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. 398.
Mr. Fish to General Sickles.

Department of State,
Washington, March 21, 1873.

No. 309.]

Sir: It has become necessary again to instruct you to call the attention of the Spanish government to the onerous burdens to which the trade of the United States is subjected by reason of the system of fines imposed by the customs authorities of Cuba.

The able manner in which you have already presented the subject in your notes of the 16th July, 1870, and 28th of November, 1872, makes it unnecessary for me to repeat or to dwell upon the facts of which our shipowners and masters complain. The printed memorandum which is inclosed shows the present condition of the question. The remedy which the ship-owners of the United States desire cannot be better stated than in the language of the following extract from the memorial which forms part of the inclosed memorandum:

The Spanish laws require that a vessel hound for Cuban ports shall make out manifests of cargo, the same to be certified by the Spanish consul residing at, or nearest to, the port of loading, in which manifest the captain must declare positively, and without qualification, the several and different kinds of packages, their marks, the generic class of contents, as well as the weights and values of same, and for every instance where, on arrival in Cuba, the examination of the cargo shows a difference between the packages and the weights, and contents of same as actually found, and the same as manifested, the vessel is fined, while the goods escape all responsibility.

That although the generic class of the goods is stated on the manifest, in compliance with the requirements of the Spanish laws, and said manifests accepted and certified to by the Spanish consul, yet the vessel is fined for not stating the specific class.

That we are entirely dependent on shippers of cargoes for information as to weights, values, and contents of packages shipped from which to make out manifests, and irresponsible parties often give erroneous descriptions of their part of cargo, resulting in fines imposed on the vessels, at times greatly in excess of the freight, against which we have no redress.

That the customs authorities at the several ports in Cuba place different constructions on the laws relative to vessels, and the manifests of same, and fines have been imposed in one port for stating that for which fines were imposed in another port for omitting.

That the captain is only informed of any fines imposed on his vessel when he attempts to clear her at the custom-house, whereby he has either to pay the fines or detain the vessel indefinitely while contesting the same.

That although we are willing and endeavor to comply with the said laws regulating manifests, yet, under the conflicting instructions placed on same by the different collectors of customs in Cuba, we find it impossible to do so, or to avoid fines.

In cases where fines are imposed, an appeal to the superior authorities at Havana is permitted on payment, under protest, of said fines; but unlesss the amount of such fine is excessive, the delay occasioned by the detention of the vessel would exceed in most cases the amount of such fine even if recovered.

We would respectfully represent to the department that as the vessel, through her agents, is entirely dependent on the shippers of cargo for information necessary to describe on the manifest the contents and weights of packages shipped, the propriety of imposing fines on the goods erroneously described on manifest, instead of on the vessel. as then the shipper would have a sure remedy against the vessel in case of error on her part, or on the part of her agents, in making out manifests, while under existing regulations it is in most cases almost, if not impossible, for the vessel to recover the amount of fines from the shipper.

These objections and suggestions appear to be reasonable, moderate, and just. It has therefore been determined both to instruct you to use your best endeavors to secure the modifications and changes which the ship-owners desire, and also to endeavor to secure a similar and, as far as possible, identical action on the part of the British, German, and Swedish and Norwegian governments, whose commerce also is affected by these rules and regulations.

You will therefore confer with the British, German, and Swedish and Norwegian ministers at Madrid, in the hope that they may receive instructions which may enable each to frame a note to be addressed by each separately to the Spanish minister for foreign affairs on the subject, which may be simultaneous, if not identical. Should they or either of them, under instructions from their governments, decline to act, you will nevertheless address a note yourself upon the subject, and spare no reasonable efforts to induce the Spanish government to accede to the requests you are instructed to make.

I am, &c.,

HAMILTON FISH.

[Inclosure.]

Memorandum concerning the imposition of fines in Cuba for alleged violations of the customs rules and regulations.

On the 1st day of July, in the year 1859, a royal order was issued in Madrid respecting a new tariff on the island of Cuba. It provided, in substance, that masters of vessels bound from foreign ports to Cuba should present to the Spanish consul a duplicate manifest, showing (1) the class, nationality, name, and tonnage (according to Spanish measurement) of their vessels; (2) the master’s name; (3) the port whence bound; (4) shipper’s and consignee’s name; (5) the bales, hogsheads, barrels, cases, and packages, with their respective numbers and marks, specifying, in ciphers and writing, the quantity of each class; (6) the generic class of the merchandise or contents of the packages according to the bills of lading; (7) those destined to bond or in transit; (8) that the vessel carried no other merchandise. It was further ordered that articles which cannot be packed in cases or packages should be declared according to Spanish weight or measure. All articles cast overboard were to be noticed in the manifest, with a specification of the amount, the packages, and their classification. These duplicate manifests were to be certified by the consul, who was to deliver one to the master, retaining the other for transmission to Cuba. The master was required, on arrival in the Cuban port, whether arriving there from necessity or in the course of the voyage, to deliver his copy, in person, to the visiting officer, first noting on it (1) goods belonging to the crew not included in the manifest, up to the value of $100 for each person; (2) the surplus of provisions on board; (3) munitions of war or extra supplies.

It was further provided that the same form should be gone through with in the case of the vessels sailing in ballast.

The penalties for non-performance of these requirements were fixed at: (1) for not presenting the manifest of a vessel in ballast, $200; (2) for not obtaining the certificate of the consul, $100; (3) for failure in specifying details in the manifest as required, $25; (4) for failure to state the tonnage according to Spanish measurement, in addition, the cost of the measurement, should the excess be more than ten per cent.

This order was suspended soon after its promulgation in 1859, and remained in abeyance until July, 1867. It was then promulgated anew, and notice was given that instead of requiring “(6) the generic class of the merchandise, or the contents of the packages according to the bills of lading,” masters would be required to state “(6) the generic classes of the merchandise, or the contents of the packages and their full weight.”

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

For the purposes of this memorandum it is not necessary to consider these particular rules, because on the 18th of November, 1868, they were suspended, and the following rules and regulations were substituted in their place and are now in force:

Rules and regulations to be observed by the captains and supercargoes of Spanish and foreign vessels engaged in importing goods to the licensed: ports of the island of Cuba, in conformity with the royal order of July 1, 1859, royal decree of March 1, 1867, and the rules in force according to the existing custom-house regulations, which have been approved by the colonial ministry in November 11, 1868.

1. All captains and supercargoes of vessels hailing from foreign ports and engaged in the importing trade to this island are obliged, on being visited by the health-boat, which visit takes place after the vessel has come to anchor, to deliver the statement of the cargoes, certified by the Spanish consul, and also the general manifest of the aforesaid cargo, without any corrections, containing the name of the captain and vessel, its nationality, number of Spanish tons, the port from whence she sailed, number of bales, packages, and every other article composing the cargo, with their respective marks, numbers, and the class of goods, the names of the shippers and consignees of the goods, expressing also, both in figures and writing, the quantity of every article and their kind, according to bill of lading; their weight, whether intended for bond or transit; it being absolutely prohibited to make any addition or alteration on the manfest or statement of the cargo, nor shall it contain any merchandise consigned to order; and should there be any difference between the statement of the cargo and the manifest, such offense will be punished according to regulations.

If the whole or part of the cargo is composed of iron bars or plates, metal plates, timber, jerked beef, salt, cocoa, or any article shipped in bulk, they must be manifested by decimal weight, adding at the end of each manifest the stores, ammunition, arms, tools, instruments, and all other ship’s utensils, the coals, if the vessel be a steamer, and also the effects that the crew may carry on the manifest, to the value of $100 each. When the cargo proceeds from a port where there is no consul or vice-consul, and if the residence of those agents be more than thirty kilometers distant from the place of sailing, the captain or supercargo will be exempted from presenting said cargo statement; but, notwithstanding this, all the cargo must be homogeneous, and must be entirely composed of one of the following articles, to wit: rawhides, timber, shooks, dye-woods, coal, or horns, provided that these effects are the production of the country from whence the vessel sailed, that the voyage has been direct, and that the duties are paid on the whole of said goods.

2. The captains and supercargoes of vessels entering in distress must also deliver a manifest of their cargo in the same manner as those engaged in the importing trade.

3. Captains and supercargoes of vessels entering in ballast are subject to the same rules and regulations of delivering the cargo statement certified by the Spanish consul and the manifest.

4. If the captain of a vessel has been obliged, by stress of weather, or any other unforeseen cause, to throw away any portion of the cargo overboard, he must state on his manifest the quantity of the cargo lost, specifying the number of packages, and the class and kind of goods, being also obliged to present to the custom-house his log-book, to prove that his declarations are true and correct.

5. All captains of vessels coming from Spanish ports with the register of the respective custom-house are only obliged to deliver an additional manfest of such goods as they may have taken on board after receiving said register, not included in the same, and also of all the stores and ship’s utensils.

