TRAVELS WITH CHARLEY IN SEARCH OF AMERICA
I find out of long experience that I admire all nations and hate all governments, and nowhere is my natural anarchism more aroused than at national borders where patient and efficient public servants carry out their duties in matters of immigration and customs. I have never smuggled anything in my life. Why, then, do I feel an uneasy sense of guilt on approaching a customs barrier? I crossed a high toll bridge and negotiated a no man’s land and came to the place where the Stars and Stripes stood shoulder to shoulder with the Union Jack.
The Canadians were very kind. They asked where I was going and for how long, and came at last to Charley.
“Do you have a certificate of rabies vaccination on the dog?”
“No. I haven’t. You see he’s an old dog. He was vaccinated long ago.”
Another official came out. “We advise you not to cross the border with him, then.”
“But I’m just crossing a small part of Canada and re-entering the US.”
“We understand,” they said kindly. “You can take him into Canada, but the US won’t let him back.”
“But technically I am still in the US and there’s no complaint.”
“There will be if he crossed the line and tried to get back.”
“Well, where can I get him vaccinated?”
They didn’t know. I would have to retrace my way at least twenty miles, find a vet, have Charley vaccinated, and then return. I was crossing only to save a little time, and this would wipe out the time saved and even more.
“Please understand, it is your own government, not ours. We are simply advising you. It’s the rule.”
I highly approve of vaccination, feel it should be compulsory, rabies is a dreadful thing. And yet I found myself hating the rule and all governments that made rules. It was not the shots but the certificate that was important. These were such nice men, friendly and helpful. They gave me a cup of tea and Charley half a dozen cookies. And they seemed genuinely sorry that I had to go to Erie, Pennsylvania, for the lack of paper. And so I turned about and proceed toward the Stars and Stripes and another government. Exiting, I had not been required to stop, but now the barrier was down.
“Are you an American citizen?”
“Yes, sir, here’s my passport.”
“Do you have anything to declare?”
“I haven’t been away.”
“Have you a rabies vaccination certificate for your dog?”
“He hasn’t been away either.”
“But you are coming from Canada.”
“I haven’t been to Canada.”
|
|
|
I saw the steel come into eyes, the brows lower to a level of suspicion. Far from saving time, it looked as though I might lose much more than even Erie, Pennsylvania.
“Will you step into the office?”
“I tell you I have not been in Canada. If you were watching you would have seen that I turned back.”
“Step this way, please, sir.”
Then into telephone: “New York license so-and-so. Yes. Pick-up truck with camper top. Yes – a dog…” and to me: “What kind of dog is it?”
“Poodle.”
“Poodle – said poodle. Light brown.”
“Blue,” I said.
“Light brown. O’kay. Thanks.”
“They say you didn’t cross the line.”
“That’s what I told you.”
“May I see your passport?”
“Why? I haven’t left the country. I’m not to leave the country.” But I handed over my passport just the same. He leafed through it, pausing at the entry and exit stamps of other journeys. He inspected my photograph, opened the yellow small pox vaccination certificate stapled to the back cover. At the bottom of the last page he saw penciled in faint set of letters and figures.
“What is this?”
“I don’t know. Let me see. Oh, that! Why, it’s a telephone number.”
“What is it doing in your passport?”
“I guess I didn’t have a slip of paper. I don’t even remember whose number it is.”
“Don’t you know it is against the law to deface a passport?”
“I’ll erase it.”
“You should not write anything in your passport.”
“That’s the regulation.”
“I won’t ever do it again. I promise.” And I wanted to promise him I wouldn’t lie or associate with persons of loose morals. He closed my passport firmly and handed it back to me. I’m sure he felt better having found that telephone number. Suppose after all his troubles he hadn’t found me guilty of anything.
“Thank you, sir,” I said. “May I proceed now?”
He waved his hand kindly. “Go ahead,” he said. And that’s why I went toward Erie, Pennsylvania, and it was Charley’s fault I crossed the high iron bridge and stopped to pay toll. The man leaned out of the window. “Go on,” he said, “it’s on the house.”
|
|
|
“How do you mean?”
“I’ve seen you go through the other way of a little while ago. I’ve seen the dog. I knew you’d be back.”
“Why didn’t you tell me?”
“Nobody believes it. Go ahead. You get a free ride one way.”
He wasn’t government, you see.
(by I. Steinbeck)
TASKS
Task 1. Answer the following questions.
