Acting under the instruction and pursuing the line of conduct indicated in my
dispatch to the Department, No. 351, I have the honor now to forward a copy
of a note transmitted to the Sublime Porte day before yesterday, and to
remark that it is identical with a note delivered at the same time by Mr.
Nelidow, the Russian ambassador.
You will please observe that while the paper is quite energetic in tone, it
nevertheless leaves a door open to compromise upon the basis to reduction of
storage charges. That in fact is the end aimed at by the identic
presentment. A proposition to settle without some new and decided turn given
the affair would have been simple waste of time. Moreover, a compromise, if
accomplished now, will be with the Russians conjointly, and upon terms of
absolute equality. I could see no better mode of obtaining this latter
point, and of putting an end to sales from the decks of small vessels, a
practice so ruinous to our interests, than by square co-operation with my
colleague in the manner here indicated.
[Inclosure in No. 358.]
Mr. Wallace to
Aarifi Pasha.
Legation of the United States,
Constantinople, March 24,
1884.
note verbale.
The legation of the United States had the honor to repeatedly declare
most emphatically, by its notes and verbally, that it could not accept
the views of the Sublime Porte relative to the right of monopoly granted
to the depots of petroleum of Sami Bey, at Tchiboukei, and to the taxes
levied on this account by the concessionary.
The United States legation in demonstrating that the taxes in question
constituted an onerous charge on the commerce of petroleum and gave rise
to just complaints on the part of American importers, requested amongst
other things that the company of Sami Bey be required to reduce them to
an equitable rate, failing in which the legation of the United States
reserved to American importers to avail themselves of the right to
establish their own depots in conformity with the exigencies of public
security, without prejudice, however, to the question of indemnities to
be claimed for the exhorbitant dues arbitrarily exacted of them.
Until now, notwithstanding the importance of this question as regards the
commercial interests involved, no sufficient answer has been given by
the Sublime Porte to the legitimate complaints of the legation, nor has
it been informed of the result of the deliberations of the commission
ad hoc appointed at the Sublime Porte,
although it has made its report some time since.
The legation of the United States cannot insist too earnestly on the
urgency of regulating, without further delay and in a satisfactory
manner, this question whose international character is so clear; in
fact, the régime to which the commerce in petoleum is now subjected is a
direct violation of the stipulations of the treaties and the
capitulations in vigor, in virtue of which articles of importation into
Turkey are liable to a fixed customs duty only and cannot be subjected
to any other imposition. The Sublime Porte will be pleased to
acknowledge that the motive for the storage of petroleum, which is an
inflamable matter, being altogether for considerations of public
security, should not be made a source of revenue for the state, and
still less for a private company. Therefore the tax levied on this
account should be in strict proportion with the expenses of installation
and the maintenance of the depots.
Any sum levied over and above the amount necessary for this purpose
constitutes an absolutely illegal charge. Such is manifestly the case as
regards the tax collected by Sami Bey, which, according to the data
collected by the legation, amounts to nearly the treble of the sum to
which he might claim to cover his expenses and have a reasonable
profit.
As regards the article of the regulation of the port of Constantinople
prescribing the storage of petroleum in a depot fitted up with a view to
public security, it cannot be quoted in support of the pretension of
Sami Bey, as it was only with the consideration in view that the
representatives of the powers gave their assent to that article, and
most assuredly it was not with the intention of creating a new source of
taxes and an onerous monopoly for commerce.
Therefore, and considering the increasing importance of the commerce of
petroleum for the United States, it is the duty of the United States
legation to protest against the present state of things, which is unjust
as it is injurious to the interests of its commerce, and to demand
prompt redress for the losses it has sustained.
In case the Ottoman Government should not, without delay, cause the taxes
collected by Sami Bey & Co. to be reduced to an equitable rate, to
be established in concert with the powers interested, the American
legation will find itself under the necessity of insisting upon the
indisputable right of American merchants to establish depots of
petroleum of their own under more favorable conditions, as well as to
require an indemnity for what may be due them for the violation, as
regards them, of the liberty of commerce.
