Mr. Bayard to Mr. Thompson.
Washington, June 23, 1885.
Sir: Among the subjects which should have your early attention, after entering on your duties, is the need of endeavoring to procure the reform of many hindrances to trade between the United States and Hayti, and which in spirit and in fact are so opposed to the systems in [Page 527] vogue in this country that vessels plying between our ports and those of Hayti encounter burdens and restrictions at the Haytian end of the voyage to which no counterpart is found in the United States.
From a letter written to the President recently by a gentleman who has long been engaged in the Haytian trade, and is presumed to be familiar with its workings and defects, I quote the following:
There are numbers of abuses in Hayti, and excessive Government charges on American vessels. The tonnage dues are $2 per ton register, water tax, $10 each voyage and no water furnished, the £ax for permission to change port, from $40 to $60 on each vessel, over and above the tonnage dues. Another abuse is detaining the vessel in port after her cargo has been discharged, sometimes as long as fifteen days, to hold said vessel as security for the import duties on the cargo, which are due from the importer and not from the vessel.
A very brief consideration of each of the above statements will show how onerous a discrimination bears on a vessel at the Haytian end of her voyage.
The tonnage tax of $2 per ton is believed to be collectible in Hayti at every voyage. In the United States the tax of 3 cents per ton per voyage is no longer collectible in any twelve month after five voyages have been made during that period. It would be well to urge the entire repeal of tonnage dues, or other equivalent taxes in Hayti, on American vessels, so that vessels from Hayti may enter free of tonnage dues in the United States after the issue of the requisite proclamation by the President, under section 14 of the act of June 26, 1884.
The charge for water supplied to shipping in the ports of the United States is a municipal one, made by the town whose water supply is drawn upon. It is proportionate to the amount. In Hayti, it would appear that a standing charge of $10 per voyage is made, whether the water be furnished or not.
The charge for changing port is not only excessive, but it seems to be in conflict with a very general international custom which is recognized by many treaties—permitting a vessel to proceed from port to port, unloading and taking on board cargo in each (but without engaging in coasting trade) under the original entry, without additional payment of tonnage-tax, or other than the local dues of wharfage, lights, and the like in the ports subsequently visited after the original port of entry.
To hold the master of a vessel responsible for the payment of the customs duties on cargo carried by him after the goods have been landed and delivered to the consignees, under the supervision of the customs officers, is as contrary to reason as it is vexatious to commerce. It is wholly at variance with the law of carriers. With the delivery of the goods as invoiced and manifested, the carrier’s responsibilities determine, and he is not justly to be held responsible for the debts of the owners of the goods to the Government, any more than he could be held liable for any other debt of the consignees growing out of the same goods. A claim to make use of the master as a security for the duties on the goods after their delivery has been put forth on several occasions in the past—in Cuba, for instance—and, in a modified form, in China, and has in each case been opposed by this Government.
These suggestions will show you the directions in which your efforts may be exerted to obtain information as to existing abuses and impediments to trade, and in which you will endeavor to effect their reform. Through the merchants, shipmasters, and other interested parties, you should seek all attainable information on these points, and make it the basis of a comprehensive report to the Department as soon as may be.
I am, &c.,