6. Should the captain or supercargo not present the statement certified by the Spanish consul, and the manifest of being in ballast, in the stated time, they will incur a fine of $200; if said manifest is not in accordance with rule No. 1, a fine of $25, and in that of $100 if not certified by the Spanish consul.

7. If the captain, when requested by the superior custom-house official, does not immediately present the statement of the cargo and the manifest, or they are not made out according to the law, he will be subject to a fine of $500, unless the vessel has entered in distress. This fact will be ascertained by a verbal process.

8. In case there are any corrections or alterations in said documents, the captains or supercargoes are liable to be tried by the competent tribunal on the charge of forgery; those arriving in ballast laying themselves liable to the same punishment as those arriving loaded.

9. The presentation and the statement of the cargo in the manifest are obligatory in all the ports, creeks, or anchorages of the island wherever the vessel may enter; and should it be in distress, custom-house officials will take a copy, and return the original to the captain, that he may present it at the port where his voyage terminates.

10. All packages and other goods omitted in the statement of the cargo or the manifest will be confiscated, and the captain fined double the value of the same, should the amount of duties to be paid on the contents not exceed $400; but if the duties should exceed the above sum, and the goods be the property of the owner, the captain, or supercargo, or consigned to them, then, instead of a fine, the vessel, together with its freight-list or other utilities, will be confiscated.

11. When the vessel is entirely discharged, if one or more packages of the quantity manifested should be found short, no invoice having been delivered previously of the contents, it will be understood that the captain or supercargo of the vessel have committed fraud on the custom-house, and they will be fined $200 for each missing package.

12. If the owner or consignee of any goods omitted by the captain in the manifest presents within forty-eight hours the bill of lading or account of said goods, he will not incur any penalty and the goods will be delivered to him; but the captain or supercargo will pay a fine equal to the value of the goods so omitted in the manifest.

13. Nothing whatever can be discharged without the permission of the collector and the inspection of the commander of the custom-house officers in the service. For the mere discharging of any article irrespective of its value, or even if it should enter free of duty, the captain or supercargo will be lined $1,000, or else the goods will be confiscated together with the boats or lighters which may transport the same, should the amount of the duties to be assessed not exceed the sum of $200; but if they should exceed this sum the vessel will be confiscated.

14. No goods whatever, be the quantity large or small, can be transported from one vessel to another within the bay unless the necessary requisites of the custom-house have been complied with. A violation of this subjects the captains or supercargoes to the legal penalty.

15. Should a vessel discharge merchandise, be the quantity large or small, in a port not open to general commerce, said merchandise, as well as the vessel and all her appurtenances, will be confiscated.

16. If in consequence of the visit to the vessel by the custom-house officers before the captain has received his register an excess of cargo should be detected, such goods will be confiscated, and the captain will be fined in a sum equal to the value of the excess.

17. All goods, products, or any other article seized in the act of being fraudulently shipped shall likewise incur the penalty of a fine and confiscation.

18. If the captain or supercargo should be unable to pay the fines and costs imposed, the vessel will be held responsible, and seized unless the consignee assumes the fines.

19. The captain who does not declare the exact Spanish tonnage of his vessel will pay the cost of measuring, if the excess is over ten per cent.

20. Passenger luggage must be presented for inspection in the custom-house depot, and if there be found merchandise not exceeding $100 in value the passengers will pay the usual duties, presenting a note of the contents to the custom-house. If the value of said goods is more than $100, and less than $200, they will pay double duty; but if the value is more, the effects are liable to seizure, unless in either case the person interested has previously presented a list of said goods, in which case they will pay according to the tariff.

21. No manifest will be translated or permits be granted for discharging, unless the captain or consignees have previously presented the register of the vessel to the custom-house.

This document in three languages, Spanish, English, and French, is given this day to captain,——— ———, of the vessel———, for his information, and he signs the receipt at——, 186–,

[Signature of the administrator of the customs.]

[Signature of the interpreter.]

[Signature of the custom-house inspector.]

The interpreter:
—— ——.

The custom-house collector:
—— ——.
Custom-house inspector:

—— ——.

It maybe said, in passing, that the only important difference between these rules and those issued in 1867, is in the requirements of the first rule concerning the specification of the goods. This difference is shown in the foot-note.

Note.

Rules of 1867.	Rules of 1868.
Número de fardos ó bultos y demás efectos de que se componga su cargamento, conexpresion de sus números, marcas, nombre genoérico de las mercaderias segun conocimiento, y su peso bruto, &c., &c.	Número de fardos ó bultos y demás efectos de que se Componga su cargamento, conexpresion de sus números, marcas, la clase genéric a de las mercaderias del contenido de los bultos, y su peso bruto, &c., &c.

French.

Et le nombre de fardeaux, colis et autres effets dont se compose le chargement, avec les numéros, marques et noms des chargeurs et consignataires; manifestant également en numéros et lettres la quantité de chaque article et le nom générique des merchandises selon connaissement, et le poids brut, &c., &c.

Et le nombre de fardeaux, colis et autres effets dont se compose le chargement, avec les numéros et la classe gériérique des marchandises et le contenu descolis, marques et noms des chargeurs et consignataires; manifestant également ennuméros et lettres la quantité de chaque article et le nom générique des marchandises selon connaissement, et le poid brut, &c., &c.

On the 16th of May, 1870, the rules of 1868 were promulgated afresh in Cuba by the intendente general de hacienda, in a circular of which the following is the principal portion:

[Translation.]

intendencia-general de hacienda.

[Circular.]

“On the 11th of October, 1868, a proclamation was made by the provisional government that the masters of vessels trading with this island should comply with certain rules indispensable for the customs service, relating to manifests, and especially to the declaration of the Spanish tonnage, constituting the burden.

“Upon assuming the duties of the intendency, I observed a non-compliance with these rules, as well as with many others; and as it is my chief duty to guard and have respected the directions of the government, I ordered that these and all other dispositions in force should be rigorously executed, without favoritism, exceptions, or tolerances of any kind, since all vessels are equal before the intendency, and likewise all nations.

“When the administration of the customs began to comply with my instructions, they found themselves obliged to impose the fines which the law exacts upon the masters of many vessels who had relied upon their previous impunity, and, ignorant of my directions, neglected to comply with the laws.

“This produced a multitude of solicitations from masters seeking condonation, and also representations from the consuls and commercial agents of various countries reclamations very appreciable by the intendency, whose primary duty is to facilitate commerce, the essential base to order and public prosperity.

“The intendency pondered over the subject, and determined to relieve from the penalty the masters of all vessels which had not entered the ports of the island since the 19th day of December, 1868, at which date his excellency, the superior political governor, confirmed the aforesaid order of the provisional government of the 11th of November of the same year, and this circumstance justifying the measure, and as was settled by the circular of the 22d February of this year, published in the Gazette by the central sections of the customs.

“Doubts had arisen as to the proper method of putting the above into practice, and his excellency the superior political governor having heard in relation thereto the central office of the customs, the comptrollers of the treasury, the intendency, and the council of administration, it has pleased him to decide that this may be justified by certificates presented by the masters from any of the ports of entry of the island, certificates which the consignees of the ships must present within thirty days, counting from the day in which he is notified of the imposition of the fine, it being well understood that this penalty shall not attach to masters who protest in writing or personally against it, if sailing for the first time to these ports, provided that they give bond until the question is settled.

“The intendency already having had the honor to signify to the public the great trouble experienced, caused by finding itself in the painful position of being obliged to inflict severe penalties in order to execute the laws, and other provisions, the observance of which is committed to its jurisdiction, has given the necessary information to masters of vessels concerning customs dues. In a word, besides publishing the regulations, hereto attached, which masters must observe, and their supercargoes, has also requested the government that, through the ministry of state, it would promulgate to all our consuls, in order that they can sufficiently inform the masters of all vessels sailing for this island, to the end that the intendency may have the satisfaction not to see itself obliged to impose any penalty.

“Also measures were taken to inform foreign governments, so that on their part they may remove the ignorance of masters of vessels, and the intendency invites the attention of consignees of vessels, that on their part they may call the attention of their correspondents to this point, to the end that the intendency may not have to impose any fine, it being well understood that, if forced to impose it, it will exact it without partiality of any kind, for to all, whether natives or foreigners, the laws must be vindicated.

English.

Number of bales, packages, and every other article composing the cargo, with their respective marks, numbers, names of the shippers and consignees of the goods, expressing also, both in figures and writing, the quantity of every article, and their expressing also, both in figures and writing, kind according to bill of lading; their weight, &c., & c.

Number of bales, packages, and every other article composing the cargo, with their respective marks, numbers, and the class of the goods, the names of the shippers and consignees of the goods, the quantity of every article, and their kind according to the bill of lading; their weight, &c., &c.

