DEFRAUDING THE CUSTOMS.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9916, 16 December 1899, Page 2

DEFRAUDING THE CUSTOMS.

(Per United Press Association.)

DUNEDIN, December 15.

At the Polico Court, Thomas Turnbull McAllister, of Tapanui, was charged with, on the 19th October, being knowingly conoerned in a fraudulent evasion, or an attempt at a fraudulent evasion, of tho Customs on certain goods. Mr Hanlou _njy}caxed for the defendant, who pleaded guilty. Mr J. F. M. Fraser represented tho Collector of Customs, and said he would state tho circumstances fully, as it waa a coso that should havo the f nflr est publicity. Thoro was a firm that carried on business with Australasia called tho United Watch and Jewellery Company, Limited, with which was amalgamated the Moreo Manufacturing Company Tho firm issued a largo catalogue which stated that their priocs were wholesale, and that they sold for cash only. Defendant sent Home several ordors for g00.13, and amongst others was an order in respect to which tho information was laid. Tho practice of this firm was to initiate a system of fraud on the Customs. They acknowledged a draft sent forward for goods, and sent an iuvoico with goods on tho invoice, which was about 50 per cent loss 'than the sum paid. Their practico was too coolly inform tho customer that they enclosed in the goods an invoice showing tho net total of blank pounds, which they said would be tho means of minimising the amount of duty that would havo to bo paid on delivery of the poods. They initiated a system of fraud themselves, and practically corrupted tho customer. They dofraudod the revenue as an induoomont to tho Customs to continuo to givo orders. They initiated fraud themselves without solicitation from their customer, and practically induced him, for his own bonefit certainly, but probably to encourage him, to givo other or* deis to commit fraud on tho Customs. It was as barefaced and rascally a pioce of imposition as it wa3 possible to conceive, and ho did not think after this case that tho firm would bo able to continue their nefarious practices. In the present case thoy sent forward a fraudulent invoice in the paroel for 17s 2d, when tho faco value of the goods was about 100 per cent more. The defendant could not bo oxoused from knowing what he was doing, but it was only right to say that he (Mr Fraser) did not suppose thai Mr McAllister would have fallen into this practico if it had nofc been suggested to him in tho first instance by this rascally firm. There were two informations laid, but ho proposed to withdraw the second one. The penalty fixed was <£100, and tho only pity was that the firni who induced tho defendant to do this wrong oould not be brought before the Court. Mr Hanlon, having spoken in mitigation of tho penalty, the h.M. decided to impose the full penalty of jOIOO, with costs, and leave it with the Minister to reduce the penalty if ho thought fit. Tho second information was withdrawn.