The penultimate document [*] in my sample of signed Adam Smith letters is Order #144, which is dated 30 December 1784 and is signed by Basil Cochrane (top signature), Adam Smith (middle), and James Edgar (bottom). This order highlights the classic tension between “law” and “equity”, between strict enforcement and equitable discretion:
“Having received your Report of the 23rd instant, on the Petition of Duncan Grant [,] Manufacturer in Forres, praying that the Duty may be remitted on a Cask of Flour Seed imported in the Friendship from Campvere in the Month of March last, which was omitted in the Report of the Master of the said Vessel; We upon considering the Circumstances of the Case, agree to the Duties on the said Flour Seed being exempted.”
What is going on here? In summary, a manufacturer based in the town of Forres in the northeast of Scotland (see maps pictured below) had imported a cask of “Flour Seed” from the port of Veere in the Netherlands. (Veere was known in Scotland as “Campvere” and was the staple port for Scotland between 1541 and 1799. [**]) The ship’s captain, however, had accidentally omitted this cask from the ship’s manifest when the cargo was being unloaded. As a result, the manufacturer petitions the principal officers at Inverness to waive whatever duties are owed on this cargo. The principal officers at Inverness write a report and forward the report, along with the manufacturer’s petition, to the Board of Customs in Edinburgh. After conducting their deliberations, the commissioners vote to waive the payment of duties.
Considering how strict we have seen the board to be thus far, this decision is somewhat surprising. Under British customs laws in force at the time (see, e.g., the Smuggling Act of 1781 (21 Geo. 3 c. 39)), any cargo omitted from a ship’s manifest was subject to seizure and forfeiture as uncustomed cargo. But at the same time, the central commissioners in London and Edinburgh have a certain level of equitable discretion when applying those same laws under extenuating circumstances. (Cf. Hoon 1968, p. 48 (footnote omitted): “Both the Lords of the Treasury and the Customs Commissioners could determine customs policy, though the final decision always lay with the Treasury Board. That body was possessed of vast powers in this connection for it could remit forfeitures and penalties under the customs laws ….”) Here, for instance, the commissioners decide to exercise their discretion, since the omission in this case appears to be an honest administrative error rather than intent to defraud the revenue.
[*] Point of order: I have already compiled (and am in the process of transcribing) about 200 Smith letters in all (from September 1784 until the beginning of 1787 thus far), and I plan to expand this burgeoning sample size to include all of Smith’s signed letters from 1784 (Jan. to Aug.) and the rest of 1787 as well as the years 1788 to 1790.
[**] The origin port of Campvere (modern-day Veere in Zeeland, Netherlands) holds major economic significance. For centuries, Campvere served as the official “Scots Staple” port in the Low Countries, handling the bulk of Scotland’s imported flax, linseed, and industrial goods in exchange for exported wool and salmon. (See generally John Davidson and Alexander Gray, The Scottish Staple at Veere: A Study in the Economic History of Scotland, Longmans, Green & Co. (1909), available here.)
