andy Importation. have been passed. The policy of the law will be more plainly Restraints of The woollen manufactures of this country, on account of Woollen Manutheir extent and importance, were protected by very ancient factures. statutes from the effects of foreign importation. By a statute passed in the reign of Edward III. (1), (a reign in which great attention was paid to the establishment of our domestic manufactures,) it was enacted, that no merchant should import cloths not made within the king's dominions, on pain of forfeiture of the clothes and further imprisonment at the king's pleasure. The statutes 3 Edward 4. c. 4. s. 1. and 4 Edward 4. c. 1. s. 7.(2). enumerate woollen cloths and woollen caps, among many other manufactured articles which are forbidden to be brought into the realm. The modern enactments, however, have only restrained the importation of woollen articles by the imposition of certain duties. Woollen cloths and woollen stuffs have distinct duties imposed upon them (3). The tools and implements used by the artificer have been guarded with the same jealousy as the manufacture itself. The 13 & 14 Car. 2. c. 19. provides that no foreign wool cards, or foreign card wire or iron wire for making woolcards, shall be imported into this kingdom (4). (1) 11 Edw. 3. c. 3. 4 Bla. (3) Woollen yarn, which has been (56 Geo. 3. c. 29.) Pope, title (4) The 3 Edw. 4. c. 4. and Restraints of Importation of It would of course materially interfere with the interests of our manufactures to allow the importation of such instruments. The manufacture of silk, a species of industry, which is altogether employed upon foreign materials, continues at the present day to be protected by various enactments which prohibit importation from abroad (1). Foreign wrought silks, as ribbonds and girdles, not manufactured in Great Britain, whether the same be wrought of silk alone, or wrought of silk mixed with any other materials, are forbidden to be imported under severe penalties (2). The 5 Geo. 3. c. 48., enacts that if any foreign manufactured silk stockings, silk mitts, or silk gloves shall be imported into any part of the British dominions, the same shall be forfeited, and shall be liable to be searched for and seized in like manner as other prohibited and uncustomed goods. The 50 Geo. 3. c. 55., which was passed to prohibit the importation of Italian silk crapes (3) and tiffanies, articles formerly allowed to be imported, (4) enacts, that no foreign silk crapes or tiffanies of any description whatever (except of China or the East Indies, imported for exportation), shall be imported into the kingdom of Great Britain, or the islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, or Man (5). The same act offers encouragement to the activity of the officers of the customs in seizing foreign wrought silks, velvets, crapes, and tiffanies, by providing that they shall receive two-thirds of the gross produce arising from the sale of the goods seized (6) The importation of (1) Pope, tit. 98. 164. 177. (2) 3 Geo. 3. c. 21. and see as to (3) There seems to be an error (4) 6 Geo. 3. c. 28. s. 13. (6) By 49 Geo. 3. c. 98. a duty was laid on wrought silk, viz. crapes or tiffanies of the manufacture of Italy. Pope, tit. 246. See also, as to silk, the statute 19 Hen. 7. c. 21. which prohibits silk wrought in ribands, &c. 13 & 14 Car. 2. c. 13. s. 2. 2 W. & M. sess. 1. c. 9. s. 2. As to thrown silk, 6 Ann. c. 19. & 14. as to secret and clandestine importing of wrought silks mixed with gold and silver, or any other materials, and 26 Geo. 2. c. 21. By letter from the board of treasury, dated 2d January 1817, it is stated, that their lordships are of opinion that silk stockings, silk handkerchiefs, shoes and loves, when they ac wrought silks from Persia, China, or East Indies, otherwise than Restraints of for exportation, was prohibited by the 11 & 12 W. 3. (1).; and the Importation. recent statute 59 Geo. 3. (2) prohibits the sale or vending in Great Britain of silk handkerchiefs of the produce of the East Indies. On the importation of wrought silks, bengals, and stuffs mixed with silk, or herba, of the manufacture of Persia, China, or the East Indies, and all calicoes printed, painted, or stained there, it is required by a statute of William, to prevent their being used in this kingdom, not with a view to enlarge the time for payment of the duty, that after they have been entered, they shall be forthwith carried and put into such warehouses as shall be approved by the commissioners of the customs, "so that none of them shall be taken or carried out thence upon any account other than in order for exportation," nor until sufficient security be given to his Majesty that they shall be exported, and not landed again in any part of England, Wales, or Berwick (3), those securities to be discharged by means of certificates obtained from the foreign country to which the goods have been exported (3); and that all such of the aforesaid goods, whether the same shall be mixed, sewed, or made up together for sale with any other goods or materials or otherwise, which shall be found in any house or other place (except in such warehouses as have been approved of by the commissioners), shall be forfeited and liable to be seized (4). It has been contended, that although the goods were meant to be relanded they could not be seized, company the proprietors arriving (2) c. 