“The intendency directs the central section of the customs to adopt the necessary measures so that the administrators may publish this resolution by all means possible, to meet the interests of all concerned, which has no other end than to avoid the imposition of pecuniary fines, and finally the good services of the public press, that it will lend its aid by giving publication to this circular.

“Havana, 16th May, 1870.

“The intendent-general de hacienda,

“J. EMILIO DE SANTOS.”

In their practical operation these rules worked great injustice to foreign commerce, especially the commerce of the United States, and many representations were made concerning them. The provision requiring three manifests, and that requiring the tonnage to be expressed in Spanish measurement, proved to be especially onerous.

Mr. Seward, on the 1st of July, 1868, directed the American minister at Madrid to make such representations to the minister of foreign affairs as would bring about an inquiry into and a redress of these grievances, and Mr. Hale was informed, in reply to the representations made in compliance with the instructions, that the subject should be inquired into. But the seizures went on, and the complaints continued.

On the 9th of November, 1869, for instance, the consul of the United States at Matanzas made a return showing that one hundred and fifteen American vessels had been reported to that consulate alone, as having been fined at the custom-house at that port since December, 1867. Some extracts from this report will give an idea of the trivial and venal mistakes (rather than offenses) for which these vessels were fined:

* * * * * * *

“These fines are in most cases imposed for trivial omissions or discrepancies in no way implicating the good faith of the masters.

“The subject has been brought to the notice of the Department at different times, and by the Department to the notice of the Spanish government. (See Diplomatic Correspondence, 1868, part 2, page 8.) But it appears to have not yet attracted the attention of the Spanish government sufficiently to bring about a modification or repeal of the regulations in force.

“As examples of the pretexts upon which these fines are imposed, I will cite a few cases of which I have the evidence before me:

“The brig Amos M. Roberts, of Belfast, Maine, was in March, 1868, fined $25. The administrator of the custom-house, in reply to my inquiry as to the motives, states as follows: ‘In the manifest which the captain of the Amos M. Roberts presented to the visiting officers on arrival, there is expressed the exact number of Spanish tons that the vessel measures, namely, 151.50 tons, but in the manifest which the captain presented to the Spanish consul at New Orleans he only declared 150.51 tons. This is the reason why he was fined fifty escudos.’

“The brig Dexter Washburne, of Portland, was fined $100 in April of this year, because the Spanish consul at Charleston omitted to impress his seal on the vessel’s manifest after verifying it. This is not, by any means, the only instance that our vessels have been subjected to fines in this port, for omissions of the Spanish consular officers.

“During the same and previous months the Henry P. Lord, George S. Berry, Ricardo Barros, Arietta, Emma M. Wright, Coquett, and others, all arriving in ballast, paid fines for alleged non-compliance with the eighth paragraph of Rule I of the Regulations of July 1, 1859, (put in force by decree of July 1, 1867,) which paragraph, up to that time, had only been applied to vessels bringing cargo, and, as far as I can learn, is only imposed in this port, even at present, on vessels coming in ballast.

“In June last, the brig Novelty, of Boston, was fined $25 because, as the administrator informed me, ‘the captain did not state in his manifest the Spanish tonnage of the vessel; and also, because he did not comply with the eighth paragraph of Rule I of the Regulations of July 1, 1859.’ This vessel was constructed at Boston for the purpose of carrying molasses in tanks. It was her first voyage from the United States; and as she had never before been in a Spanish port, it could not be expected that the master should manifest her Spanish tonnage. And, as she came in ballast, the paragraph referred to was not applicable to her case.

“Several other vessels, that had never been in a Spanish port, have been fined by this custom-house for not manifesting their Spanish tonnage.

“In September last, the bark Sarah B. Hale arrived at this port, and among her cargo was a consignment of hoops. Hitherto it had never occurred to any of our customhouse officials that there could be any motive for requiring ship-masters to express the ‘kind’ genero of that article, as it is well known that there is but one kind of hoops imported from the United States, and to require them to express that the hoops are of wood, would appear as unnecessary as to require it in any other articles of the same nature; such as sugar-box shooks, hogshead shooks, or empty casks. Nevertheless, the fine was exacted, and other vessels arriving since have also been fined for the same reason.

“I thought it my duty to bring to the notice of the administrator the case of a fine imposed on the brig Etta M. Tucker, and to remonstrate against its imposition. I accompany herewith copies of the correspondence, by which it will be seen that the matter has been referred to the superior authority at Havana.

“I earnestly request that you will bring the matter to the notice of the proper authorities, in order that some remedy may be found for these great grievances of our ship-masters.

“In very many cases the masters of vessels are not notified of the imposition of fines until the day of clearance, and then there is little time left to either the master or consignee to make necessary explanations or rectify errors.

“It results, therefore, that very frequently, to avoid detention, the captain pays the fine, however unjust it may be.”

Again, on the 19th of March, 1870, the, American ship-masters laid their grievances before the Government of the United States. They said:

“It is never alleged that we desire to defraud the Spanish revenue. Irregularities of the most trifling character are the sole ground which are urged to defend the imposition and continuance of our burdens. So numerous are the requirements of the customhouse, so conflicting are the interpretations of the law, so various and variable are the customs prevailing at the different ports, that we find it impossible to draw up a manifest in which an expert may not pick a flaw, or one which may not offer some pretext for the imposition of a fine of from twenty-five to five hundred dollars. Vessels which have never been in a Spanish port, and vessels which may, at the time, be on their very first voyage, are fined because they do not express their Spanish tonnage. So multiform are the pretexts for fines that we dare not attempt to enumerate them all. 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 arrive in ballast; for an absence of what is known as the asseveration, or the words ‘So help me God;’ for neglecting to state, when we bring hoops, that they are of wood and not of metal; for the slightest error in converting American weights and measures into those of Spanish denominations; for omitting in the heading of the manifest the nationality, class, tonnage of the vessel, name of captain, place whence she comes and port whither bound; for consigning goods to order, though they may be so consigned in the bill of lading.”

This document was signed by fifty-five American ship-masters in the port of Matanzas, and thirty-three American ship-masters in the port of Cuba.

On the 9th of June, 1870, the minister of ultramar at Madrid issued a decree—

“Ordering the remittance of all fines imposed in the island of Cuba for the non-presentation of a third copy of the manifest, and that under no conception whatever, and as it is found provided in the legislation for that department, can the authorities of the provinces of ultramar alter, reform, or make additions to the legislation of the customs, which power is reserved exclusively to the supreme government of the nation, the same authorities being personally responsible for whatever trangression of the law which they commit in this sense, and inserting in continuation the rules prescribed on the 1st of July, 1859, for the guidance of captains and supercargoes of Spanish vessels and those of other nations engaged in the import trade from foreign ports to those of the island of Cuba and Puerto Rico, and the modifications afterward accorded, * * * * and ordering that against the resolutions that may cause lawsuits, by the intendents of the public treasury of the provinces of ultramar in the matter of customs, a contentious demand may be made, by those who consider themselves injured in their rights, before the respective territorial courts, and in conformity to that prescribed by the decrees of the 7th of February and the 6th of April, 1869.”

This decree was promulgated at Madrid on the 12th of June, and in Cuba on the 6th of July.

At this stage of the proceedings the United States invoked, diplomatically, through their minister at Madrid, the interposition of the Spanish government. On the 16th of July, 1870, General Sickles, the American minister at Madrid, addressed a note to Mr. Sagasta, the minister for foreign affairs, in which, after a concise recital of the material facts hereinbefore set forth, he continued as follows:

“The revenue laws of most countries provide a system of equitable and summary relief in cases where a fine or forfeiture may have been incurred by merchants or masters of vessels without culpable negligence or intention of fraud. In the United States, for example, it is provided that in such cases an alleged offender desiring relief may present his petition to a magistrate, whose duty it is to hear the parties in a summary way, and make such recommendation to the principal officer of the Treasury as the circumstances of the case may suggest. This course of procedure has been followed in the United States since 1797, and has been found entirely satisfactory to the persons concerned as well as to the Government.

“Without undertaking to enumerate all the unusual and severe exactions contained in the twenty-one articles of the circular of the intendente de hacienda, those mentioned as illustrations will he sufficient, I hope, to convince your excellency that these regulations should he revised, and so modified as to relieve foreign vessels trading with Cuba from burdens which cause serious inconvenience to commerce without corresponding advantage to the treasury.

