Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 1, 1873, Part I, General Correspondence; and Papers Relating to Naturalization and Expatriation, Volume II

No. 407.
General Sickles to Mr. Fish.

United States Legation,
Madrid, June 1, 1873. (Received June 20.)

No. 610.]

Sir: I have the honor to forward herewith a copy of the papers prepared in obedience to your instruction No. 309, in relation to the grievances imposed on foreign shipping by the customs regulations in Cuba. On pages^* 46–52 of the printed case will be found a draft of a proposed note to the Spanish government. These papers have been transmitted, in duplicate, to the representatives of Great Britain, Germany, and Sweden residing at this capital, accompanied by a note—mutatis mutandis—corresponding to the copy annexed.

I am, &c.,

D. E. SICKLES.

[Appendix 1.]

General Sickles to Mr. Layard.

Legation of the United States of America,
Madrid, June 1, 1873.

Sir: I have the honor to transmit to your excellency, in obedience to instructions from my Government, three copies of sundry papers touching the customs regulations in Cuba in their relation to foreign vessels engaged in commerce with that island. It is presumed that the trade carried on in British ships with Cuban ports may have given occasion for reclamations on the part of your government like those it has been my duty to present. The representations heretofore made by the United States having been only partially successful in obtaining the ameliorations desired, I am directed to persevere in further efforts to this end, and especially to invite simultaneous and, as far as possible, identical action on the part on the government of Great Britain.

My Government directs me to confer likewise with the representatives of Germany and Sweden at this capital, in the hope that they also may receive instructions enabling each to frame a note on this subject, to be addressed separately and at the same time to the Spanish minister of foreign affairs.

On page 46 of the inclosure will be found a draught of a proposed note to the Spanish government, which I shall be happy to amend so as to meet your views, in order that the proposed action may, if deemed expedient, be identical.

I avail, &c.,

D. E. SICKLES.

[Here follows instruction to General Sickles of March 21, for which see page 932.]

Additional papers.

1. New regulations of December 26, 1872. English translation.

2. New regulations of December 26, 1872. Spanish original text.

3. Mr. Martos to General Sickles. Note dated January 2, 1873.

4. General Sickles to Mr. Martos. Note dated January 27, 1873.

5. Mr. Castelar to General Sickles. Note dated May 16, 1873.

6. Draft of proposed note to the minister of state.

Nos. 1 and 2.—New regulations of December 26, 1872. English translation and Spanish text.

[From La Gaceta de Madrid, December 29, 1872.—English translation.]

Colonial Office.

Your Excellency: In consideration of the representations made by the general superintendent of the treasury in the island of Cuba, respecting the inconveniences found in the practical working of the regulations at present in force for the guidance of the captains and supercargoes of vessels engaged in commerce between foreign ports and those of the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico, and the expediency of limiting the privileges enjoyed by mail-steamers, and to re-establish, in all their vigor, the provisions affecting other steamers, principally employed in the transportation of articles of commerce, the King (whom may God save) has been pleased to order that the regulations in question should be drawn up in the form exhibited in the accompanying document, and that, as thus modified, they shall go into operation thirty days after their publication by the consuls and vice-consuls of Spain in the official newspapers of their respective districts; to which end His Majesty charges me to indicate to you, as by his royal order I now do, the necessity of notifying the said functionaries, through the ministry under your worthy charge, that they shall, as soon as possible, cause the accompanying regulations to be published in the said newspapers, and to see that they are frequently reproduced, and also that they shall communicate to the general superintendent of the treasury in Cuba and the chief financial officer of Porto Rico the date of their publication.

May God guard Your Excellency many years.

Madrid, December 26, 1872.

TOMAS MARIA MOSQUERA.

To the Minister of State.

Rules to be observed by the captains and supercargoes of Spanish vessels, or those of other nations engaged in the carrying trade from foreign ports to those of the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico.

I. Captains of vessels sailing from foreign ports to those of the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico shall present to the Spanish consul or vice-consul a duplicate statement, without any corrections whatever, which shall declare:

1. The class, (or rig,) flag, and name of the vessel and its exact measurement, in Spanish tons. In the first voyage made by each vessel to the said islands, declaration shall he made of the number of tons it measures, by builder’s measurement, even though they be not Spanish tons; and in the subsequent voyages, a certificate of the tonnage measurement made at the first port of entry, by order of the custom-house authorities for the payment of tonnage-dues, must be exhibited;

2. The name of the captain or master of the vessel;

3. The port or ports from whence it has sailed;

4. The names of the shippers, and those of the owners or consignees to whom the cargo is consigned;

5. The packages, bales, casks, barrels, cases, and other bundles or packages, with their respective marks and numbers, expressing in numbers and in writing the quantity of each class thereof;

6. The specific kind of merchandise or goods contained in the parcels, and their gross weight. The words merchandise, victuals, provisions, or others of like vagueness, will not be allowed to determine the specific kind of merchandise;

7 A similar statement of all cargo in bond, or in transit (to other ports;)

8. And the statement shall conclude by a distinct declaration that the vessel carries no other merchandise.

II. If all or part of the cargo consists of iron in bars or plates, metal in pigs or ingots, lumber, jerked beef, salt, cocoa, or other articles in bulk, they must be declared according to their kind, in decimal weight or measure, in the duplicate statement already mentioned.

