Mr. Draper to Mr.
Sherman.
Embassy
of the United States,
Rome,
Italy, November 1,
1897. (Received November 16.)
No. 61.]Sir: Referring to your instruction, No. 14, of
date July 7, 1897, which inclosed copies of letters from the Ansonia
Clock Company of New York, and directed me to look into their complaint
that the Italian minister of commerce refused to admit their clocks into
Italy as clocks fitted up with “American movements,” thus preventing the
continuation of their business with this country, also to present the
matter to the attention of the Italian Government, and to do all I could
to remove the impression that the works manufactured by this company
were not “American movements,” and referring to my dispatch No. 25, of
date July 27 last, I now have to say:
It seemed wise, in my judgment, before approaching the Italian Government
with a complaint, to learn privately and exactly what their attitude was
toward the importation of clocks generally and toward those having
American movements in particular, and Mr. Hector de Castro, consul
general of the United States at Rome, kindly undertook to make the
necessary inquiries at the Italian custom-house department and
elsewhere, if it seemed desirable. The result of Mr. de Castro’s
investigations will be read in detail in the inclosures herewith. I take
this opportunity to express my high appreciation of the thoroughness
with which the consul-general conducted his examination.
It seems certain that the trouble is largely due to the fact that the
term “American system” (sistema Americano) was
not closely enough defined when the commercial treaty with Austria
Hungary and with Germany was made, for, as I understand the
complication, it is through the clauses of this treaty, in connection
with the favored-nation clause in our own commercial treaties with
Italy, that the Ansonia Clock Company looks for different treatment from
what it has been receiving. American manufacturers mean one thing by the
term “American movement” or “American system,” while the Italian
authorities mean another. What
[Page 356]
the Italian authorities regard as the American system is limited to .one
specimen of the cheap, round, nickel-plate American clock with an alarm
bell on top, which was exhibited and examined, as they say, when the
treaty was under consideration; and they have ruled that nothing but
that one kind of clock shall come into the Kingdom under the treaty. It
simply must look like the picture in the official circular, as will be
seen in inclosure No. IV. The quality of the works, the quality of the
casing had nothing to do with it. Clocks which look like the one that
they had seen when the treaty was signed are to them the entire American
system, and nothing else can be imported that looks different, no matter
whether it was made in America or was better or worse in any or every
respect. The collector-general says frankly that the only reason why the
Italian authorities agreed to allow the clocks to come in at all at the
reduced rate (namely, 1.56 lire per kilo on the weight instead of 5 lire
on each clock and 1.50 lire per kilo of weight in addition) was because
they knew that the number must be limited. To give anything but a narrow
construction to the clause of the treaty would have been to throw open
the Italian market to large importations of clocks of different outside
appearance. Naturally enough, perhaps, they do not mean to allow that.
Their present position may be an afterthought based upon a technicality
of appearance, but there is no doubt about their position.
If you have any further instructions in the matter I shall be glad to
receive them. I may add that I have to-day written to the Ansonia Clock
Company, telling them that I had reported to the Department of State in
regard to their complaint, and referring them to you for further
information.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 61.]
Mr. de Castro
to Mr. Draper.
Consulate-General of the United States,
Rome, October 28, 1897.
Sir: In accordance with the request of the
embassy to elicit from the Italian custom-house department some
satisfactory explanation in regard to their tariff laws regulating
the collection of duties upon the so-called clocks of “sistema
Americano,” I have the honor to transmit to you herewith translated
copies of the correspondence exchanged upon the subject by me with
the said department.
I am, etc.,
[Subinclosure 1 in No.
61.—Translation.]
Mr. Mozzo to
Mr. de Castro.
Milan, September 19,
1897.
Sir: As agreed upon in our conversation of
a few days since, I take the liberty of submitting to you a few
remarks on the subject of the application of the Italian tariff to
“clocks, so called, of American system.”
Among the sample clocks the embassy now holds you will find two round
clocks, the Spark and the Bee Alarm, which the Italian ministry of
finance considers as clocks so called of American system because
they are inclosed in cylindrical cases. Besides these you will find
two other clocks, the Midge and the Pert Gem, which,
[Page 357]
owing to the fact of their being
inclosed in rectangular casings, are not considered as “American
clocks;” consequently, instead of paying 1.50 lire per kilo, as is
the case with the Spark and the Bee Alarm (when accompanied by
certificate of origin), they are made to pay 5 lire apiece plus 1.50
lire per kilo for the casing.