52. s. 17. s. 14. provides that (as the goods (4) 11 & 12 W. 3. c. 10. s. 2. Restraints of nor would the exporter's security be forfeited, until some attempt had been actually made to accomplish that purpose. But it has been decided, that if it can be shewn that the person who took the goods out of the warehouses had no intention to export them, and that he meant to put them on board a vessel in order to be carried one, two, or three leagues only from the shore, proof of that intention would defeat the allegation that they were taken out of the warehouse for the purpose of exportation. The circumstance of actual relanding need not be shewn, for the case would be vitiated by the intention withwhich the goods were taken out of the warehouse. If the circumstances of the case afford a presumption of illegality, they ought to be submitted to a jury; if, on the other hand, reasons of necessity existed to justify the exporter in acting in a manner apparently suspicious, he has an opportunity of explaining his conduct. As, when an action of trespass was brought against a custom-house officer for seizing goods, it appeared that the plaintiff, who had purchased at the India sale a quantity of Bandana handkerchiefs, sent them down with the usual forms in the care of a custom-house officer to the custom-house at Aldborough, where they were put on board the Experiment cutter by the custom-house officers, the plaintiff having entered them for Hamburgh, and the vessel having cleared out for that port, though in fact she was only a cutter licensed to fish between Flamborough head and the Isle of Wight. The plaintiff had given the usual security that the goods should be exported and not relanded; and the defendant, who was captain of the Argus revenue cutter, seized the vessel and goods after they had proceeded some way down the river, but while she was within the limits of the port of Aldborough, and a tidewaiter of that port was on board at the time (1). The court held that it ought to be left to the jury to determine whether the goods were put on board the cutter with the intention of being exported; that if they were not intended to be exported, they could not be said to (1) It was objected that the goods were in custodiâ legis, and therefore could not be seized; but the court denied this, for they said, the owner, after giving security in London, according to the statute, was at liberty to export them as he thought fit; that the practice of sending down an officer with the goods was not re. quired by the 11 & 12 W. 3. but adopted from 6 Geo. 3. c. 40. s. 6. which relates to the exportation of East India goods to Africa, and that the officer on board at the time was placed for the general protection of the revenue, and not to watch these goods. 1 Bos. & Pul. 269. be in a course of exportation, and that the goods had been Restraints of properly seized, and the defendant was entitled to a ver- Importation. dict (1). The statute 11 & 12 W. 3. c. 10. enacts, that the exportation bond required by that act (2), shall be discharged without fee or reward, upon certificate returned under the common seal of the chief magistrate in any place beyond the seas, or under the hands and seals of two known English merchants upon the place, that such goods were there landed, or upon proof by credible persons that such goods were taken by enemies or perished in the seas; the examination and proof thereof being left to the judgment of the commissioners of the customs. A certificate obtained under such a provision by the exporter of goods under the hands and seals of two British merchants, is not evidence in a court of law, but only before the commissioners, to whom it seems to have been the intention of the act that it should be submitted; it is nothing more than a declaration of two individuals, not even given upon oath, and the commissioners may have opportunities of enquiring into its validity, which are not accessible in a court of justice. (3) factures. So great is the encouragement afforded to the woollen Linen Manuand silk manufactures, that it has been made unlawful to use or wear in Great Britain, in any garment or apparel, any printed, painted, stained, or dyed calico (4). It was also enacted by the statute 7 Geo. 1. st. 1. c. 7. that it shall be equally legal to wear or use in apparel, household-stuff, or furniture, any stuff made of cotton or mixed therewith, which should be printed or painted with any colour or colours; or any calico chequered or striped, or any calico stitched or flowered in foreign parts with colours or with coloured flowers made there, (muslins, neckcloths, and fustians excepted). Under this enactment it appears to have become a matter of doubt whether it was unlawful to wear printed stuffs made of linen yarn and cotton wool, which had been for many years manufactured in Great Britain, and were considered as forming a branch of the ancient fustian (1) Wilson v. Saunders, 1 Bos. & Pul. 267. (2) On the exportation of wrought silks, &c. of the East Indies, see 11 & 12 W. 3. c. 10. s. 2. and ante, 521. n. 3. 43 G. 3. c.132. s. 13, which requires a similar certificate, though the provisions (3) The King v. Vyse, Forrest's Rep. Exch. 35. held also, that though the certificate is required to be under the hands and seals of the merchants, proof of the signature is sufficient. (4) 7 Geo. 1. stat. 1. c. 7. 3 Macpherson's An. Com. 118. |