III. These statements (sobordos) shall be certified by the Spanish consul or vice-consul, who will deliver one of the copies to the captain of the vessel, retaining the other, which he shall himself remit directly to the intendente-general of the island whither the ship is bound, so that it may serve as a voucher for the examination of the cargo by the customs authorities of the port of entry.

IV. The captain, at the end of the voyage, must note down in the copy of the statement which he is to retain the following particulars:

1. Whatever goods the crew may take with them, not already declared in said document, up to the value of 200 escudos (100 dollars) for each individual;

2. Such articles of food for the voyage as may remain unconsumed; and,

3. All munitions of war and spare materials, as also the quantity of coal carried for the consumption of the vessel if it be a steamer.

V. The captain, on arrival at his port of destination and when the sanitary inspections takes place, shall deliver the statement certified by the consul, and the general manifest of the cargo, to the chief of the custom-house officers or of the revenue guard.

VI. If a vessel sail in ballast, the captain shall present to the consul or vice-consul a note, (or statement,) in duplicate, declaring the fact, and the same forms will be observed as prescribed for the sobordo; that is to say, the consul will certify both documents, delivering one copy to the captain, and retaining the other to forward to the intendente of the island to which the ship is bound.

VII. If the captain or supercargo do not show the statement, or note declaring that the vessel sails in ballast, when the vessel is boarded, which act shall take place the moment it drops its anchor in the port of its destination, they shall be held liable to a fine of 400 escudos (200 dollars) for the want of that document; if the consular certificate or attestation do not appear thereon, he (or they) shall pay a fine of 200 escudos (100 dollars) for the absence of that formality; and, if it do not contain the particulars specified in Rule I, he (or they) shall pay a fine of 50 escudos (25 dollars) for each one omitted or inaccurately stated, but in the latter case the sum total of such fines shall not exceed 400 escudos (200 dollars.) In like manner, the captain or supercargo who shall not produce the sobordo and manifest when required to do so by the chief officer of the revenue guard, or whoever represents him, at the moment of boarding the vessels, shall incur a fine of 1,000 escudos (500 dollars,) unless an accident at sea shall have forced the vessel to put hastily into port, which fact shall be shown by means of a summary proceeding.

VIII. In case any correction or alteration should be observed in said documents, the captains or masters shall be held liable to appear before the competent tribunal to answer the charge of forgery, incurring an equal responsibility whether the vessel arrive in ballast or with cargo.

IX. The production of the sobordo is obligatory, and shall take place in all the ports, bays, and harbors of the island in which the vessel may anchor, even when in distress, the collector of customs retaining a copy and returning the orignal to the captain, in order that he may deliver it at the port of his destination.

X. Vessels of the coast-guard (revenue-cutters) may demand the sobordo from the captain or master within a distance of 23 kilometers (14.291 English miles) from the port of their destination.

XI. Captains are likewise under obligation to present to the Spanish consul or vice-consul of the port of departure a memorandum of the approximate value of their cargo, to serve as data for the commercial statistics, with the preparation of which those functionaries are charged.

XII. The captain who shall not declare the exact burden of his vessel in Spanish tons, shall pay the expenses of its remeasurement if the excess prove to be more than 10 per cent.

XIII. Captains, who are forced by stress of weather or any other unforseen event to throw a portion of the cargo overboard, shall also note it down in the manifest, stating even though it be in general terms, the quantities, parcels, and classes or kinds, (of the articles thrown overboard,) being obliged to make a corresponding declaration in their custom-house and to exhibit their log-book in confirmation of their assertions.

XIV. Passengers’ luggage shall be presented for examination in the customs warehouse, and if articles of merchandise be found therein of a value not exceeding 200 escudos, (100 dollars,) the customs duties according to the tariff shall be assessed thereon, after comparison with the note or detailed statement which the interested parties are required to deliver to the collector of customs. If the value of such goods should exceed 200 escudos and not exceed 400, (200 dollars,) double duties shall be imposed; but if they amount to a larger sum they shall be liable to confiscation, unless in either case a declaration of the said goods shall have been previously made, when they shall only be subject to the payment of the duties fixed by the tariff.

XV. Any correction, addition, or alteration of the manifest or statement, or of the custom-house declarations, is absolutely prohibited, the discrepancies which may appear between the said documents being punishable in conformity to the regulations.

