that the Boers frequently paid their Kafftr
labourers in arms and ammunition. (This man had seen
a large quantity of gunpowder run on the coast from a
Liverpool vessel.)

Later Earl Grey wrote complaming bitterly of the
running of guns, powder, and bar lead to the hostile
Kaffirs. Soon came a report from the commander of
H.M.S. Rhadamanthus , who had been sent to Espiegle
Bay and the mouth of the Orange River to investigate.
He had found no unauthorized suppl}/ on hand, except
five barrels of powder intended for blasting purposes,
but he had collected much information from Field-Cornet
Cornelissen and a trader named Dickson. These con-
curred in stating that the smuggling of arms, etc., was
nearly ended ; but Dickson's admissions as to his dealings
in the past cause us to think he might still be active, as
soon as H.M.S. Rhadamanthus departed. Not only did



1851-52] RECIPROCITY AND CAPE TRADE 319

he give details of his own doings, but of certain traffic by
missionaries, and of direct landing of guns and powder
by European vessels at Angra Pequena and Walwick
Bay. There can be no doubt that ' gun-running ' was
a profitable business, and that many unworthy British
merchants made a good thing of supplying weapons to
the enemies of their country.

The New Zealand collectors were empowered by the
governor to allow tobacco to be mixed in bond with spirits
of tar or turpentine, and then delivered duty-free for
manufacture into sheepwash.

Provision had been made by treaty in 181 9, and ratified
by Cap. 54, 59 Geo. III., for reciprocity in commercial
arrangements between the United Kingdom and the
United States of America, and the United Kingdom and
Portugal. Cap. 90, 8 and 9 Vict., had extended recip-
rocity so as to apply between the United Kingdom and
all foreign powers that had entered into similar treaties.
Cap. 47, 15 and 16 Vict., conferred still greater elasticity,
for it provided that the queen by Order in Council might
at any time establish reciprocity as regarded commerce
and navigation between the United Kingdom and an^^
foreign power that gave to British goods and shipping
the same privileges as to its own, such reciprocity to endure
as long as the foreign power continued to grant the
privileges, even though no treaty had been entered into.
The places that enjoyed Treaty privileges were : Austria,
Belgium, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Denmark, the Dominican
Republic, ' the Republic of the Equator,' France, the city
of Frankfort, Greece, Guatemala, Hanover, the Hanse
cities (of Bremen, Hamburg, and Lubeck), Liberia — the
Duchies of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Mecklenburg-Strelitz,
Oldenburg, and Tuscany — Mexico, Holland, New Grenada,
Turkey, Peru, Portugal — Prussia, and the various states
forming the German Commercial Union — Rio de la Plata,
Russia, Sardinia, Sicily, Sweden and Norway, the United
States of America, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

In 1852 the Board issued directions as to dealing with



320 TOWARDS FREE TRADE [1852

a new article of import ' known as Semolina.' It was
to be admitted as wheat-meal, at 4|d. a hundredweight
duty.

The once famous port of Chichester was made a creek
(head port, Arundel) on December 5, 1852.

A Treasury Order of November 29, 1852, directed that
all tobacco, except cigars, in the Queen's Warehouse as
' seized,' and all such tobacco seized thenceforward,
should be destroyed, instead of being disposed of by
auction at the Customs sales. The order stated that it
was apparent that the sale of seized tobacco ' led to
fraud,' and injured the honest trader, ' by displacing in
the market a corresponding quantity of tobacco which
would otherwise be entered for home consumption.'
(This order, sHghtly modified, is still in force, ^\^ly it
should apply only to tobacco is difficult to discover.)

By a Board's Minute of 1852 certain privileges had
been granted to merchants of unshipping duty-free goods
in the Port of London before and after legal hours without
any expense for Customs attendance. Later the mer-
chants of Liverpool asked that the privilege might be
extended to that port. The Board replied that the
measure was but experimental. The Liverpool merchants
applied afresh, declining to consider it ' experimental,' it
having been extended to Leith, Kirkcaldy, and Dundee.
The Board referred the petitioners to the collector at
Liverpool, but they refused to accept the recommendation,
and soon the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce moved the
Board upon the matter. Then a full report was called
for, and the Customs surveyor-general tried his best to
make out a case for the preferential treatment of London,
stating that the London dock and wharf hours were
similar to the Customs hours ; that few goods were un-
shipped in London before and after the usual hours,
except into craft, to be cleared by Customs during the
legal period ; but that at Liverpool nearly all the goods
were landed, and required to be cleared at once, and that
if the Crown had to pay the officers for the extra attend-



1850-52] HOURS AND SWEEPINGS 321

dance, great public expense would be incurred. He

thought that ' the American portion ' of the Chamber of

Commerce had inspired the memorial. The request was

afterwards granted, and later still one from the Bristol

merchants.

During 1850 and 1851 the Customs Board had been

considerably embroiled with the directors of the London

and St. Katherine's Docks. The trouble arose in 1849,*

when information of fraud in connection with ' sweepings '

in the St. Katherine's Docks was given privately to the

Solicitor. To make things quite clear, it may be necessary

to explain the position of a dock company with respect to

the Customs. In the first place the dock company was

under a heavy bond to the revenue department — a bond

liable to be put in suit if any fraud were discovered for

which the company might legally be held blamable. The

directors were bound to provide all reasonable facilities

for the customs men to take account of goods, and might

deliver no goods, either dutiable or free, without Customs

sanction. In connection with the unpacking, repacking,

weighing, etc., of certain kinds of dutiable goods, especially

such goods as raw coffee and cocoa, there was frequently

an accumulation of ' sweepings ' — viz., litter from the

various packages — and when the floors were cleared at

the end of each day the ' sweepings ' were put away by

the dock company's servants. In course of time they

grew into a large quantity, and it was the practice of the

dock company to assume possession, clean them, lot

them, and either pay duty on them and sell them, or

export them duty-free. In short, they became the

company's perquisites, it being held that they could not

be justly allotted to the various merchants' goods. It

will be evident to readers that if the dock company's

officials happened to be astute and unscrupulous people,

they had here a chance of committing fraud. In the first

* A case much similar had occurred in 18 16, when, acting upon
information received, the Customs seized goods to the value of
about ;^i 2,000 for being found in various places in the London
Dock, and not accounted for in the Company's books.

21



322 TOWARDS FREE TRADE [1850-52

place there could be no exact check on the quantity of
' sweepings ' till the period arrived when the bulk was
weighed and lotted. During the interval much might be
done. ' Sweepings ' of dutiable goods might be slyly
conveyed from the dock, or used in making up deficiencies
in goods which had been taken to account (deficiencies
caused by neglect or abstraction). There can be no
doubt that something of the kind had been practised
pretty freely at the St. Katherine's Dock. A sudden
search was made by the Customs on December 4, 1849,
and several packages, some containing ' sweepings,' and
other goods which had not been entered with the Customs,
were seized. Other searches were made durmg the early
part of 1850, and many packages detained. The total
value of the goods seized (mostly coffee, indigo, and
pepper) was £8,392.

On March 2, 1850, information was tendered as to
similar irregularities in the London Dock. Several
searches were made, and goods to the value of £10,467
were seized.