“With regard to the clause requiring a foreign vessel to show its Spanish tonnage on its manifest, it must be always extremely difficult, and sometimes impossible, for masters of vessels to comply with that regulation. I am not aware that any other nation has established a similar rule. It is certain that the United States have never required Spanish vessels entering their ports to show their American tonnage on their manifests. The measurement and tonnage of all American vessels appears on the ship’s register. The measurement is made and the tonnage calculated according to the standard of the country to which the vessel belongs. And this is believed to be the common practice of nations. The United States take care, as it is presumed all governments do, that the certificate of registry delivered to the master of a vessel expresses her true dimensions and capacity for burden. It is easy, then, for the proper officer of the customs in any foreign port, taking the measurement found on the vessel’s papers, to compute her Spanish tonnage, for the purpose of ascertaining the amount of tonnage-dues to be collected, or for any other purpose depending upon the capacity of the vessel. And in any case in which there may be reason to doubt the correctness of the register, a new measurement may be made.

“It does not distinctly appear whether the gross weight of merchandise in bulk, which must also be stated on the manifest, is required to be given according to the Spanish standard. If that be the true interpretation of article 1 of the circular, then it imposes an additional hardship upon masters of vessels, which is believed to be equally without precedent. And if the weight of cargo in bulk is not to be stated according to the Spanish standard, but according to the standard of the country where the vessel was laden, then it is difficult to see why one rule should be applied to the statement in the manifest of the tonnage of the vessel, and another to the weight of her cargo in bulk. I am not informed whether these regulations are to be enforced in all the ports of Spain, or whether they relate only to the Spanish colonies; or whether, adhering to more convenient and reciprocal rules in the ports of the peninsula and of the other colonies, these regulations are confined to foreign vessels entering Cuban ports. If the same requirements are to be enforced in all Spanish ports, the question presented will all the more deserve the consideration of your excellency, in view of the wider range of the embarrassments and losses to which foreign vessels engaged in trade with Spain will be subjected. But if the regulations are colonial only, or, having a character yet more exceptional, are limited in their operations to Cuba, it may be fairly asked, why is it necessary for the manifest of a foreign vessel, entering a port in Cuba, to show her Spanish tonnage, when the same vessel may enter Spanish ports having her tonnage expressed on her papers in conformity with the standard of the country to which she belongs?

“Moreover, fines have been imposed upon masters of vessels for irregularities in manifests authenticated by the Spanish consul at the port of departure. It is to be presumed that if the consuls of Spain residing in the United States had known that these regulations were in existence, those officers would not have approved the sufficiency and regularity of papers which did not meet the requirements of the authorities in Cuba. When a consul has given to a document the sanction of his signature and seal of office, it is certainly unjust for the authorities of his own country not only to reject the document as insufficient, but to impose a fine upon the ship-master who presents it in good faith. If, on the other hand, the consuls have been duly notified of these regulations, and fail to assure themselves that the manifests they certify are regular in substance and in form, then the blame and the penalty should fall on the consul so offending.

“By article 6 of the circular of the intendente it is required that masters of vessels shall have their documents certified by the Spanish consul at the port from which they sail, in default of which they are fined two hundred escudos. And surely it will be admitted that when the master presents papers thus certified, they should be at least so far recognized by the customs authorities in Cuba as to exempt the innocent master or merchant from penalties incurred through the fault of the consul, or because that officer was not informed of the regulations in force in the ports of the country he represents.

“Much inconvenience has been caused to the Spanish authorities, as well as loss to masters of foreign vessels, by the failure to give reasonable and customary notice of the establishment of these regulations. It is the usual practice of nations, whenever material changes are made in their laws or regulations affecting trade carried on in foreign vessels, to give timely notice of such changes to friendly Governments with whom they have intercourse, in order that merchants, shippers, and masters of vessels may be duly informed, by the proper authority, of their duty in the premises. I am not aware that these regulations have ever been communicated to the Government of the United States, or that any notification of them has been given by the Spanish government other than that published in the Havana by the intendente de hacienda in May last, and by him since furnished to the consuls residing there.

“Persuaded of the justice of the considerations presented in the name of my Government, which so much desires to remove every obstacle to free and advantageous intercourse between the two countries, I trust that it may be agreeable to the government of his highness, the regent, to cause the regulations prescribed in the circular of the intendente de hacienda to be revised and amended, so that they may bear less oppressively upon the masters of foreign vessels, and that the penalties imposed upon masters of American vessels for mere irregularities in matters of form, where no willful neglect or intent to defraud the revenue appears, may be revoked; and that the fines actually paid by masters of American vessels for alleged violations of the regulation requiring the Spanish tonnage to be borne on the manifests of American ships may be refunded to the parties concerned.

“I improve this occasion to renew to your excellency the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.”

This note was not answered until the 4th of February, 1871, but meanwhile some important correspondence had taken place in Cuba.

On the 19th of August, 1870, the intendente at Havana issued a further circular, in explanation of his circular of the 16th of May, 1870. The following is a translation:

[Translation.]

“intendency-general of the hacienda.

“In a circular from this intendency of the 16th of May last, published in the Gaceta of the 18th of the same month, it was ordered that in order to release masters of vessels from fines which they had incurred on account of informalities in their manifests, or for not having presented them, together with the manifest certified by the consul, thus failing to comply with the regulations they should observe, according to an order of the provisional government of 11th of November, 1868, it was necessary for them to prove that they had been in no port of this island since the 19th of December, 1868, the date of the going into effect of the said order. It was also ordered that the justificatory proof should consist of certificates issued by the captains of the qualified ports of the island, which the consignees of the vessel should present within thirty days, counting from the date of the notice of the imposed fine; but as various petitions have been presented as to the difficulty and cost in many cases of procuring this proof, this intendency, desiring to give commerce and navigation all the facilities compatible with law and the interests of the treasury, after having heard the reports of the central section of customs and the board of finance, has decreed that custom-houses shall consider as sufficient proof for the purpose indicated a certificate of the consul of the port where the vessel enters, in which shall be stated that, according to an examination of the log or log-books presented to him for that purpose by the master, said vessel has not been in any port of the island since the 19th of December, 1868; the consuls being also at liberty to exact such data as they may consider necessary to certify with exactness upon the subject.”

Notwithstanding the notice that three manifests would not be required, the authorities in Cuba continued to demand them. When complaint was made of their conduct in this respect the intendente made the following reply:

[Translation.]

“intendency-general of the public treasury.

“Your polite communication of 24th October, in answer to that of this intendency of 21st of the same month, relative to the fine imposed by the custom-house at Manzanillo on the American brig Queen of the South, has been received, and in view of which I have to state that masters of vessels are obliged to deliver to the Spanish consul or vice-consul at the port of departure a ‘sobordo’ in duplicate, who returns one to the master, and the other is forwarded directly to this intendency.

“Upon arrival at this island the said ‘sobordo,’ certified by the consul, must be presented, and also a general manifest of the cargo. If you refer to the laws prescribed for the government of masters and supercargoes of vessels engaged in the import trade with this island, you will be convinced that the fine was justly imposed; but as the two words sobordo and manifesto have the same signification in English and Spanish it happens that masters of vessels, upon clearing at foreign ports, deliver two manifests or ‘sobordos’ to the consul, under the belief that no other documents are required at these custom-houses; but as two are required, one certified by the consul (the duplicate of which is retained by the consul for this intendency) and a second without this requisite, an impression is created that triplicate manifests are exacted here, whereas two only are required, and for this are imposed fines upon those who neglect to present the second one, and gives rise to such reclamations as that made by the master of the Queen of the South.

“The decree to which you refer as published in the Diario de la Marina, and which was communicated to the Minister of State at Washington, ordering the return of all fines imposed for the non-presentation of a third manifest, having been dictated in a mistaken supposition, has been annulled by another under date the 21st of September, ultimo, which I now transcribe to you, and its perusal will show that the authorities of this island were acting in compliance with their duty in imposing the fines; but as they have been remitted for reasons of equity, and because the faults committed did not reveal an intention to commit fraud, as this intendency had indicated, I am pleased that this question has been thus satisfactorily settled, and I can assure you that the fine of one thousand escudos ($500) imposed on the master of the above-referred-to vessel will be returned as soon as the collector at Manzanillo remits the certificate of entry, which is applied for this day.

“God preserve you many years.

“Havana, November 3, 1870.

“J. EMILIO DE SANTOS.

“The Acting Consul-General of the United States.”

[Translation.]

“intendency-general of the public treasury.

“The following order was received from the ministry of ultramar, by his excellency the superior political governor, under date the 21st of September ultimo:

“‘Your Excellency: In view of the official letters of your excellency, Nos. 490, 501, 504, and 509, relative to the fines imposed by the custom-houses of that island on the British schooner Island Belle, and on the vessels Belle Louisa, Evening Star, Carrie Douglas, Castilla, Carlton, Sarah Anne, Martha, and Queen of the South, some of which fines had already been remitted by your excellency, and considering that all have been imposed in accordance with ruling legislation, his highness has been pleased to order that it be made known, as has been by order of this date, to the minister of state, with the view that it may be communicated to the claimants that the authorities of that island have complied, as they always do, with their duty. Moreover his highness, for reasons of equity and the fact that the faults committed do not reveal fraudulent intentions, has been pleased to order that the fines referred to be restored.’