XVI. When the cargoes proceed from a port where there is no consul or vice-consul, and the residence of these agents is more than thirty kilometers (18.640 English miles) from the place of embarkation, the captains and supercargoes may be relieved from the formality of the sobordos, but in order to enjoy this exemption it is necessary that the cargoes shall be homogeneous and composed exactly and entirely of anyone of the following articles: Hides, timber, (or lumber,) staves, dye-woods, mineral coal, or horns, provided that these articles are the product of the country from which the vessel comes; that the voyage is direct, and that the duties be assessed on the merchandise as a whole.

XVII. All packages omitted in the sobordo, or manifest of the cargo, shall be liable to the penalty of seizure, a fine being imposed, in addition, upon the captain to the amount of their value, provided that the amount of duties upon the goods therein contained shall not exceed 800 escudos (400 dollars;) but if the duties exceed this sum, and the articles belong to or are consigned to the owner, captain, or supercargo of the vessel, the fine will not be levied, and in its stead the vessel, with its freights and all other profits, shall be confiscated.

XVIII. If, after the vessel’s cargo is discharged, one or more of the packages declared shall be found missing, without the invoice of their contents having been presented at the proper time, the captain or supercargo shall be deemed and taken to have committed fraud against the treasury, and shall be fined 400 escudos (200 dollars) for each one of the missing parcels.

XIX. If the owner or consignee of an article not declared by the captain should, within forty-eight hours, present the invoice of the said article to the custom-house, no charge will lie against him, and the goods shall be delivered up to him; but in such case the captain or supercargo shall be held liable to pay a fine equal to the full value of the articles or goods not manifested.

XX. Without a permit from the collector of customs and examination by the chief of the revenue-guard, nothing whatever can be landed. For the simple act of landing anything, although of little value, and even though it be free of duty, the captain or supercargo shall pay a fine of 2,000 escudos, (1,000 dollars,) and all the articles seized, as well as the boat or barge carrying them, shall be liable to confiscation; provided, that the duties the said articles would have had to pay shall not exceed 400 escudos, (200 dollars;) because, if they exceed this sum, the fine will not be levied, and the vessel shall be confiscated.

XXI. Neither may any articles be transferred from one vessel to another in harbor, in small or large quantities, without fulfilling the conditions required by the regulations; and in the contrary case the captains or supercargoes are liable to the penalties prescribed in these regulations.

XXII. If articles of great or little value be landed in a port other than a declared port of entry, the vessel bringing them shall be confiscated, with all her equipments.

XXIII. If the search, which must be undergone by all vessels before their clearance register can be issued, should show any excess of cargo, such excess shall be confiscated, imposing in addition a fine upon the captain equal to the value of said excess.

XXIV. The same confiscation and fine as that mentioned in the foregoing article shall be held to apply to all seizures made in consequence of fraudulent attempts to embark goods, fruits, or other effects.

XXV. If the captains or supercargoes have not wherewithal to satisfy the amounts to which they may he adjudged liable, the vessels under their command shall be made use of for payment of all penalties and costs, unless the consignees should voluntarily offer to satisfy them.

XXVI. The translation or dispatch of any manifest or sobordo shall not be undertaken until the captain or consignee shall have presented in the custom-house the corresponding bill of health.

XXVII. The captains or supercargoes of mail-steamers, under which denomination only those carrying the mail by commission from their government, and having fixed periodical days of departure from their respective ports, can be included, may carry up to 10 tons of cargo without requiring a consular certificate, being obliged, nevertheless, to present a manifest of the cargo in the time and form prescribed in these regulations.

XXVIII. If the cargo carried by the mail-steamers exceeds 10 tons, the presentation of the sobordo, registered by the consuls of Spain in the ports of departure, shall be obligatory; and in this case the captains or supercargoes may be permitted to declare up to 6 tons in addition, without requiring the consular certificate. If this figure be exceeded, the manifest shall be deemed and held not to have been presented, and the proceedings prescribed in the present regulations shall be enforced.

XXIX. The masters of fishing vessels or smacks coming from the neighboring coast and entering the ports of the Antilles laden with fish, or in ballast, are exempted from the presentation of consular certificates.

Madrid, December 26, 1872.

MOSQUERA.

[No. 3.—Note dated January 2, 1873.—Translation.]

Mr. Martos to General Sickles.

Ministry of State,
Madrid, January 2, 1873.

Sir: I have the honor to inform you that, in order to diminish, so far as may be possible, the reclamations of foreign representatives growing out of the fines imposed by the customs authorities in the island of Cuba upon merchant-captains, the minister of ultramar has, under date of the 26th of December last, notified the general superintendent of the finances of the island of Cuba, (intendente-general de hacienda,) firstly, that ho fine imposed by the customs authorities upon captains or supercargoes of national and foreign vessels for errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the sobordos or manifests they present, shall take effect without the previous approval of the general superintendent, the administrators and treasurers of the several custom-houses being required to exact on their own responsibility a sufficient guarantee to protect the interests of the treasury, in case the vessels put to sea before the final payment of the fines which shall have been incurred by their captains or supercargoes; secondly, that within as brief a period as may be practicable, he shall proxose such separation as can be made between the circumstances and details now required in the sobordos, leaving such as may be essential to the prevention of frauds subject to consular registry and certification, and exempting from such formality such as have no importance in a financial point of view; and, thirdly, that the fines imposed on the captains or supercargoes of vessels for errors in their papers, and subsequently revoked, as well as those condoned by the free act of the supreme government, shall be refunded within the fixed term of one year, counting from the date of the reception in the general superintendent’s office of the order directing such restitution, or declaring the penalty to have been improvidently imposed.

