CUSTOMS FRAUD IN AUCKLAND.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2100, 27 September 1875, Page 2

CUSTOMS FRAUD IN AUCKLAND.

The Echo of Thursday last gives the following particulars of an attempt made to defraud the Customs, by an Auckland importer, and the sequel thereto at gathered in the Resident Magistrates Court:— "Mr Moss Levy imported certain goods liable to an ad valorem duty. He presented an invoice to the Customs setting forth the value at a certain amount. This, of course^ he had' ; to swear to- as being correct in,eyery particular, and he paid duty accordingly pn the goods per invoice presented. Owing to some oversight on the part of one of the Customhouse officers on the wharf,; who had neglected to take a note of certain numbers, Mr Levy was requested to send down the invoice, and bis clerk sent down another invoiceat a higher rate of prices for the same goods. The whole "thing waa then discovered—the one was the real invoice, the other the altered one^and the Collector of Customs laid an information for attempting to evade Customs duties, and sued for treble the value of the goods, namely—£22s 2s 6d. -At the Police Court Mr J. B. Kussell, wlio appeared for Levy, pleaded guilty, but ?«iiid that although his.client was legally guilty, he was not so morally. However, this could only be explained by the defendant on oath, and of course that was not possible, as defendant's mouth was shut. 'It was then arranged that with the permission of the bench a fine of £100 should % paid, together with the costs."

The four Auckland papers, we gather from the Echo, combined to suppress the report of these proceedings, on the plea that the publication would damage tho commercial credit of Auckland; but the Echo, stung with remorse, made a clean breast of the whole thing. Jt is a pitiable business all through—the salted invoices, j the way in which the case was settled in the Court, and the hushing up of the proceedings. It is not long since the Auckland Star lashed itself into a fury over the enormous offence.of specimen stealing. Can it justify the systematic fraud revealed in this case? Is the well-to-do merchant who by means of duplicate invoices cheats the Government and increases the burdens of the consumers of dutiable goods one jot better than the specimen stealer? Ihe Auckland Star will probably justify itself for not exposing this customs fraud, Perhaps we are wrong in supposing that salted invoices and cheating the customs are amongst the " wrongs that need resistance." To use duplicate invoices is a trade trick ; to cheat the Government is a venial offence-; and to suppress the report of wrong doing is justifiable to save the commercial credit of Auckland. We shall see. The Echo having let the cat out of the bag, in self defence the other Auckland papers will possibly afford some further information oh the matter of customs frauds and suppression of Court proceedings. ~ ' .