1. How did the author find himself on the Canadian border?
2. What did he feel when he came up to the customs border?
3. What trouble did he have with the Customs officials about Charley?
4. How did he explain why he hadn’t had the dog vaccinated?
5. Why did he have to return to the U.S.?
6. Did the author save the time he had planned?
7. What numbers did a U.S. Customs officer find in the author’s passport?
8. How did he feel having found the violation of the law?
9. What did the author promise not to do in future?
10. Did he pay a toll for crossing the bridge?
Task 2. Say what you remember about:
1. The difficulties the author had while crossing a small part of Canada to save time and shorten the distance.
2. The incident with the passport.
Task 3. Problem questions.
1. Why do people travel?
2. Why do some people travel with pets?
3. Why must Veterinary Certificate for pets be presented to the Customs?
Task 4. Comment on the following sentence from the text.
“I have never smuggled. Why, then, do I feel an uneasy sense of guilt on approaching a customs barrier?”
Task 5. Over to you.
Why do people feel nervous at the Customs?
THE WORD
Not until his jetliner touched down on the runway of Orly Airport outside Paris did Steve Randall feel safe. It was France and it meant freedom.
He took up his suitcase – he had not permitted it out of his sight while boarding this plane in Rome, and he had been allowed to keep it with him as hand baggage – and he joined the others leaving the jetliner. Quickly, efficiently, Randall was transported to the disembarkation hall. Falling in line with the other passengers, he stepped on the moving walk that ran through the transit corridor, and stepped off beneath the sign that read: PARIS. Here the activity was intense. This was what the French called the Police Filter or passport control.
|
|
|
Now, he was before the desk, and unsmiling policeman was holding out his hand. Randall released his suitcase and presented his green United States passport. The policeman turned a page or two of his passport, considered Randall’s photograph, glanced at Randall again and finally nodded. Retaining the yellow disembarkation card, he returned Randall’s passport and gestured him toward the Customs boxes. The policeman stood up and began to leave his stall over the protest of the other passengers waiting on line.
Suitcase once more in his hand, and with his free hand taking out the declaration form from his jacket pocket, Randall moved on to the nearest Customs box. Still holding his suitcase he handed the form to the official, eager to get through this formality.
The official looked up. “You have no other baggage to claim downstairs, monsieur?” This is your only baggage?”
- “Yes, sir. Just the one piece I have with me. I was away for just few days.” He disliked himself for these nervous explanations, but Customs agent, not only here but in the United States, made you feel guilty, when there was nothing to feel guilty about.
- “No goods purchased, or gifts received, or valuables acquired in Italy?”
- “Exactly as I stated in the form,” said Randall.
“I have only my personal effects.”
- “Nothing to declare?” the official asked again.
- “Nothing! You have my declaration. I’ve made it clear.”
- “Yes,” said the Customs official rising. He stepped out of his box, waited for another younger Customs man to replace him, and came alongside Randall.
- “Please, follow me, monsieur.”
- “Hey, what’s going on here?”, Randall protested.
- “We will go downstairs,” the Customs official explained, “a mere formality.”
- “What formality?”
- “Routine baggage check.”
- “Why not do it right here?”
- “We have special rooms off the baggage-claim hall.” He led the way to the escalator.
|
|
|
As they crossed the busy ground floor of the terminal, Randall protested once more. “I think you’re making a mistake, gentlemen.”
The officials did not reply. They led him into the hall where passengers were recovering their luggage from revolving belts, and guided him toward empty rooms with open doors.
- “Now, will you tell me why I’m here?” – Randall demanded to know.
- “Place your bag on the stand here,” the Customs man said quietly, “Please, open it for inspection, monsieur.”
Randall lifted his suitcase onto the stand. He went through his pocket for his key. “I’ve already told you there’s nothing to declare” he insisted.
- “Open it, please.”
Randall lifted the lid of his suitcase.
- “There you are. Go ahead and see for yourself.”
The Customs official moved past Randall and stood over the suitcase. He rummaged deep inside, found something and put it before Randall. It was a solid gray leather pouch.
- “What is this, monsieur?”
- “A cheap souvenir from Rome,” Randall said. “It’s worthless to anyone except me. I’m a collector.”
The Customs official seemed not to be listening. He opened the pouch and drew out the fragile leaflike fragment of papyrus.
- “Monsieur Randall, it is my duty to inform you that our Service of Investigation has been on the lookout for you. You have appropriated a priceless national treasure from Italy, without permission of the government. Such an act is forbidden by the Italian law, and you’ll be subject to a heavy fine ever you return to Italy.”
Randall listened, shocked with a disbelief. How could anyone possibly have known what he had in this luggage?