I avail myself of this occasion to repeat to you, sir, the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.

CRISTINO MARTOS.

The Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States.

General Sickles to Mr. Martos.

Legation of the United States of America,
Madrid, January 27, 1873.

[No. 4.—Note dated January 27, 1873.]

Sir: 1 have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note addressed to me by your excellency under date of the 2d instant, by which I am informed—

1st. That fines on captains or supercargoes of vessels for errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in their manifests and sobordos shall not take effect in Cuba without the approval of the intendente of the treasury;

2d. That the intendente shall point out without delay such of the present requirements respecting the contents of the sobordo as may be omitted without prejudice to the public service; and,

3d. That lines revoked by the authority imposing them, or remitted by the supreme government, shall be refunded within one year, counting from the date of the reception of the order of restitution.

My Government will learn with satisfaction that subordinate customs officers will not hereafter be allowed in their discretion to impose and collect fines from captains and supercargoes of foreign vessels in the Cuban ports. It is, however, much to be regretted that the restitution of fines wrongfully inflicted may be withheld from the injured parties twelve months after the authorities shall have received orders directing such re-imbursement.

My Government will likewise be gratified to know that steps are taken to simplify the regulations now in force, under which it is so difficult for captains of vessels, with the utmost rectitude of conduct and purpose, to escape the numerous penalties denounced for mere informalities in their papers.

Referring to the communication I had the honor to address to your excellency on this subject on the 27th of November last, and likewise to my note of July 16, 1870, I desire to renew the representations therein made respecting several of the regulations contained in the royal order of July 1, 1859, and which re-appear in the decree of December 28, 1872, published in the Gazette of Madrid on the 29th of the same month.

Some of the particulars required to be set forth in the sobordo, or statement in duplicate, are, it is respectfully urged, unnecessary as safeguards against frauds on the revenue, at variance with commercial usage, and tend, in their operation, to cause much inconvenience and loss to captains and owners of vessels. It is required, among many other specifications, that the sobordo shall show, 1. The “exact measurement of the vessel in Spanish tonnage.” 2. A description of the specific kind of merchandise contained in every package, bale, case, bundle, or parcel in the cargo, and the quantity, decimal weight, or measure, and marks and numbers of each article. In addition to this detail called for in the duplicate sobordo, a manifest of the cargo is necessary. 3. A similar statement of all articles on board in transit to other ports. 4. A statement, in the copy of the sobordo, retained by the captain, of whatever goods the crew may have in their possession and the quantity of ship’s stores remaining on board, including coal, if the vessel be a steamer.

And it is provided that on presenting such sobordo to the inspector, if it be not duly certified by a Spanish consul, a fine of $200 is incurred, and, although the consul may have certified the document, yet, if it shall be found deficient in any respect, a fine of $25 is imposed for each and every defect that may appear; that is to say, after requiring very much more than is usual in ship’s papers, and making it the duty of the Spanish consuls to certify to their sufficiency in form, if that officer fail in his duty to point out irregularities, a fine must be paid by the captain for each instance of the consul’s neglect. I am sure your excellency will agree that if these stringent requirements as to the contents of the sobordo are to be retained, the consul’s certificate should, in all cases, be accepted as covering any defect of form in a document he has approved by his signature and seal of office.

Article 7 provides that if a captain fail to produce the sobordo and manifest when required to do so by the coast-guard, “at the moment of boarding the vessel,” he shall incur a fine of $500, unless it appear satisfactorily that he has been forced by some casualty of the sea to put into port suddenly. And it is provided in article 10 that the coast-guard may board a ship and demand her papers anywhere within a distance of twenty-three kilometers (14.291 English miles) from the port of destination. With reference to the latter article I have to observe, that I presume it cannot be the intention of His Majesty’s government to enforce any such regulation beyond Spanish jurisdiction. As the article now stands, it amounts to the exercise of a right of search on the high seas, accompanied by an extreme penalty for a non-compliance with an unauthorized demand. And in any aspect of article 7, even if its execution be confined within Spanish jurisdiction, cases may often happen where, without fault or wrongful intent on the part of the captain or supercargo, the technical enforcement of the rule would be unjust and oppressive.

It is further provided, in article 11, that captains shall furnish the consul memoranda of the approximate value of their cargoes, to the end that these may serve as data for commercial statistics.

Article 13 requires that in the event of any disaster at sea making it necessary to throw overboard a portion of the cargo, the parcels, quantities, and classes of goods so lost shall be noted on the manifest.

