It will be observed that the commission decides against the
construction put upon the phrase by Mr. de Lesseps, a judgment which
would condemn the company to refund the tolls which have been paid
under protest since July 1, 1872. It is not, however, supposed that
Mr. de Lesseps will submit to this decision without a struggle but
that he will seek some other method of obtaining his own way, which,
as a solution of all difficulties, that eminent gentlemans seems to
consider to be his mission upon earth.
[Inclosure.]
[From the “Levant Herald.” July 17, 1873.]
the suez canal.
Vizieral letter to the
Khedive.
On Tuesday the letter addressed to the Khedive by the grand
vizrer, and containing the interpretation given by the Forte to
article 17 of the Suez Canal concession, was communicated to the
foreign representatives at Constantinople.
The following is a translation of this document:
Highness: As your highness is aware,
the Suez Canal Company was in the habit,
[Page 1122]
from the opening of the canal up
to the 1st July, 1872, of levying a due upon vessels passing
through the canal of 10 francs for every ton registered upon the
ship’s papers, without this mode of levying being confirmed by
the imperial government. Since the 1st July, however, the
company has, also without the sanction of the Turkish
government, levied the same due according to a new system which
it has adopted for the measurement of vessels. This measure did
not fail to excite the protests of foreign powers.
It was agreed between the latter and the canal company to refer
to the imperial government for an interpretation of the clause
in the concession accorded by the Egyptian administration to the
Suez Canal Company, on the 2 Rebi-ul-enel, 1272, and confirmed
by imperial firman on the 2 Zileadé,
1282, whereby it is laiddown that the due upon vessels passing
through the canal shall not exceed 10 francs per “ton of
capacity.”
Consequently, and seeing the necessity of removing all grounds
for the existing protests by elucidating this clause, the
council of ministers has deliberated on the question, and has
studied it attentively and profoundly. Now, in ratifying the act
of concession above mentioned, the Porte has never, in reality,
understood the expression “ton of capacity” occurring in a
certain passage of the concession, otherwise than in an absolute
sense; it has understood the expression in the sense of the
tonnage specified on the papers of vessels belonging to
different nationalities. For it is obvious that vessels of every
nation traversing the canal must be subjected, according to the
provisions of the concession, to an equal tax. As, however, the
different governments have not yet adopted a uniform system of
measurement for their vessels, it was necessary to employ the
expression “ton of capacity” in general, so that the expression
should be applied to the uniform measurement which would later
on be adopted by every government as well as by the imperial
government for its marine. According to this order of ideas, it
would be natural to adopt a system of measurement which would
give the available capacity with the closest approximation. As,
therefore, the Moorson system is evidently the one which
approaches the most of all the existing systems of measurement
to the available capacity of vessels, the Sublime Porte is of
opinion that the net tonnage fixed according to that system
should be adopted. In case, however, that the powers, or M. de
Lesseps, should not agree to maintain this system, it will be
necessary to convoke an international commission for the purpose
of choosing an available system of measurement. For it is
evident that the imperial government cannot select a definitive
tonnage measurement which has not yet been approved and adopted
by the other powers.
Such being the result of the debate of the council of ministers,
and His Imperial Majesty to whom their decision has been
referred having approved of this decision, I hereby inform your
highness of the said decision, in order that your highness may
take your measures in consequence.
Sublime Porte, 17 Djemazi-ul-evvel,
1290.
