Mr. Porter to Mr. Foster.
Washington, June 8, 1885.
Sir: Referring to late instructions in the case of duties levied in Barcelona on a shipment of old iron from Havana by Messrs. Hamel & Co., * * * the question occurs whether the royal order of January 7, 1885, is a Treasury ruling interpreting existing law and applying it to a specific case under consideration, or whether it is in fact a new rule imposing a duty on what has not heretofore been dutiable. Mr. Hamel claims that it falls under the latter category. If so, it would be clearly unjust to make it retroactive and collect back duties on entries heretofore admitted free, and it would, be equally a hardship to apply it in the case of shipments on the way before the new rule was promulgated in the place of shipment. Treasury rulings deciding the application of existing rules of law are of course within the competence of every Government, but even here their retroactive enforcement may involve great hardship, especially where the ground of the decision itself is so open to controversy as in this case.
I am, &c.,