Department of State,
Washington, October 5,
1894.
[Inclosnre.]
Mr. Carlisle to
Mr. Gresham.
Treasury Department,
Washington, September 28,
1894.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 25th instant, transmitting a
translation of a note from the Spanish minister at this Capital,
asking for an interpretation “of paragraph 165 of the new tariff law
in regard to lead.”
The minister states that “the paragraph establishes that
argentiferous ore and all other ores that may contain lead shall pay
three-fourths of a cent per pound on the lead contained in them, but
it does not specify the duties to be levied on the silver contained
in lead ores.”
The minister further states that he “would also desire the honorable
Secretary of the Treasury to state whether the sworn declaration
made by the consignee that the lead unshipped by him in the United
States is not argentiferous will be sufficient, or whether, in spite
of said declaration, the lead will have to undergo critical analysis
at the customhouse on landing.”
In compliance with your request for such information as will enable
your Department to reply to the minister’s note, I have to state
that silver, as such, when contained in imported ores, is not
subject to duty; that the rates of duty specified in paragraphs 165
and 166 of the act of August 28, 1894, are applicable only to
merchandise not coming within the scope of the proviso to the latter
paragraph, in virtue whereof the articles enumerated in either of
the two paragraphs, when imported from a country imposing an export
duty upon “lead ore or lead dross, or silver ore containing lead,”
exported to the United States, remain subject to the rates of duty
fixed by the act of October 1, 1890.
I have further to state that all lead ores, and silver ores
containing lead, are sampled and assayed on importation
independently of any statements of the consignor as to their
contents, but that lead imported in pigs or bars, or as dross, is
neither assayed nor analyzed.
Respectfully, yours,