“And I communicate the same to yon for your information, informing you also that under this date the order has been given to the collector of customs at Manzanillo for the return of the certificate of the entry of $500 fine, exacted by that custom-house of the American brig Queen of the South, and which has been remitted by the government of his highness.

“God preserve you many years.

“Havana, November 2, 1870.

“J. EMILIO DE SANTOS.

“The Consul-General of the United States.”

On the 4th February, 1871, the minister for foreign affairs at Madrid replied thus to General Sickles’s note of July 16, 1870:

[Translation.]

“Ministry of State,
“Madrid, February 4, 1871.

“My Dear Sir: * * * * * * *

“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 9th of July last.

“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 fines have been remitted in those cases in which the vessels had entered the ports of the island of Cuba since the 19th 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.

“The evidence hitherto required to exonerate the masters of foreign merchant-vessels having been the occasion of reclamations, the administration has taken the matter into consideration, and instead of demanding certificates of the port captains, as heretofore, it is now ordained that a certificate shall be furnished from the consul at the port of arrival, showing that, according to the log-book, the vessel had not before entered a port of the island, the consuls being at liberty to ask from the captains such other facts as may appear necessary to certify with exactitude upon the matter. The fines were legally inflicted, and in remitting them the government has acted in conformity with sentiments of equity and deference. Your excellency will, therefore, understand that captains subjected to fines have the means to exempt themselves from payment if they fulfill the conditions indicated.

“Touching the request to modify the regulations in force, it will be taken into consideration by the board engaged in the compilation of the new orders and regulations for the customs of the colonies, which will endeavor to conciliate as far as possible the interests of legitimate commerce with those of the public treasury.

* * * * * * *

“C. MARTOS.

“The Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States.”

The reforms and ameliorations which were apparently contemplated at the time when this note was written not having been carried out in practice in Cuba, General Sickles, on the 28th day of November, 1872, addressed the following note to the minister for foreign affairs:

“Legation of the United States of America,
“Madrid, November 27, 1872.

“ Sir: I have the honor to bring to the notice of your excellency, in compliance with instructions from my government, some further representations respecting the penalties imposed by the customs authorities in Cuba for alleged violations of the royal order of July 1, 1859, and the several decrees and regulations subsequently issued in the execution thereof. Your excellency will, perhaps, remember the communication on this subject that I had the honor to address to the ministry of state on the 16th of July, 1870, as I recall with great pleasure the satisfactory reply thereto, received from your excellency on the 4th of February, 1871. It has, however, unfortunately happened, although without the least responsibility attaching to your excellency, that the promised relief of foreign vessels employed in the commerce with Cuba from the vexatious and exorbitant fines for unintentional errors and omissions as to matters of mere form in ships’ manifests has not been fulfilled. In truth, under a recent circular of the intendente-general, dated September 18, it appears, as I regret to state, that American ship-masters are more frequently than ever subject to severe fines imposed by subordinate customs officers, following possibly the literal text of their instructions, without the least evidence of any intent to defraud the revenue or to disregard the necessary requirements of customs regulations.

“With reference to the suggestions made in my former communication respecting the modification of the royal order of 1859, the original source of nearly all these reclamations, your excellency kindly informed me in the note I had the honor to receive under date of February 4, 1871, that my representations would be referred to the junta, then engaged in compiling new ordinances for the ultramarine provinces, in order that the interests of lawful commerce might as far as possible be reconciled with those of the public treasury. It seems, however, from the recent circular of the intendente-general that no redress through the action of the junta has yet been granted.

“Your excellency was likewise good enough to assure me in the same communication that the government of His Highness the Regent, moved by the sentiments of equity and consideration that so much distinguished it, would concede the remission of certain classes of penalties incurred by reason of the over-zealous application of the royal order of 1859, and in which it was admitted that just grounds of reclamation had been shown. Your excellency will learn, I am sure, with equal surprise and regret, that the restitution thus ordered has not been made effective, although the reclamations have been presented severally in due form. The consul-general of the United States at Havana reports, for example, among numerous instances, that of the series of fines imposed on vessels of the United States since 1868, and which were condoned by the action of the minister of ultramar, communicated to me in your excellency’s note of February 4, 1871, none have been refunded. Nor does it appear that, apart from the relaxation of the rule requiring the tonnage of foreign vessels to be expressed in Spanish measurement, there has been any essential amelioration of the unjust and vexatious exactions that have grown into usage since the revival of the almost obsolete order of July 1, 1859. Indeed I may state that it is the concurrent testimony of persons engaged in foreign commerce with Cuba that it is extremely difficult for any ship-master to make out a manifest of an assorted cargo in which a pretext may not he found for a penalty predicated on some deviation from the strict requirements of the existing regulations.

“In commending to your excellency the expediency of a revision of the present customs procedure in Cuba, so that the important commerce with that island may be relieved of useless burdens, I am instructed to bring to the notice of His Majesty’s government the practice of the revenue authorities of the United States in analogous cases, in the hope that in a spirit of reciprocity the same circumspection may be practiced in Cuba. Before enforcing upon any foreign vessel the penalties prescribed for irregularities or omissions in manifests, collectors of customs are required to consult the Treasury Department. This rule, which is embraced in article 4, part 3, of the revised regulations of that Department, is uniformly observed in the United States, with respect to all foreign shipping, thereby assuring greater care in the investigation of complaints, and protecting foreign ship-masters from the indiscretions of subordinate functionaries.

“It may be confidently assumed that the intendente-general of Cuba, an officer of high character, clothed with ample powers for the establishment of customs rules and regulations, is at once the proper authority as well for the imposition as for the removal of penalties. At present, fines are inflicted by inferior officials in any of the ports of the island; payment is demanded before any appeal can be made to superior authority; and experience has shown that the process of recovering a penalty once paid, no matter how clear may be the right to restitution, is an endless proceeding, usually abandoned after fruitless efforts. With more discrimination in the use of the power to impose fines, most of these reclamations might be avoided. A very large proportion of the penalties collected from American ship-masters in Cuban ports are imposed without evidence of any intent to defraud the revenue or to violate the law, and it may be safely asserted that if in such cases the intendente-general had been consulted before the infliction of the fine, by a reference of the case, to his department, such instances of injustice could not have happened.

“I have, therefore, to request that His Majesty’s government will take into further consideration the representations made in my note of July 16, 1870, and those now respectfully brought to its notice, to the end that restitution be made of the fines heretofore admitted to have been imposed improvidently; that the existing customs ordinances in Cuba may be reviewed by competent authority, with the same just disposition shown in the recent action of the Spanish hacienda to discriminate between mere errors of form and cases of culpable transgression and that the power to exact penalties on foreign shipping in Cuba may be reserved to the intendente-general, in analogy to the considerate and deferential practice observed by my Government in like eases.

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

“D. E. SICKLES.

“His Excellency the Minister of State.”

That there has been no real amelioration in Cuba is shown by the following extract from a dispatch from the consulate-general, dated October 30, 1872; on the contrary, the objectionable regulations of 1859 are prescribed and enforced with little alteration or modification:

“I transmit herewith three copies of what are styled the ‘Regulations for the guidance of captains and supercargoes of Spanish as well as foreign vessels,’ &c., &c. These ‘regulations’ are a recapitulation of the royal order of 1st July, 1859, put into force on the 1st July, 1867, which has so frequently been referred to in communications from this office. It seems unnecessary to call the Department’s attention to the ambiguities, contradictions, and absurdities contained in this document. The so-called translation into English is quite as intelligible as the original in Spanish. Under these regulations, fines are imposed for the following offenses:

“For omitting to express class of vessel, whether ship, bark, brig, &c., $25.

“For omit ting the nationality of the vessel, it is not sufficient to state the brig—— of Boston; the master must state the American brig —— of Boston; the penalty of such omission is $25.

“For omitting name of the vessel, $25.

“For omitting to state the exact Spanish tonnage measurement, $25.

“For omitting master’s name, $25.

“For omitting the port or ports from whence arriving, $25.

“For omitting the name of the shipper or shippers, each omission, $25.

“For omitting names of consignee or consignees, each omission, $25.

“For omitting to state the kind of package, $25.

“For omitting to state in writing, as well as in figures, the quality, or number of packages or pieces, $25.

“For omitting marks and numbers, although the packages may have neither, $25.

“For omitting to state the generic class of the effects manifested—such as wooden hoops, iron nails, &c.—$25.

“For omitting to state the gross weight of different items, $25; and other penalties for discrepancies in weights. If goods are to go into bond, or are in transit, and not so stated, $25.

“For omitting to state at the foot of the manifest that the vessel brings no other cargo, although she may be in ballast, $25.

