Mr. Bayard to Mr. Cox.
Washington, November 11, 1885.
Sir: Your No. 31, of the 17th ultimo, relative to a dispatch of our consular agent at Mytilene, transmitting to our consul at Smyrna the protest of foreigners in Mytilene against a decree of the governor of that island levying a tax on foreigners for the local public schools, is received.
As Mr. Fottion’s dispatch is not among your inclosures, it can only be inferred from Mr. Stevens’s dispatch of the 5th ultimo, Mr. Heap’s of the 14th ultimo (which you inclose), and your note to the Imperial minister for foreign affairs, that there is no protest against this school tax on the part of American residents in Mytilene, as Mr. Heap says he has no information that any Americans own real estate there, but that Mr. Fottion’s appeal to the consul is a general one in the interests of foreign residents on account of two school taxes ordered, respectively, by the central and by the communal or municipal governments. If this is so it would go to prove that there was no discrimination shown against American residents, even supposing, as does not appear from the correspondence, that they would, not owning real estate there, be taxed at all, unless this is an income tax, which is not stated.
On general principles it is safer not to protest against local ordinances until at any rate the rights of American citizens appear to be specifically invaded, so as to cause complaints from them; and for the views of this Department on the general subject of the taxation of our citizens abroad I would refer you to the Hon. Hamilton Fish’s instruction, No. 29, of the 21st of November, 1874, to our minister at Berlin. The ground is there taken that as long as a tax is uniform in its operation, and can fairly be considered a tax and not a confiscation or unfair imposition, no successful representation can be made to a foreign Government on behalf of the parties complaining, and that complaints of excessive taxation are more properly questions for submission to local courts.
The fact that part of the tax goes to local and part to Imperial schools would seem to afford no additional ground for objection.
A Government has a perfect right to say, “We will establish and raise taxes for certain central universities, which are for the benefit of [Page 879] the whole land, while local and primary schools are to be established and taxed for by municipalities.” This in analogous matters is the constant practice in the United States.
Unless, therefore, there are other points in the case not clearly understood by the Department, I must consider your note to the foreign office protesting so strongly against the tax as premature, and you are requested to transmit the minister’s reply to it as soon as received to the Department, before having further correspondence with the foreign office on the subject.
I am, &c.,