I might proceed with the enumeration of many other features of these new regulations which seem to need modification in order that they may not needlessly burden and harass legitimate commerce, but, in view of the revision of the same ordered by the minister of ultramar, I trust that the amendments and reforms that may he adopted will be such as to render further representations unnecessary.

I avail myself of this opportunity to repeat to your excellency the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.

D. E. SICKLES.

His Excellency the Minister of State.

[No. 5.—Translation.]

Mr. Castelar to General Sickles.

Ministry of State,
Madrid, May 16, 1873.

Sir: I have the honor to inform you, in reply to your note of the 27th of January last, that, as appears by a communication from the minister of ultramar, the suggestions contained in your note will be taken into account, as far as possible, in reforming the customs regulations of the island of Cuba, whose revision is now in progress.

With respect to the term of one year fixed for the return of fines imposed on captains of vessels, whether such fines be declared unjustifiable or whether their return be ordered as an act of grace by the government, I must beg you to remark that such a provision does not involve the necessity of permitting the full year to elapse in all cases before effecting the repayment ordered, but that it is the limit fixed within which to comply with the orders issued to that end, and such orders are not merely obligatory in the cases of those fines shown to have been wrongfully imposed, but also in the cases of such as have been levied for real faults of the captain or supercargo of the vessel and subsequently pardoned as an especial act of grace.

I avail myself of this occasion to repeat to you, sir, the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.

EMILIO CASTELAR.

No. 6.—Draft of proposed note to the Minister of State.

United States Legation in Spain,
Madrid, June, 1873.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of a note from your excellency, dated the 16th ultimo, in reply to mine of the 27th of January last, respecting the onerous burdens imposed on the trade between the United States and Cuba by the customs authorities in that island.

I regret to have occasion again to solicit the kind aid of your excellency in bringing to the notice of your distinguished colleague of the colonial department some further representations I am instructed to make on this subject.

It appears from sundry memorials recently presented to my Government by American ship-owners and masters of vessels, and also from the official reports of the consul-general of the United States in Cuba, that notwithstanding the assurances given me in the several communications received from the ministry of state, under date of February 4, 1871, and of January 2, 1873, the reforms and ameliorations therein announced have been but imperfectly carried into effect in Cuba.

The memorialists therefore solicit the aid of their government in further efforts to obtain relief from grievances of which, I am persuaded, your excellency will admit that they justly complain. It is, perhaps, unnecessary to assure your excellency that my Government disclaims any purpose of discussing the perfect right of every nation to establish and enforce such rules as it may choose to frame for the execution of its own revenue laws. It is to be presumed, however, that it cannot be the intention of this class of local ordinances to inflict needless vexation and loss on foreign vessels, engaged in legitimate commerce between friendly countries.

That your excellency may see how difficult it has been for foreign ship-masters to inform themselves as to the requirements of the customs regulations in Cuba, I may be permitted to recapitulate the successive orders, decrees, and circulars which have been published from time to time within a few years past. On the 1st of July, 1859, a royal order was issued in Madrid, prescribing numerous regulations for the government of foreign commerce with Cuba. The order was suspended soon after its publication, and remained in abeyance until July, 1867. It was then promulgated anew, with important modifications respecting the manifest.

With the publication of the decree of 1867, appeared also in the Spanish, French, and English languages what purported to be identical “rules to be observed by the captains and supercargoes of vessels, in conformity with the royal order of July 1, 1859, the royal decree of March 1, 1867, and the rules in force according to the existing custom-house regulations.”

On the 18th of November, 1868, the last-named ordinances were suspended and a fresh compilation of rules issued, in which it is to be especially noted that the requirements as to the manifest were again changed and made more exacting; and also that the Spanish original and the English and French versions, as published, differed essentially in the terms of the first rule prescribing the contents of the manifest.

On the 16th of May, 1870, the rules of 1868 were again promulgated, with further modifications and interpretations, announced in a circular from the intendente general de hacienda of Cuba.

On the 9th of June, 1870, the minister of ultramar ordered the remission of all fines imposed in Cuba for the non-presentation of a third copy of the manifest, forbidding the provincial authorities from changing the customs legislation, declaring them personally liable for damages caused by such transgression, and restoring to force and effect the royal order of July 1, 1859, as modified by subsequent orders; this decree was published in Cuba July 6, 1870.

On the 3d of November, 1870, the intendente general de hacienda, in an official communication, informed the consul-general of the United States at Havana, that so much of last-mentioned decree of June 9 as remitted fines for the non-production of a third copy of the manifest had been annulled on the 21st of September.

On the 29th of December, 1872, another decree was published containing a new code of regulations, modifying in various particulars, those previously in force.