- “Our concern is,” the officer went on in faultless English, “that you hid in your luggage an object of great value, failed to declare it to our Customs, and, in fact, attempted to smuggle it into France.”
- “I hid nothing! I declared nothing because I had nothing of value to declare!”
- “The government of Italy appears to take another view of this papyrus,” the inspector said calmly.
- “Another view? There is no other view. What do they know about the papyrus? I’m the only one who knows. I tell you – listen to me, don’t make fools of yourselves, that papyrus is worthless in terms of money, it is an imitation. It has no value to anyone, except to me.”
- “That remains to be seen, monsieur. There are experts in these matters, and we are in contact with one of them already, to make a study and give an opinion. Until an examination is made we are confiscating this object.”
(by I. Wallace)
TASKS
Task 1. Answer the following questions.
1. What did Paris mean for Randall?
2. Why had Randall kept the suitcase with him as hand luggage?
3. How did Randall go through passport control?
4. Why did he feel guilty?
5. Did he have anything to declare?
6. Why did the Customs official take Randall downstairs?
7. What did the Customs official find in Randall’s suitcase?
8. Did Randall try to take a priceless national treasure out of Italy without permission of the government?
9. Why was Randall shocked with disbelief?
10. Why did he insist that the papyrus was an imitation?
11. Why was Randall subject to a heavy fine in Italy?
12. Who was to give an opinion on the problem?
Task 2. Problem questions.
1. What articles are usually detained?
2. What articles cannot be taken out of the country without a special permission?
3. Why were Randall’s actions regarded as smuggling? On what grounds?
Task 3. Over to you.
What are the Customs regulations in respect of valuables?
TESTS
Test 1
Coke and the Colonel’s wife
The US Army insists that Colonel James Hiett had no idea he might have been living together with the enemy. Since last summer, Hiett had been in command of the 200 American military personnel waging a difficult campaign against Colombia’s drug traffickers. But according to a criminal complaint filed in federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y., last week, Hiett’s wife, Laurie Anne, 36, was using the mail service at the American Embassy in Bogota to send cocaine to the United States.
Court papers say the smuggling was discovered last May, when a Miami Customs official found 2.7 pounds of cocaine in a package Mrs. Hiett had sent to someone in New York. Subsequently investigators tracked down six more packages allegedly sent by Laurie Hiett – or at her request – that contained 15.8 pounds of pure cocaine, with a street value of as much as $ 230,000.
Laurie Hiett surrended to federal authorities in Brooklyn last week and was arraigned on a charge of drugs distribution. After appearing in court, she was released on a $ 150,000 bond, she still had not been indicted. Through her lawyer, she denied any wrongdoing. The papers filed in court, said she told investigators she had sent the parcels as a favor to her husband’s chauffeur, Colombian Jorge Algonso Ayala. She insisted she didn’t know what was inside.
Ayala, who was named as a co-conspirator and is still at large in Colombia, told investigators Mrs. Hiett “abused cocaine”, which he helped her buy in Bogota.
Colombian authorities have long argued that America is to blame for the drug problem. Whether the Colonel’s wife is a dupe or a doper, the charges against her haven’t done any good to the war on drugs.
TASKS
Task 1. Read the article. Choose the correct answer from the given variants.
1. Paragraph one provides information that:
a) Colonel James Hiett knew that his wife was smuggling cocaine using the mail service;
b) Colonel James Hiett had no idea that his wife was smuggling cocaine;
c) Colonel James Hiett had certain suspicions that his wife was smuggling drugs.
2. From paragraph two it is clear that:
a) smuggling was discovered last June when a New York Customs official found 2.7 pounds of cocaine in a package;
b) smuggling was discovered last May when a Miami Customs official found 2.7 pounds of cocaine in a package.
c) smuggling was discovered last May, when a Miami Customs official 3.7 pounds of cocaine in a package.
3. What is meant by “wrongdoing” in paragraph three?
a) a hero deed;
b) an illegal action;
c) being forgetful to do something.
4. What does it mean “to abuse cocaine”?
a) to buy;
b) not to like to use;
c) to deliberately use something for the wrong purpose.
5. Paragraph five informs that:
a) Colombian authorities have long argued that America cannot be blamed for the drug problem;
b) Colombian authorities have never argued that America is to blame for the drug problem;
c) Colombian authorities have long argued that America is to blame for the drug problem.