The Italian Government, in its ill-defined tariff, makes a special
item of “American clocks,” but instead of distinguishing the clocks
by the “works,” it applies its tariff according to the casing; so
that, provided a clock is inclosed in a cylindrical case (like the
Spark and the Bee Alarm), no matter whether the “works” be of the
finest workmanship, it is-considered as an “American clock” and
taxed accordingly. On the other hand, if the works of a “clock, so
called, of American system” are inclosed in a case of any shape
(like the Midge and the Pert Gem), they are taxed at the rate of 5
lire apiece for the works plus 1.50 lire per kilo for casing.
Hoping you will forgive my having entered into so many details, and
that yon will succeed in obtaining from the ministry of finance of
Italy its consideration of the matter,
I am, etc.,
[Subinclosure 2. in No.
61.]
Mr. de Castro
to Mr. Busca.
Consulate-General of the United States,
Rome, September 23, 1897.
Sir: I have been instructed by my
Government to prepare a detailed report on the commerce of the
United States with Italy.
Among other items I find that of “clocks, so called, of American
system” (customs tariff No. 251, letter C). I should be glad to know
the exact meaning of said item and what articles are included in
that category. I therefore beg that you will kindly give the desired
information.
I take this opportunity to thank you for the numerous courtesies you
are continually extending to us, and to say that I would gladly
reciprocate them should occasion therefor arise.
I am, etc.,
[Subinclosure 3 in No.
61.—Translation.]
Mr. Busca to
Mr. de Castro.
Ministry of Finance, Office of the Collector-General of
Customs,
Rome, October 2,
1897.
Sir: In reply to your esteemed letter of
the 23d ultimo I hasten to transmit to you the inclosed circular
issued by this office in 1892, by which you will learn what the
Italian customs office intends by “clocks, so called, of American
system.”
Yours, respectfully,
Busca,
The Collector-General.
[Subinclosure 4 in No.
61.]
Mr. de Castro
to Mr. Busca.
Consulate-General of the United States,
Rome, October 8, 1897.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of and to thank you for your letter of the 2d instant,
inclosing a copy of the circular published by your office on May 30,
1892, relating to “clocks, so called, of American system.”
I beg that you will allow me to return to the same subject to ask you
what would be the tax on the same “clockworks” if, instead of being
inclosed in the cylindrical case, as shown by the illustration in
the aforesaid circular, they were inclosed in a case of different
shape and more expensive, though they were manufactured in America,
and their origin were proved to the satisfaction of the honorable
collector-general’s office.
I have been requested to clear this point by American manufacturers
who claim that if the clocks are not inclosed in a case similar in
shape to that of which a drawing is in margin of the above-quoted
circular, they were taxed at the rate of 5 lire apiece for the clock
work plus 1.50 lire per quintal for the casing, although the clock
work was identical to that of the “clocks, so called, of American
system.”
I should feel much obliged if you would kindly make clear to me this
point, which is of the utmost importance to one of our chief
industries.
Thanking you in advance for the information it will please you to
give me on the subject, I am, etc.,
[Subinclosure 5 in No.
61.—Translation.]
Mr. Busca to
Mr. de Castro.
Ministry of Finance,
Office of the
Collector-General of Customs,
Rome, October 22,
1897.
Sir: In your esteemed letter of the 8th
instant you inquired as to this ministry’s interpretation of the
regulations of the commercial treaties with Austria-Hungary and
Germany relating to “clocks, so called, of American system.”
In reply I beg to state as follows:
The general customs tariff (No. 251, letter A–2) fixes the duty on
clocks at 5 lire apiece plus the duty on the casing.
A favor treaty was established with Austria-Hungary and Germany for
clocks, so called, of “American system;” but in establishing this
favor treatment it was intended that it should apply only to the
ordinary alarm clocks with plain casing of sheet nickel-plated metal
of the pattern a drawing of which illustrated the circular I had the
pleasure of transmitting to you. It was in consideration of the
limited extension of this concession that it was agreed in the
treaties to collect a duty of 1.50 lire per quintal on clocks of
said species, casing included, thus renouncing to the provisions of
the general tariff, according to which an extra duty is collected on
the casing.
You will easily understand that in granting this exemption from tax
on the casing it was intended that this favor treatment should apply
only to clocks the casing of which corresponds to that of the clocks
produced as samples and examined during the course of the commercial
conference. All controversies arising on the subject have been
settled on this principle, and all clocks were excluded from favor
treatment which, although having the clock work of so-called
“American system,” were inclosed in casings of material and shape
different from that of the alarm clocks of the pattern described in
the above quoted circular.
Trusting that I have satisfactorily replied to your inquiry, I am,
etc.,
Busca,
The Collector-General.
