A copy of the reply made to the representative of the French being, as I am
informed, identical with that made to the representative of the German
government, together with a copy of the paragraphs of the reply made to the
representative of the English Government, which are omitted in the other
replies, I herewith transmit to you, with translations.
I am advised that the representatives named propose to transmit, at once,
such replies to their several governments for further instructions.
Of course, in view of the position heretofore taken by the Haytian Government
on this subject, such replies were to be expected.
[Inclosure 1 in No.
133.—Translation.]
Office
of the Secretary of State of Foreign Affairs,
Port au Prince
,
March 7, 1879.
Mr. Minister: I have the honor to acknowledge
the reception of your dispatch of the 23d of January last, as the result
of an exchange of communications between the cabinets of Paris, Berlin,
and London, you addressed me to protest against the provisions of the
law of the 23d of August, 1877, relative to consular taxes.
Permit me, in the first place, to recall the following principles, which
seem to me to be a truth incontestable. The modification of the tariff
of customs of a people is a legal measure against which one cannot be
opposed. It exercises there its right of sovereignty, whether it applies
after its conviction and acquired experience the principle of the
protective system with all its exclusions, or the commercial liberty in
all its extension. In the case under consideration Hayti has not made
engagements with any nation that its tariff of customs should never be
modified, and, in doing it, it has not, I believe, injured any
international contract.
I am about to have the honor to submit to your appreciation some
arguments which already I have had occasion to formulate upon the
subject of the legitimacy of our consular taxes.
It is not correct to say that the law of the 23d of August, 1877, has had
for object to create new resources for the Haytian treasury, “in levying
upon foreign commerce a veritable tax.” The charges of visa of invoices
of merchandise sent to Hayti constitute an impost which weighs only upon
the Haytian consumer. Foreign commerce pays them at our consulates and
is reimbursed thereof with a commission in advance by the importer of
Hayti, who in his turn adds them to the current price of the merchandise
offered to the consumption of the country. It is therefore in reality
this last one only who has to his charge the sums paid for consular
visas.
The consular tax received from 1858 to 1877 never gave place to any
contestation; the modifying law against which you protest to-day has had
nevertheless for effect to regulate, after a manner more conformable to
justice and equity, the receipt of charges of consular visa, in
substituting charges proportional to charges fixed. I cannot believe
that a proposition of this kind can be of a nature to cause
disapprobation.
All governments receive consular charges, collected according to the mode
which they believed it right to establish in conforming themselves to
the usages, to the political customs of their country, and to the
necessity of the moment; no one can contest in these governments the
right to modify their consular tariffs, to lessen them or to increase
them.
Another argument works in our favor. Does not one often see a state
subject to taxation, negotiable paper, stocks, bonds, &c., and even
the annuities upon the national, state, and public funds abroad? The
foreign holders residing upon the territory of another state, are they
not really governed by the legislation of a country which is, not
theirs? Do they not pay that impost received to the profit of another
state? A fact of this kind does not raise, notwithstanding any
reclamation on the part of governments, and does not provoke, even,
discussion by publicists.
The law of the 23d of August, 1877, in its consequence and its results,
does it offer anything which can be compared to the fact which I have
just had the honor to cite to you?
I have only submitted here, in response to your dispatch, the general
points of a debate which may be extended, and the details of which, when
they shall be made clear, will show the question in its true light.
Nevertheless, I hope, Mr. Minister, that the considerations which I have
just presented will suffice to convince you of the legitimacy of the
imposition, the maintenance of which I here defend, and for which the
government has asked the vote of the Corps Legislatif as much in point
of duty as in point of right.
Be pleased to accept, Mr. Minister, the assurances of the distinguished
sentiments with which I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,
The secretary of state of foreign affairs,