On the 2d of January, 1873, the minister of state informed the undersigned, in reply to sundry reclamations made by the United States Government—1st. That hereafter no fine imposed by the customs authorities in Cuba upon captains or supercargoes of national or foreign vessels for errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in ships’ manifests or sobordos should take effect without previous approval of the intendente general de hacienda, the administrators and treasurers of the several custom-houses being required to exact, on their own responsibility, a sufficient guarantee to protect the interests of the treasury in case vessels put to sea before the payment of fines. 2d. That with all convenient speed the intendente should propose such separation as could be made between the facts and details now required to be stated in the sobordos, retaining such as served to prevent fraud and discontinuing those not important to the interests of the revenue; and 3d. That fines imposed on captains or supercargoes of vessels for error in their papers and subsequently revoked, as well as those spontaneously condoned by the supreme government, should be refunded within the fixed term of one year, counting from the date of the reception by the intendente of the order directing such restitution or declaring the penalty to have been improvidently imposed.

The undersigned is not informed that these dispositions have been published in Cuba, nor is he advised that they have yet been put in practice.

In my notes of July 16, 1870, November 27, 1872, and January 27, 1873, the attention of your excellency was invited to various clauses of the royal order of July 1, 1859, the decree of March 1, 1867, the regulations of November 11, 1868, and those of December 26, 1872, which seemed to my government unreasonably severe and punitory in their treatment of lawful commerce. It is unnecessary to recapitulate the views presented in those communications. I desire now, more especially, to bring to your excellency’s notice the representations made by the merchants of New York and Boston, in a recent communication they have addressed to the Department of State at Washington.

They show, for example, that in making out their manifests, they are entirely dependent on the shippers of cargo for information as to the weights, values, and contents of packages shipped, and that irresponsible parties sometimes give false or inaccurate descriptions of their consignments, resulting in fines imposed on vessels largely in excess of the freight received. It is therefore suggested that whenever the contents, weight, or value of any package be found on examination to differ from the description of the same in the manifest, the penalty thereby incurred shall be imposed on the goods in the said package, and not upon the vessel. In such cases, if it should be established on the part of consignees that the master of the vessel is in fault, they would have ample legal remedies against the ship-owner. On this point the consul-general of the United States at Havana reports, under the date of January 13, 1873, that he had pointed out to the intendente that it would be more just to hold the goods rather than the vessel responsible for any concealment or deceit respecting the contents of packages, and that the intendente replied that such a rule would be more equitable, but the regulations put the fine on the vessel.

It also appears that the customs authorities at the several ports in Cuba place different constructions on the laws and regulations prescribing the form and contents of a ship’s manifest. Fines have been imposed in one port for stating that for which fines were imposed in another port for omitting. Inasmuch as it is required in all cases that the manifest shall be certified in duplicate by the Spanish consul at or nearest to the port of loading, it is proposed, as a just and convenient remedy for such irregularities, that manifests bearing the certificate of a Spanish consul shall be accepted in any of the ports of Cuba as regular and sufficient in form.

I have observed that, in nearly all of the cases I have had occasion to bring to the notice of the predecessors of your excellency, the manifest in duplicate had been exhibited to the Spanish consul at the port of departure, one copy of the document having been left with him, to be transmitted to the port of destination, and the other, approved under the hand and seal of the consul, returned to the master of the vessel, to be afterward presented by him to the customs authorities. Surely it should be held sufficient to exonerate ship masters from penalty if their papers are found to be in due form by the commercial agents of the country to which they are bound. If a ship-master arriving in Cuba does not produce the consul’s certificate he is fined five hundred dollars. If he does produce such a certificate, and the manifest is nevertheless informal, he is fined for every oversight or neglect of the consul to point out informalities subsequently discovered by the more expert customs officers in Cuba. The blame, if any, in such cases is with the consul; and yet others, who are blameless, pay the penalty. And not only are ship-masters fined when consuls overlook mistakes in a manifest which it is their duty to correct, but it has not infrequently happened that American vessels are made to pay a penalty because the certificate of the Spanish consul was informal. The brig Dexter Washburne, of Portland, was fined one hundred dollars at Matanzas because the consul at Charleston had neglected to impress his official seal on a manifest after verifying it. Spanish consuls may be presumed to know the customs regulations in Spanish ports; at least their official certificate and seal authenticating a manifest should be accepted as evidence of an honest intent on the part of ship-masters to respect and obey Spanish laws; and if the consul is excused for ignorance of the customs regulations of his own country, the foreign ship-master should not be punished for the fault of the official to whom he is compelled, under heavy penalties, to apply to certify the regularity of his papers.