“For omitting to give the weights and measurements in the decimal or French system, $25 each omission.

“For omitting to manifest any goods that the crew may have in their possession, $25.

“Omitting to note the surplus stores, $25.

“Omitting to state the arms and ammunition on board, $25.

“Omitting to state the quantity of coals on board, if the vessel is a steamer, $25.

“Omitting to deliver the manifest the moment of the visit, $200.

“For manifesting goods to order, whether or not so required by the bills of lading, $25.

“If the manifests have not been authenticated by the Spanish consul, a fine of $100 is imposed. In a case where the Spanish consul had neglected to impress his seal on the manifest, it was held by the customs officials at Matanzas that there was no authentication, and the vessel was fined accordingly.

“For omitting in the manifest any of requisites of Rule 1, (?) $25.

“In addition to the consular manifest, called ‘sobordo,’ another simple manifest, not authenticated, is required; this requisite is not clearly provided for in the royal order and only inferred from the second paragraph of Rule 7; nevertheless a failure to produce it subjects the master to a penalty of $500. Numbers of our vessels have been subjected to these exorbitant fines. Any erasure, alteration, or interlineation, subjects the master to a charge of forgery.

“I know of no instances where this penalty has been enforced. A fine of $25 is usually imposed for each defect.

“The presentation of the consular manifest is obligatory in all the ports of the island at which the vessel may touch, for orders or in distress.

“Rule 12 provides that the master who does not declare the exact Spanish tonnage, shall pay the expense of admeasurement, should there result an excess of 10 per cent. The rule is inconsistent with the first paragraph of Rule 1.

“All goods omitted in the manifests are confiscated, and a penalty of double duties imposed on the master, and if the duties should exceed $400, the vessel, freight-money, &c., will be confiscated,

“For every package missing, upon the discharge of a vessel, a fine of $200 is imposed.

“For discharging goods without permits, a fine of $1,000 is imposed.

“Articles 16, 23, and 26 provide for penalties which are not clearly defined.

“Vessels coming from a port where there is no Spanish consular officer are required to have their manifests verified by three merchants, who will also certify that no such officer resides at the place, or within a radius of thirty kilometers: if omitted, a penalty of $100 is imposed. There is no provision for this penalty in the regulations, but the fine is frequently imposed notwithstanding.

“The mail-steamer Crescent City, of and from New York, arrived here on the 15th instant, the day upon which the circular of the intendente, referred to in my No. 123, went into effect. Her manifest comprises fifty-eight items? and a fine of $25 has been imposed for each, and one of $500 for want of the consular authentication, which, hitherto, has not been required of mail-steamers. * * * * *

“I availed myself of the opportunity to urge upon the intendente the suspension of the royal order of July 1, 1859, in view of the gross injustice it inflicts upon foreign commerce, while experience has shown the impossibility of ship-masters making out their manifests in accordance with its provisions, and not incur some one of its numerous penalties. I acquainted him with the instructions of the Treasury Department of the United States relative to fines upon foreign vessels for want of manifests; that such fines were not enforced without consulting the Department, and I asked that the same considerations be extended to our vessels, in the out-ports of the island, where it had been customary to impose fines and exact their payment before appeal could be made to the central authority.

“I also called his attention to the fines imposed on our vessels at Manzanillo, in 1868, which General Lersundi had ordered to be restored more than four years ago, and which had never been carried out by the proper department of the intendency. He took note of my suggestions and promised that they should have due attention.

“It is due to this officer to state that upon his arrival here he found the greatest demoralization in his department, and that he is endeavoring faithfully to effect reforms therein. He makes, however, the usual mistake of his predecessors in supposing that any of these irregularities are to be attributed to the masters of foreign vessels. * *

“Regulations established on the 1st of July, 1859, for the guidance of captains and supercargoes of Spanish as well as foreign vessels engaged in the import trade between foreign ports and the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico, together with the alterations subsequently granted.

• “I. Captains of vessels trading between foreign ports and the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico will deliver to the consul or vice-consul of Spain a duplicate manifest, without any corrections whatever, specifying—
  • “1. The rig, flag, name of the vessel, and the exact Spanish measurement. The measurement of her national register will only be exacted of vessels coming to the said islands for the first time, although the tonnage be not in accordance with the Spanish measurement; but in all subsequent voyages a certificate of the Spanish measurement made by order of the custom-house authorities will be required for the payment of the tonnage dues.
  • “2. The name of the captain or mate.
  • “3. The port or ports of sailing.
  • “4. The names of the shippers and owners or consignees of the cargo.
  • “5. The bundles, bales, barrels, boxes, and other packages, with their respective marks and numbers, expressing both in writing and by figures the quantity of every description.
  • “6. The nature of the contents of the packages and their gross weight.
  • “7. The above is also applicable to goods to be entered, in bond or in transit.
  • “8. And finally that the vessel brings no further cargo.
• “II. Should a portion of the entire cargo consist of iron, bars or plates, metal plates, lumber, jerked beef, salt, cocoa, and other merchandise in bulk, the specifications will be made according to metrical weights and measures in the duplicate manifest above mentioned.
• “III. The manifests will have to be certified by the Spanish consul or vice-consul, who will give one of the copies to the captain, retaining the other one, which he will forward to the intendente-general of whatever port the vessel is bound to, to serve as a voucher to the custom-house, on a comparison of the cargo.
• “IV. The captain on conclusion of his voyage will note in a copy of the manifest, which he will retain, the following additions:
  • “1. The goods that the crew may bring, apart from the manifest, not exceeding $100 for each individual.
  • “2. The provisions remaining from the vessel’s stores.
  • “3. War materials, ship’s utensils, and also the quantity of coals she brings for use, if a steamer.
• “V. The captain on arrival at port of destination, in the act of the visit by the board of health boat, will deliver to the chief custom-house officer the manifest certified by the consul, together with the general manifest of cargo.
• “VI. Should the vessel leave in ballast, the captain will present to the consul or vice-consul a duplicate note to that effect in the same manner as with a manifest, viz, the consul will certify both documents, a copy of which he will give to the captain, and reserve the other to forward to the intendente of the port of destination.
• “VII. Should the captain or supercargo, in anchoring in the port of destination, not present, on being visited, the manifest or note to the effect that the vessel comes in ballast, he will be subject to a fine of $200 for the want of said document. Should the consular certification not appear in the same be will have to pay the fine of $100 for this informality; and finally, should the requisites stated in rule No. 1 not be complied with, a fine of twenty-five dollars will be imposed. In like manner the captain or supercargo who, on request of the chief custom-house officer or whoever represents him, does not present, on being visited, the manifest and statement of the cargo, will incur a fine of $500 unless the vessel has been compelled to put in in distress, which fact will be proved by inquiry.
• “VIII. In case that any alteration should be observed in the above documents, the captains or supercargoes will be liable to be tried by a competent tribunal on the charge of forgery, whether the vessel came in Ballast or with cargo.
• “IX The presentation of the manifests is obligatory, in all ports, inlets, or anchorages of the island the vessel may put into, even when in distress, the custom-house officers retaining a copy and returning the original to the captain, so that he may present it at the port of destination.
• “X. The manifest may be exacted from the captain or supercargo by the revenuecutters within distance of twenty-three kilometers from the port of destination.
• “XI. All captains are obliged to present to the Spanish consul, or vice-consul, a memorandum of the approximated value of the cargo to serve as data for the commercial statistics which are under the charge of said functionary.
• “XII. The captain who does not declare the exact Spanish measurement of his vessel will pay the expenses incurred in measuring, should the expense be more than ten per cent.
• “XIII. A captain who, by stress of weather, or any other casualties, may be compelled to throw overboard any portion of the cargo, will make a note to that effect in the manifest, specifying, although it he in a general manner, the number, kind, and nature of the packages. He will also be obliged to make to the custom-house a declaration thereof, and present his log-book as a proof in confirmation of his assertions.
• “XIV. The baggage of passengers will undergo an examination in the customs warehouse, and in the event of any merchantable goods being found therein to the value of $100 they will be subjected to the duties as per tariff, on presentation of a detailed statement, which must be delivered to the collector of the custom-house by the interested parties. Should the value of the said goods be more than $100, and yet not exceed $200, they will incur double duty; moreover, should their value be in excess of the latter amount they will undergo confiscation, unless in either of the above instances the statement of the goods should have been previously presented; in which case the duties will only be exacted as per tariff.
• “XV. It is positively prohibited to make any addition or alteration in the manifest, or statement of the cargo, or the items, ‘to order,’ under the penalty imposed by the statutes for any difference arising between the said documents.
• “XVI. This formality in the manifest will not be exacted from captains or supercargoes of vessels proceeding from a place where there is no Spanish consul or vice-consul, or where their residence exceeds a distance of thirty kilometers from the port of sailing; but in order to be entitled to this exemption the cargo must consist of the following: hides, lumber, staves, logwood, coals, or horns; provided the articles be products of the country from whence the vessel sails, and that the voyage be direct, and the duty be paid upon the total amount of the goods.
• “XVII. All packages omitted from the manifest will be liable to confiscation, and, besides, involve the captain in a fine of double their value, provided the amount of the duties on the goods they contain be not in excess of $400. Should it exceed that sum, and the goods belong or be consigned to the owner, captain, or supercargo of the vessel, the fine will not be imposed, but the vessel, together with the freight earned and every other available property, will be confiscated.
• “XVIII. On the final discharge of the cargo, if one or more packages should be found missing from the manifest, without previous presentation of the invoice, the captain or supercargo will be looked upon as defrauders of the revenue, and a fine of $200 will be imposed for each of the packages missing.
• “XIX. If the owners or consignees of articles not manifested by the captain present to the authorities within forty-eight hours the invoice of the articles, they will not be involved in any responsibility, and their goods will be delivered to them; but the captain or supercargo in such a case will be subjected to a fine equal to the total value of the goods not manifested.
• “XX. Without the permission of the collector, and an examination of the chief custom-house officer, nothing will be allowed to be discharged. For the mere act of discharging any goods, even if they be of no value or free of duty, the captain or supercargo will be subjected to a fine of $1,000, and the goods taken in this manner forfeited; also the boat or lighter which conveys them; provided the said goods do not exceed $200 in value; but should the value exceed this sum, the fine will be removed and the vessel confiscated.
• “XXI. Nor will it either be permitted to transport in the bay goods in any quantity, however small, without the requisites prescribed; otherwise the captains or supercargoes will incur the established penalties.
• “XXII. Should goods in whatever quantity be discharged in a port not open to general commerce, the vessel that brings them will be confiscated, together with all her appurtenances.
• “XXIII. If on the clearance-visit made on board all vessels, previous to the delivery of the papers, an excess should be discovered in the cargo, said excess will be forfeited, and, besides, a fine equal to its value imposed on the captain.
• “XXIV. The confiscation and fine above referred to apply to all goods seized under attempt of fraudulent shipment.
• “XXV. In the event of the captain or supercargoes not being in a position to pay the amount of their fines, these, together with expenses incurred, will be borne by the vessel under their command, unless the consignees voluntarily assume the said fines.
• “XXVI. No manifest will be translated nor permits granted for discharging, unless the captains or consignees have previously presented the register of the vessel to the custom-house.