Task 2. Find expressions in the text which mean:
a) a series of actions intended to achieve a certain result
b) someone who tries to find out the truth or the causes of something
c) to make someone come to court
d) not be caught
e) someone who is tricked into becoming involved in something illegal
f) someone who takes a lot of illegal drugs
Task 3. Below are one-sentence summaries of each of the paragraphs in the article. Put the summaries in the correct order. (Two of the summaries are not used.)
a) One of the main dangers of drugs is the state of intoxication.
b) According to criminal complaint filed in federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y. Colonel James Hiett wife was using the mail service at the American Embassy in Bogota to send cocaine to the USA.
c) Through her lawyer, Laurie Anne denied any wrongdoing.
d) Cocaine is a white powder which is usually sniffed, but can also be injected.
e) The case hasn’t influenced the war on drugs.
f) All in all 18.5 pounds of cocaine were found in the packages allegedly sent by Laurie Hiett.
g) Her so-called co-conspirator is still at large in Colombia.
Task 4. True or false?
a) The Colonel’s wife is a dupe.
b) The Colonel’s wife is a doper.
c) Where there is smoke there’s fire.
Test 2
On the border
Simply put, the average traveler is very average. He has two cases and the things in those cases accurately reflect his position in life and his journey.
Let’s say he is a businessman back from Europe. He may have had a rather complex journey, been to a few capitals over there. His cases will have a fair bit of paperwork in them. He’ll have a couple of pairs of shoes, good shoes, and a Brooks Brother suit or whatever, three or four silk ties, and a good selection of shirts and socks, all neatly laundered by a hotel. There will be laundered handkerchiefs and a couple of hard-cover books.
Now, if he’s an oilman, even a fairly senior one, he’ll be very different. If his travels have taken him to the North Sea, he’ll have bought a couple of tartan rugs, for certain – they all do! He’s going to have slacks, sports skirts and a pair of boots. He may have a paperback and a shooting or hunting magazine. And, almost certainly, a couple of bottles of whisky. Don’t ask me why oilmen have dirty laundry, maybe Scottish hotels won’t do it.
When we get somebody whose luggage doesn’t match his appearance or his story or his route, then we get curious. Like with Pan Am 800. Why should people carrying light clothes, slacks, short-sleeved skirts be coming from Tokyo in February? Why should they have sun-tan oil in their toilet kits? Because they started from Colombia. They may claim to be students. What is a student doing in Tokyo in February? He’s surely not on vacation. So where is he studying? Or a businessman. So how come he’s not carrying lots of papers, commercial samples, sales aids?
Smugglers never accumulate all the rubbish in their cases that an ordinary traveler does: phrase books, torn street maps, half-filled-in postcards, used rolls of film, hotel receipts, curious presents for the children. And they can make real fools of themselves. They’ll say, “Colombia? Where’s that?” And then you point out that their skirt wrappers are labeled “Bogota Hotel” or that their toothpaste or shaving cream is Colombian. You get some who are so stupid that they don’t even fill their suitcases. They seem to think that we won’t find it odd that they’re traveling with a case. Those who fill them often get the mix wrong. There will be masses of clothes but not heavy shoes or books. The clothes themselves are often suspicious: skirts of different sizes, trousers that don’t seem they would fit the passenger, labels with little give-aways: “Ind Col” (“Colombian made”) or all the other clothes will obviously be new or they don’t suit the personality of the owner. We had one, a “macho” type, and he had all dull gabardine trousers and chunky sweaters, totally out of character. Though the cocaine we found wasn’t!
It takes a lot of skill to fool a man who’s been looking at suitcases for 15 years.
TASKS
Task 1. Read the article. Are these statements true or false?
a) The average traveler has two cases and one traveling bag.
b) A businessman returning back from Europe may have all necessary papers with him.
c) An oilman always has the laundered clothes as well as a couple of bottles of whisky.
d) Smugglers never accumulate all the rubbish in their cases that an ordinary traveler does.
Task 2. Choose the proper definition of the following words used in the article.
1. case
a) a situation
b) law / crime
c) a large box or container
2) rubbish
a) food, paper that is no longer needed
b) an idea that is silly or wrong
c) a film that is very bad
3) chunky (adj.)
a) thick and heavy
b) large pieces of food
c) a person who has a broad, heavy body
Task 3. What is the key message of the article? Choose the best alternative.
1) The methods of smuggling are becoming more and more sophisticated but there is no substitute for a well-trained and experienced Customs officer.
2) Airlines provide difficulties at the border as the number of passengers is constantly increasing.
3) A Customs officer must be a good judge of character.
Test 3
Дата добавления: 2019-02-12; просмотров: 379; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!