UNCUSTOMED GOODS

Evening Post, Volume XCII, Issue 55, 2 September 1916, Page 6

UNCUSTOMED GOODS

ARE USEFUL ARTICLES DE

STROYED?

.. A; complaint of destruction of useful goods by the Customs in default of payment of duty has been the subject of enquiry by a representative of The Post. It was stated that a local importing house, having refused to accept delivery of (and consequently to pay duty on) a case of boots salved from the Rangatira, the goods were destroyed by the Customs. It was pointed but* that in the present time, when there was never greater need for the exercise of personal and general economy, the destruction by the Customs of any goods that cpuld be turned to account was indefensible.

The matter was enquired into by our representative, and from the importing firm'whose name had been mentioned it was learned that no boots had been destroyed by the Customs in default of acceptance of delivery and consequential non-payment of duty. Goods might be refused -acceptance if they were pillaged or .damaged, but claims would /be made for'any defects upon-the ship or others: concerned. Duty would be paid upon the balance of the goods that were saleable. From the Customs.it was learned that there was no waste whatsoever by destruction of dutiable goods if the same were fit for human consumption, wear, or use. Goods could be re-exported, and any duty paid upon them refunded. If fruit, food, or other imports, even boots, were refused acceptance, then they would be destroyed if they were not fit for human consumption or use or could not bo disposed of in the Dominion (as in the case of, say, unmanufactured tobacco if the same were unmarketable here) and the consignee declined to take delivery or pay duty. An assurance was given, however, that nothing that was in a suitable condition for . use or consumption and was of a marketable character was destroyed by the Customs.