No. 226.
Mr. Evarts
to Sir Edward Thornton.
Washington, July 14, 1879.
Sir: Referring to your note of the 9th of May last, and my acknowledgment thereof on the 13th of the same month, in relation to the Haytian tariff of consular fees under the decree of August 23, 1877, and to the protests of the representatives at Port au Prince of the United States, Great Britain, Germany, and France, and the reply of the Haytian Government thereto, I have now the honor to communicate to you, in conformity with the desire expressed by the Marquis of Salisbury, the views of this government in relation to that question.
The Government of Hayti, prior to the reply of the 6th of March last to the foreign representatives named, had seen fit on the 4th of February to transfer the discussion of the question to Washington, so far as this government was concerned, by a very fall and argumentative note, addressed to me by Mr. Stephen Preston, the Haytian minister in this country. Although much more extended, the note of Mr. Preston in the main merely repeats and reaffirms the reasoning and conclusions of the communications made to the foreign representatives by M. Ethéart, and, like those, they appeared to this government, as well as to that of Her Majesty, as appears from your note, to be altogether unsatisfactory, and reply was so made to Mr. Preston on the 13th ultimo. In that reply the Haytian minister was informed, with respect to that portion of his note which related to the authentication by the consular officers of Hayti in this country of the invoices of the cargoes of vessels bound to the ports of that country, that the charge of one per cent. on values for that proceeding is, after the most deliberate consideration, believed to be unduly exorbitant, and tantamount to an export tax, which it does not comport with the dignity of this government to allow to be exacted by any foreign authority within the jurisdiction of the United States. It was asserted that, even if the exaction in the form in which it is imposed were moderate and unobjectionable as to amount, still, if it were once acquiesced in, this would be a bar to any objection which this government might make if the consular fee were afterward to be much augmented. The inexpediency of subjecting exports from this country to Hayti to a tax of the kind was further illustrated by the consideration that, owing to the dangers of the sea and other causes, many cargoes do not reach their destination.
The Government of the United States being, by its Constitution, expressly prohibited from levying an export tax, it cannot allow any foreign power to exercise here, in substance or in form, a right of sovereignty denied to itself. No denial was made of the right of the Haytian Government, at its discretion, so far as this may not have been limited by treaty, to impose duties on the cargoes of vessels from this country arriving in Haytian ports, but it was complained most positively that the [Page 502] present grievance of a consular fee of this character exacted in our ports is, in its form, derogatory to the sovereignty of the United States, and that this character was not removed from it by the Haytian citation of the axioms of political economy that all duties are ultimately paid by the consumer. In view of all this, it was hoped that the Haytian Government would see the expediency of changing its regulations upon that subject without any unnecessary delay.
To the note, thus briefly summarized, no reply has as yet been received from Mr. Preston.
I have, &c.,