It is likewise stated that ship-masters are only informed at the last moment before the departure of their vessels of fines imposed on them. This notice is usually received when application is made at the custom-house to clear their ships for another port, so that the vessel must be indefinitely detained if payment be contested, or else the fine must be paid, no matter how unjust it may be, in order to avoid the greater loss of detention. It would seem that a practice so unreasonable and inconvenient might be prevented by a regulation requiring the customs authorities to make known to the captains or supercargoes of vessels all fines for irregularities in ships’ papers within forty-eight hours after the said documents shall be delivered to the proper officers. Complaint is also made by fifty-five American ship-masters who had delivered cargoes in the port of Matanzas, and thirty-three captains of American ships which had made voyages to the port of Santiago de Cuba, that with the utmost desire on their part to conform to the requirements of the customs authorities, they had nevertheless found it impossible to fill up a manifest which had not afforded some pretext for fines, ranging from twenty-five to five hundred dollars. So various and so frivolous are the grounds on which fines were imposed that it would be in vain, they say, to attempt to enumerate all of them. Informalities of the most trivial nature are deemed sufficient to impose on them the severest penalties. These ship-masters state: “It is never alleged that we intend to defraud the Spanish revenue. We are fined for an absence of the name of the shipper of the goods and the consignee; for a failure to express numbers, weights, and measures, in letters and figures; for a failure to state, after the enumeration of our cargo, that we carry nothing else; for a failure to make a similar statement when we come in ballast, for an absence of what is known as the asseveration of the words ‘so help me God;’ for the slightest error in converting American weights and measures into Spanish denominations; for omitting in the heading of the manifest the nationality, class, and tonnage of the vessel, name of captain, place whence she comes, and port whither bound; for consigning goods to order, although they may be so consigned in the bill of lading.”

Illustrations of the character of these penalties are also found in the reports of the American consuls in Cuba. It appears that although the regulations may have been followed in stating the generic class of freight, yet vessels are fined because a manifest does not also contain a specific description of the cargo. For example, fines have been imposed because hoops were not described as “wooden” hoops, and because nails were not stated to be “iron” nails. In other cases extreme technicality is required in the terms used in stating the nationality of a vessel. It is held to be insufficient when the manifest shows the name of a ship and the port or place where she is registered, since, for example, fines have been inflicted when the manifest has described a vessel as “the brig Hudson, of New York,” because it was not stated that she was the “American brig Hudson, of New York.” Penalties have likewise been exacted for omitting to state the marks and numbers of packages which were neither numbered nor marked.

Two very remarkable cases are found in a late dispatch from the United States consul-general in Havana. He reports that the American mail steamer Crescent City, having arrived in that port on the 13th of October last with a manifest containing fifty-eight items of cargo, was fined fifty-nine times; in other words, a fine of twenty-five dollars for each item in the manifest, and five hundred dollars besides for the want of the usual consular authentication of that document, although the consul’s certificate had never before been required of mail steamers; that is to say, the manifest having been filled up under a misapprehension of the regulations in force at the moment, and the same error having occurred in noting each item of freight, amounting at most to but one offense, if it could be called an offense, yet the penalty was repeated fifty-eight times, according to the letter of a rule not known to the master until after his arrival in port. And there is a case now pending at Sagua la Grande—that of the American brig G. de Zaldo, which has been fined one hundred and forty-nine times for mistakes in her manifest. One hundred of these fines are for a single item noted in the manifest as 100 kegs of lard. The customs authorities say that these should have been called “tierces;” and for that misnomer 1hey impose a hundred fines of twenty-five dollars each! It is scarcely too much to affirm that customs regulations executed in such a spirit tend toward the exclusion of foreign vessels from commerce with Cuba.

As a general rule, a ship’s manifest corresponds in its description of the cargo with the bills of lading delivered; and these are made out from the data furnished by consignors in settling the terms and conditions of the contract for freight. This custom was recognized in the royal order of July 1, 1858, and in the royal decree of March 1, 1867. It is the general practice of commercial nations to regard the manifest as a means only of identifying the several shipments constituting the cargo. It is the peculiar office of the invoice, as distinguished from the manifest or bill of lading, to set forth the information on which duties are ascertained. The owner or agent entering goods in a foreign port for consumption or sale alone possesses full and accurate knowledge respecting his importation. The mere carrier, whether a ship-owner or a railway corporation or an express company, cannot furnish information respecting the contents of closed packages. Duties are never charged and collected upon the statements contained in a manfest. Port charges do not depend upon the nature of the cargo. It is not, therefore, easy to discover what useful purpose is served by exacting in a manifest more than is necessary for the identification of the articles comprising the cargo, and less than is required for the computation of imposts.

The payment of duties is seldom, if ever, evaded by means of combination between owners of vessels and owners of cargo. The risk incurred by the ship would be far greater than any gain derived from the transaction. And since ship-owners are not the accessories of consignees in defrauding the revenue, neither should they be made to suffer penalties for the conduct of others, for whose acts they are not justly responsible. Nor can ship-masters, by collusion with parties at the port of destination, defraud the revenue without extreme peril to themselves and the vessels they command. It is a mistake to assume, as seems to be the practice in Cuba, that the revenue frauds said to be so common there are to be attributed to masters of foreign vessels. These practices on the part of unprincipled dealers in commercial towns generally depend for their success on facilities acquired by long residence, by confidential relations with subordinate customs officers, by false representations in invoice, and by various devices known to themselves in making up packages. The ship’s manifest neither aids a dishonest importer in consummating a fraud, nor assists a vigilant revenue official in detecting imposture. On the contrary, it most frequently happens that an upright ship-master is subjected to penalties which he would have escaped if lie had conspired with those whose connivance is essential to the success of revenue frauds.