“This document, in three languages, viz, Spanish, French, and English, is given this day to Captain—— ——, of the vessel——, for his information, and who will sign a receipt for it.

“ The Interpreter:

—— ——.

“ The Custom-Souse Collector:

—— ——.

“ Custom House Inspector:

—— ——.”

It is also shown by the following extract from the dispatch from the consul-general at Havana, dated January 13, 1873, that there had been no real abatement of the causes of grievance as late as that date:

* * * * * * *

“This matter of fines is giving a great deal of trouble to the American shipping arriving in the island. The intendente has adopted the rule that the captains shall know and manifest every article, and the weight of the same, that he brings, and for every error or mistake they impose a fine of twenty-five dollars. If the bill of lading from which the captain makes his manifest is not correct he would have (in order to comply with the rule here) to open every package and weigh the same. I told the intendente that he should not expect to make foreign ship-masters detectives for his custom-house, but that he should hold the goods and make the consignees responsible for any false entries in the custom-house. He says that would be better, but their law or orders puts the fine on the vessel.

“Another annoyance is that a vessel may arrive here with a cargo, and be in port a month, reload, and when the captain goes to the custom-house to clear for sea, he may be told there is a fine on his vessel on account of some informality about his inward cargo. In many cases of this kind the fine (although manifestly unjust) has been paid rather than delay going to sea, and knowing the time it takes to settle such things with the officials. A case in point I had recently. The American ship Marcia C. Day, of New York, arrived here from Cardiff on the 21st of November, with a cargo of coal; the captain’s manifest called for so many tons, and that amount was entered by the consignees at the custom-house; the cargo discharged agreed with the captain’s manifest. When the vessel was ready to go to sea, about the 4th of January, 1873, the parties were informed that there was a heavy fine on the vessel because the Spanish consul’s certified manifest from Cardiff was one million kilograms less than the number of tons called for by the captain’s, and entered at the custom-house. The consignee informs me that he was told at the custom-house that the fine would be about $8,000. I at once addressed a note to the intendente, with a memorial of the consignee, which was never answered. After waiting six or seven days the captain determined to discharge his crew and abandon his vessel. I informed the intendente of his determination in a personal interview. He asked me not to do that, and I told him such would be the case if some decision was not promptly given in the case. The next day the vessel was allowed to go to sea without the fine being exacted.

“There is a case pending now at Sagua la Grande of the American brig G. de Zaldo, which has been fined one hundred and forty-nine times, at $25 each, for mistakes in manifest. One item on the manifest, 100 kegs of lard, they say should be tierces, and they impose one hundred fines of $25 each. Another item of 235 barrels of potatoes, 35 turned out to be beans, and they place thirty-five fines of $25 each, &c., &c.

“On the 18th of January, orders were issued in Madrid that no fine should be imposed on captains or supercargoes without the approval of the intendente; but no information of the promulgation of these orders in Cuba has yet been received. The shipowners in the United States engaged in the trade with the island of Cuba have, however, addressed a united memorial to the Secretary of State on this subject in the following language:

“‘To the Hon. Hamilton Fish,
Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.:

“‘Sir: We, the undersigned, citizens of the United States, and owners and agents of vessels trading between this port and the several ports of the island of Cuba, would respectfully state that the practice of imposing fines on vessels arriving in Cuban ports by the Spanish customs authorities thereof, for so-called errors in manifesting cargo, has become so onerous and burdensome that we feel constrained to solicit the interference of your Department in our behalf.

“‘The Spanish laws require that a vessel bound for Cuban ports shall make out manifests of cargo, the same to be certified by the Spanish consul residing at, or nearest to the port of loading, in which manifest the captain must declare positively and without qualification the several and different kinds of packages, their marks, the generic class of contents, as well as the weights and values of same, and for every instance where, on arrival in Cuba, the examination of the cargo shows a difference between the packages and the weights, and contents of same as actually found, and the same as manifested, the vessel is fined, while the goods escape all responsibility.

“‘That although the generic class of the goods is stated on the manifest, in compliance with the requirements of the Spanish laws, and said manifests accepted and certified to by the Spanish consul, yet the vessel is fined for not stating the specific class.

“‘That we are entirely dependent on shippers of cargo for information as to weights, values, and contents of packages shipped, from which to make out manifests, and irresponsible parties often give erroneous description of their part of cargo, resulting in fines imposed on the vessels, at times greatly in excess of the freight, against which we have no redress.

“‘That the custom authorities at the several ports in Cuba place different constructions on the laws relative to vessels, and the manifests of same, and fines have been imposed in one port for stating that for which the fines were imposed in another port for omitting.

“‘That the captain is only informed of any fines imposed on his vessel when he attempts to clear her at the custom-house, whereby he has either to pay the fines or detain the vessel indefinitely while contesting the same.

“‘That although we are willing and endeavor to comply with the said laws regulating manifests, yet, under the conflicting constructions placed on same by the different collectors of customs in Cuba, we find it impossible to do so, or to avoid fines.

“‘In cases where fines are imposed, an appeal to the superior authorities at Havana is permitted on payment, under protest, of said fines, but unless the amount of such fine is excessive, the delay occasioned by the detention of the vessel would exceed in most cases the amount of such fine even if recovered.

“‘We would respectfully represent to the Department that as the vessel, through her agents, is entirely dependent on the shippers of cargo for information necessary to describe on the manifest the contents and weights of packages shipped, the propriety of imposing fines on the goods erroneously described on manifest, instead of on the vessel, as then the shipper would have a sure remedy against the vessel in case of error on her part, or on the part of her agents, in making out manifests, while under existing regulations it is in most cases almost, if not impossible, for the vessel to recover the amount of fines from the shipper.

“‘Therefore your memoria lists pray that the Department will take such action in the matter as may seem most advisable to obtain such relief in the premises as they may be equitably entitled to.

“‘New York, January 13, 1873.

