The law making the decision of the Commissioner of Navigation “final”
on “all questions” relating to the collection of tonnage tax, and to
the refund of such tax, when collected erroneously or illegally, the
matter has been submitted to that officer, and I transmit herewith a
report in which he expresses the opinion that, under the existing
legislation, there is no authority for reducing the rate to 3–15
cents per ton, as requested by the Government of Sweden and
Norway.
The inclosures of your letter are returned herewith.
Mr. Morton
to Mr. Fairchild
.
Treasury Department, Bureau of
Navigation,
Washington,
D. C.
,
June 20,
1887.
Confidential.]
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge
the receipt of the letter from the Secretary of State, dated the
2d instant, marked “Confidential,” in which he refers to
previous correspondence with the Treasury Department touching
the claim of certain foreign governments under treaty provisions
to the benefit of the reduced tonnage tax specified in the acts
of June 26, 1884, and June 19, 1886.
This communication relates especially to a claim by Sweden and
Norway that vessels proceeding from that country to the. United
States should be admitted to entry in this country on the same
terms as vessels proceeding to the United States from the West
Indies, etc.
My opinion upon the matter is sought for the reason that “on all
questions relating to the collection of tonnage tax and to the
refund of such tax when collected erroneously or illegally” the
act of July 5, 1884, makes the decision of the Commissioner of
Navigation “final.”
It appears that the merits of the claim, so far as it is founded
on a just and strict construction of the laws and of the treaty
bearing upon the matter, are not acknowledged by the Secretary
of State, but that in view of the action taken by the Government
of Sweden and Norway on a similar claim made by Mr. Clay in
behalf of the United States, he feels that the Government of the
United States is in honor bound to take favorable action. He
therefore requests specific information whether the Treasury
Department is prepared to put into operation at once the 3–15
cent rate in respect to the vessels of Sweden and Norway coming
from those countries.
In imposing the tax which said Government now seeks to have
reduced it seems obvious that Congress either was not aware of
the provisions of article 8 of the treaty of 1827 or did not
construe them in accordance with the claim now made by the
Government of Sweden. The tax complained of was imposed,
therefore, upon all vessels which should be entered in the
United States from any foreign ports, with certain exceptions,
not pertinent in the consideration of this case. The language of
the statutes shows it to have been the intention of Congress
that no exception should be made to said provisions by reason of
any previous law or treaty, except as mentioned below. Under the
provisions of the law, if it shall be shown that action in
regard to the matter can be taken in accordance with the proviso
of section 14 of the act of June 26, 1884, as amended by section
11 of the act of June 19, 1886, and in accordance with the offer
to the Government of Sweden, made in the proposed draught which
the Secretary of State inclosed for your information, Swedish
and Norwegian vessels, as well as others, could be relieved of
the tax. Should the foreign government accede to that proposal,
immediate action could be taken in the manner prescribed by law
to relieve its” vessels from tonnage dues when arriving in the
United States from those countries, without awaiting further
action by Congress as to cases arising thenceforth.
I have to state, however, that in the absence of further action
by Sweden and Norway of the character alluded to above, I am
satisfied that there is no legal authority to prescribe the
collection of the 3–15 cent rate in the case of vessels from
those countries, and that the specific inquiry of the Secretary
of State upon, that point must be [Page 1907] answered in the negative, the legislation
fixing a higher rate of dues being absolute, later than the
treaty, and therefore paramount.
It would undoubtedly be proper for this department to cooperate
with the Department of State, if necessary, in any effort that
may be made to secure legislation authorizing compliance with
the treaty as now construed or providing for a refund of the
moneys claimed to have been already erroneously collected,
although it is presumed that the tax was paid from freights
increased to meet the exaction of the dues.
The inclosures of the letter from the Secretary of State are
returned herewith.
Respectfully, yours,
C. B. Morton,
Commissioner.
