Accept, sir, a renewed assurance of my high consideration.
Mr. L. de Geofroy,
&c., &c., &c.
Mr. Fessenden to Mr. Seward
Treasury
Department,
July 22, 1864.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 6th instant, enclosing “translation of
a communication of the 2d instant from Mr. L. de Geofroy, relative
to the exaction of double duty on certain goods forming part of the
cargo of the ship Provençale, from Senegal, by the custom house
authorities at New York.”
Some delay has occurred, on account of the recent interruption of
mail communication with New York, in my receiving a report in the
case required of the collector of that port. That report, dated 20th
instant, is now before me. The collector says, “That the French bark
Provençale arrived at that port on the 20th June, from Goree, west
coast of Africa; that the regular rates of duty fixed by law were
charged upon the several items of the cargo to which they applied,
together with the 50 per cent. additional duty provided by the joint
resolution of the 29th April; and also a discriminating duty of 10
per cent. ad valorem under section 3 of action of 5th August, 1861;
French vessels not being entitled by reciprocal treaties to be
exempt from discriminating duties, as per General Regulations of 1st
February, 1857, page 483, section 3. This discriminating duty so
charged has not been collected.”
It will be seen from this report that the petitioner (the master of
the Provençale) has misapprehended the facts of the case, mistaking
the 50 per cent. additional duty assessed alike upon the cargoes of
American and foreign vessels, under the joint resolution of 29th
April, for a discriminating duty, and that the action of the
collector was in accordance with law.
I do not understand Mr. de Geofroy as claiming exemption for the
goods in question from the charge of the discriminating duty of 10
per cent.; but if he does, I may add that the treaty of June 24,
1822, (Stat, at Large, vol. 8, pp. 278 and 280, arts. 1, 2, 3, and
7,) expressly limits the exemptions to “productions of the soil or industry of France, imported in
French bottoms into the ports of the United States.”
That it was not intended to extend to the productions of French
colonies is further shown by several subsequent acts of Congress
extending similar privileges
[Page 229]
to certain French possessions, among which, however, Senegal is
not included, as, for instance, the acts of May 9, 1828, Stat., vol.
4, p. 269, chap. 49; July 13, 1832, Stat., vol. 4, p. 573, chap.
196, and others.
With great respect,
W. P. FESSENDEN, Secretary of the
Treasury.
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State.
