CROWN VERSUS FRAPWELL.

Evening Star, Issue 14307, 4 March 1910, Page 7

CROWN VERSUS FRAPWELL.

10 THIi KDITOK. Sir,— Regarding tho case which was before the Court last Friday, viz., I'rapwell and Holgato versus Hia Majesty s Customs, the account published might perhaps have given a wrong impression, as since then fuller particulars have come to hand. In tho first place, the importers forward their orders to the shippers through an agent in this city, who sends to Frapwell and Holgato with each shipment a letter, attached to which arc; two invoices, the totals in each instance being exactly the same, but, on one invoice, the goods were charged at £25 4s, packing and casing at £4 15s, inland carriage and freight to Duuediu £7 2s Gd, and insurance, exchange, etc., at £1 9s, making a total of £3B 10s Gd ; while on tho other goods are charged at £32, and freight, insurance, exchange, etc., £G 10s Gd—total, £3B 10s Gd. As all packages and packing have to be paid for at tho same rate of duty as goods enclosed in tho packages, Messrs Frapwoll and Holgate paid duty on the sum of £29 19s in place of £32, and the actual difference in the duty paid and what should havo been paid was 10s 3d. The reason Frapwell and Holgate sent their Custom house agent the invoice, which the Customs Department says is not the correct ono (viz., the first one mentioned), is that that one bears on the back the necessary declaration stating the goods are of British manufacture. Were this declaration not endorsed on the back the importers would have to pay preferential tariff equal to another 12.J- per cent, duty, so that the case is hardly what tho first report represented. At this stage I am not in a position to criticise the action of Frank Watts, London, in sending out these two invoices, as ono does not know what value ho understands goods coining into New Zealand have to pay duty upon, but I think in all probability he has been misinformed, as it is hardly creditable that a firm of this standing would lend themselves to a fraudulent action, which would at any time get their clients into serious trouble, such as has happened on this occasion.

As mentioned before, Frapwcll and Holgate wore perfectly open in the matter, for directly the Customs authorities asked me, as their agent, if this firm received any other invoice, I, on ringing up Mr I'" rap well and ascertaining if such was the case, was at onco informed in the affirmative, and both invoices were produced without the slightest hesitation.—l am, etc., 11. C. CAMl'liKl,!,. March 4.