I might point out several instances in which the requirements of one regulation cannot be obeyed without violating the provisions of another. One illustration of these contradictions will be sufficient to show the necessity of a further revision of these ordinances. Article 4 requires the captain at the end of the voyage to note in the duplicate sobordo he retains, (1) any goods in the hands of the crew; (2) the surplus ship’s stores; (3) arms and ammunition; (4) coal on board, if the vessel be a steamer. And yet article 8 denounces any amendment or alteration whatever in the sobordo, or manifest, as a forgery for which the captain will be arraigned before the criminal tribunals.

It is extremely desirable that the uncertainty resulting from so many successive orders and decrees, and the various interpretations given to particular clauses at the several ports in Cuba, should be removed by an authoritative declaration by the supreme government.

1st. Is a third manifest necessary besides the two required to be certified by the Spanish consul? I have already shown that on the 9th of June, 1870, a decree was issued by the minister of ultramar remitting all fines imposed in the island of Cuba for the non-presentation of a third manifest. This decree was published in the official gazette, at Havana, and communicated to the Department of State at Washington. Yet afterwards numerous fines were exacted from foreign vessels because they were not provided with a third manifest. Subsequently, on the 4th of February, 1871, the minister of state, Mr. Martos, in reply to a note from me on this subject, said:

“Respecting fines inflicted on captains of vessels for informalities in their manifests, or for not having presented them, in addition to the cargo list certified by the Spanish consul at the port from whence they sail, considering that in these omissions there was no intention to defraud, the said tines have been remitted in those cases in which the vessels had entered the ports of the island of Cuba since the 19th of December, 1868, that being the date when the order of the provisional government of the 11th of November then last past commenced to be in force.”

Nevertheless it appears that the customs authorities in Cuba continued to impose fines as well for not presenting as for informalities in the third manifest. And now, according to the tenor of article 7 of the new regulations of December, 1872, the captain must provide himself with a manifest, besides the duplicate sobordo certified by the consul.

2d. Is it necessary that foreign vessels should state their tonnage according to Spanish measurement? Upon this point, likewise, contrary decisions have been made since I had the honor to receive the note of the minister of state, Mr. Martos, dated February 4, 1871, in which his excellency said:

“Captains of foreign vessels are no longer required to declare the tonnage of their vessels in Spanish measure, it being sufficient on the first voyage for them to make such declaration in conformity with the builder’s measurement, or according to the measurement of the respective nations to which they belong, being, however, obliged thereafter to show certificates of the measurement that shall have been used for the collection of tonnage-dues, as laid down in the order of the 9th of July last.”

Nevertheless the new regulations of December, 1872, article 12, impose a charge on the captain who fails to declare the exact capacity of his vessel according to the Spanish standard.

3d. It is enough that the manifest state generally the class of merchandise comprising the cargo, with the marks, numbers and weight of packages, or must the contents of each and every package be particularly described?

4th. It is respectfully suggested that whenever the contents of packages are found on examination to differ materially from the description of the same in the manifest, the penalty thereby incurred shall be imposed on the goods and not on the vessel.

5th. To the end that foreign ship-masters entering Cuban ports may be relieved from the hardship and vexation of so many penalties imposed for trivial informalities in the manifest, it is respectfully submitted that the certificate of the Spanish consul, at the port of departure, should be accepted as a sufficient authentication of the regularity of that document.

6th. A further regulation is respectfully proposed requiring the customs authorities to make known to the captains or supercargoes of vessels all fines for irregularities in ship’s papers within forty-eight hours after said document shall have been delivered to the proper officer.

7th. In conclusion I beg leave to observe to your excellency that long delays continue to occur in the return of money collected for fines subsequently remitted. Fines imposed on American vessels in 1868, and which General Lersundi ordered to be returned more than four years ago, are still withheld by the intendency. Considering the facility with which penalties are inflicted, and the difficulty incident to their remission, it would seem there should be no hesitation in the matter of restituting after a decision to that effect has been announced.

Appended to this note I have taken the liberty to transmit for your excellency’s perusal several papers on this subject which I have received from my Government.

(A) is a copy of a dispatch from the consul-general of the United States at Havana, dated October 30, 1872, giving many examples of unjust fines imposed.

(B) is an extract from another communication from the consul-general, dated January 13, 1873.

(C) is a copy of a memorial addressed to the Secretary of State of the United States, dated New York, January 13, 1873, and signed by many respectable ship-owners trading between that city and the several ports in the island of Cuba; the same memorial is also signed, under date of January 28, 1873, by other firms of equal respectability residing in Boston.

I avail myself of this opportunity to repeat to your excellency the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.

D. E. SICKLES.

1. See pages 995–999 of this print.