“‘Way dell & Co., Walch, Field & Way, Abiel Abbott, James Henry, Simpson, Clapp & Co., J. O. Ward, R. P. Buck & Co., Henry Moss, Borland, Dearborn & Co., John Chrystal, Carver & Barnes, Atlantic Mail Steamship Company, Charles Cooper, Evans, Ball & Co., Snow & Richardson, H. D. & I. W. Brockman, A. W. Dimock, president, Oliver Bryan, Thompson & Hunter, E. San dies y Dolz, Samuel Duncan, Brett, Son & Co., Warren Ray, Lunt Dras Brothers, R. H. Griffith, Snow & Burgess, H. W. Loud & Co., B. J. Wenberg, Jonas Smith & Co., B. T. Thurlow & Son, L. C. Wenberg, E. D. Hurlburt & Co., John Swan, F. Alexandre & Sons, Van Brunt & Brother, James E. Ward & Co., Boyd Hincken, I. B. Phillips & Sons, J. H. Winchester & Co., S. C. Loud & Co., C. H. Trumbull, Miller & Houghton, T. M. Mayhew & Co., Hand & Swan, James W. Elwell & Co.

“‘‘Boston, January 28, 1873.

“‘Bridge, Lord & Co., Baker & Humphrey, J. Baker & Co., Aug’t B. Perry & Co., Davis & Coker, Fitz Brothers & Co., Gilmore, Kingsbury & Co., Pitcher, Flitner & Co., J. R. Coombs, John S. Emery & Co., Enoch Benner &, Co., John Rich & Co., Kil-ham, Londt & Co., Alfred Blanchard & Co., Ambrose White, Cutter, McLean & Co., Mayo & Tyler, Love Joy, John Walter & Co., Peters & Chase, J. W. Linnell, Doane & Crowell, Fowle & Carroll, Franklin Curtis, Gammans & Co., William Haskins & Son, Edw. D. Peters & Co., Hinckley Brothers & Co., William McGilvery, Joseph Wilkerson & Co., Pendleton & Rose, Isaac Coombs, Thayer & Lincoln, Henry F. Lawrence.’”

It has also been suggested, in a letter, of which the following is a copy, that some relief can be afforded by the intendente in Cuba by giving such instructions” to the various collectors as may insure a uniform administration of the existing regulations:

“New York, March 20, 1873.

“Sir: We would respectfully call the attention of your Department to the fact that American vessels trading to ports in the island of Cuba are subjected to many fines, in consequence of the various constructions placed upon the customs regulations by the respective collectors of customs thereat, and would solicit such action on the part of your Department as may be necessary to secure, through the intendente at Havana, a uniform construction of these regulations at the several ports.

“Manifests made out in what we believe to be compliance with the customs regulations of the island are accepted in one port as correct, while in another port the vessel is fined, on a similar manifest, because that particular collector places a different construction on the regulations.

“This system of exacting fines has become so burdensome upon us, as owners of American vessels, that we feel constrained to submit the matter to your consideration, and to solicit your interference in our behalf.

“We are, very respectfully, yours,

‘“WAYDELL & CO.

Hon. Hamilton Fish,
Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.”

Since the foregoing was printed a dispatch has been received from General Sickles, inclosing a copy of new regulations, published December 29, 1872. The differences between these regulations and those of July 1, 1859, are as follows:

1st. To the sixth subdivision of regulation I, (page 14,) the following is added: “The words merchandise, victuals, provisions, or others of like vagueness, will not be allowed to determine the specific kind of merchandise.”

2d. Regulation VII (page 15) is modified so that the total of the fines for non-compliance with the requisites of regulation I shall not exceed $200.

3d. Three new regulations are added, under which regular mail steamers may carry ten tons of cargo without a consular certificate, but must have a manifest. If the cargo exceeds ten tons, such certificate is obligatory, but the captain or supercargo may declare up to six tons in addition without the certificate. If that figure is exceeded, the manifest will be held not to have been presented, and the regulations will be enforced. Fishing vessels, laden with fish or in ballast, need no consular certificate.

These modifications do not remove the features of the regulations which are now complained of, nor make less necessary the requests which General Sickles has been instructed to submit to the Spanish government.

appendix.

Legation of Sweden and Norway,
Washington, May 31, 1872.

1.—Note from the minister of Sweden and Norway at Washington to Mr. Fish, May 31, 1872.

Mr. Secretary of State: In obedience to the orders of my government, and referring to the conversation which I had the honor to have with you yesterday on this subject, I take the liberty of requesting the co-operation of the American Government in a measure to be taken jointly near the Spanish government by the other maritime powers, for the purpose of causing the Spanish custom-house regulations of July 15, 1870, to be so modified that the formalities may be simplified, which foreign captains arriving in Spain are obliged to observe, the formalities being at present a source of incessant annoyance, useless expenditures, and heavy fines. In order to attain this object the government of the King proposes that (as was done on the 13th of December last, at the suggestion of the British government, in relation to the quarantine laws of Spain) the representatives of the different maritime powers at Madrid be authorized to address to the Spanish government, after having come to an understanding with each other in the matter, simultaneous notes, requesting a revision of the customs regulations of 1870.

The King’s minister of Spain having already received the necessary instructions on this subject, and the suggestion of my government having been favorably received by the representatives of the other maritime powers at Madrid, I flatter myself that the American Government also will be pleased to join its efforts to ours in order to attain the desired end, and that it will give suitable instructions to its representative in Spain.

In the expectation of a favorable reply, I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you, Mr. Secretary of State, the assurances of my highest consideration.

• O. STENERSEN.
• Mr. Hamilton Fish,
  Secretary of State, &c., &c., &c.

2.—Memorandum handed to Mr. Fish by the British minister at Washington, June 6, 1872.

The attention of Her Majesty’s government has been of late repeatedly called to the fines which are enforced in Spanish ports for omission to comply with customs regulations. These fines are enforced for accidental omissions in ships’ manifests, as well as for non-compliance with customs regulations, and they have been levied even in cases where vessels put into Spanish ports in distress or had lost part of their cargo through marine casualties; no regard being paid to circumstances under which ships’ papers could not possibly be in exact conformity with the requirements of Spanish laws and regulations. Part of the evils complained of may probably be traced to the practice of these fines being, as is stated, shared between the customs authorities and the Spanish treasury.

It is obvious that the result of such a system must be to restrict commercial intercourse with a country which adopts it. Nevertheless it is a general rule that customs regulations in themselves are not matters for discussion between governments beyond a frank statement of facts and reasons. But, in the present instance, there appears to be grounds for an exception to this general rule. The Spanish customs regulations have not only been applied with harshness, hut in the case of some of the British ships, and doubtless of some of the ships of other nations, which have been thus fined, these regulations have been enforced in a manner which is at variance with international comity. It is, therefore, to be feared that discussions are likely to ensue, the tendency of which cannot fail to be to disturb the friendly relations between Spain and foreign powers.

Her Majesty’s government believe that the representatives of some other powers at Madrid are fully sensible of this unsatisfactory state of things. And it is possible that they may have reported cases of the enforcement of fines which have occurred to the ships of various powers. Numerous cases have already occurred to British shipping.

In one instance, owing to the accidental omission in the ship’s manifest of twelve barrels of olive oil shipped at an Italian port for an English port, a fine of nearly £500, or ten times the duty payable on olive oil, was enforced on the vessel touching at a Spanish port for some more cargo. The utmost concession obtained from the Spanish government was a remission of half the fine.

In another instance a fine of over 2,000 pesetas was inflicted on account of the weight of cargo being in Ibralian instead of Spanish kilograms, and a further fine of over 12,000 pesetas was levied in consequence of the steamer having discharged in excess of the weight stated in the bill of lading. In spite of various representations to the Spanish government, no remission of these fines has been obtained.

In a third instance, the vessel was compelled by stress of weather and want of coal to enter a Spanish port, where the custom-house authorities seized some small articles belonging to the officers and crew and fined the ship, in the sum of about £90, on account of the above articles not being in the ship’s manifest, and the Spanish government justified the action of the customs authorities on the ground that this vessel was in the transit trades. These proceedings are held to be contrary to the comity of nations.

In a fourth instance a fine of $1,450 was imposed for the accidental omission from the manifest of one item of the cargo, and this liable only to a low duty. A remission of half the fine only was obtained.

In a fifth instance the steamer was fined 1,500 pesetas for not having the manifest presented and certified at the neighboring port to a quarantine station where it had been detained, although the captain proceeded on his voyage without so doing with the full authority of the civil governor. Moreover, the British vice-consul was held responsible for these fines, and ordered to deposit 1,000 pesetas within twenty-four hours. The Spanish government maintained their position in the affair, but their definitive decision has not yet been received.

In a sixth instance a ship has been declared liable to a fine of about $850 on account of the captain turning English tons into kilograms, at the mistaken rate of two pounds to the kilogram!

In a seventh instance a fine of over 12,000 reals was imposed on account of a ship carrying extra anchors and chains not in the manifest, but required by English law!

In an eighth instance a fine of about £1,134 was inflicted because by a clerical error the Spanish consul in England had stated the number of some barrels at two thousand, whereas the true number of two hundred was accurately stated in the manifest!

The foregoing are instances out of many cases, and are referred to as illustrative of the manner in which these fines are levied by the Spanish custom-house authorities.