The department is gratified to learn of the progress made.
I inclose herewith for your information a copy of a dispatch from the
consul-general at Beirut, in answer to the department’s instructions
directing him to ascertain and report whether the claims of other
foreign institutions of like character for the return of duties
similarly collected are being presented.
[Inclosure.]
Consul-General Bergholz to the Assistant
Secretary of State.
[Extracts.]
American Consulate-General,
Beirut, Syria, January 23, 1906.
No. 35.]
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of department dispatch No. 16 of December 16, 1905,
regarding the claim against the Ottoman Government of the Syria
mission of the board of foreign missions of the Presbyterian Church
of the United States of America, commonly known as the “American
mission,” and of the Syrian Protestant College, commonly known as
the “American college,” for the reimbursement of duties collected on
goods which should have been admitted free under the treaties and
capitulations, and directing me to advise the department if the
claims of other foreign institutions of like character for the
return of duties similarly collected are being presented.
The result of inquiries made at the consulates-general of France,
Great Britain, and Germany, is as follows:
France appears to have received for her mission schools and
educational establishments somewhat better treatment than the United
States, as they were permitted to pay under protest, or what is
usually called here “on deposit,” from the time the customs
immunities were withdrawn from all nationalities, in 1899, except
Germany, to the Mytilene settlement in November of 1901, while our
missions and schools were deprived of the right to pay under protest
since 1900. As a result of the naval demonstration off Mytilene by a
French fleet and the temporary occupation of a part of that island
the customs immunities were wholly restored to France. Since then
the amounts paid in duties, on deposit, by the French missions and
schools have been recovered from the Porte through the embassy and
paid over to the establishments which had disbursed them.
Great Britain has fared, as regards her schools, about the same as
the United States, but seems to have retained the right of paying on
deposit, since the immunities were withheld in 1899, while we were
deprived of the privilege in 1900. She has, as yet, made no demand
upon the Porte for the return of the moneys paid in duty on deposit
by her schools, as the embassy has not yet been successful in
obtaining their recognition. There has been considerable
correspondence between the British consulate-general and the embassy
at Constantinople, with a view of securing official recognition of
the schools in Syria. A list of the English schools has been sent to
Constantinople, but it was not found quite satisfactory, and a
corrected list was forwarded last summer. My British colleague is in
hopes his embassy will shortly secure the necessary recognition, and
when it comes he “will not fail to apply for the restitution of the
customs duties paid by said schools under protest.”
Germany has never been denied the customs privileges, which the rest
of the powers were deprived of in 1899, but has continued in the
full enjoyment of the immunities notwithstanding that neither the
hospital nor the Deaconness School hold an imperial firman.
You will have noticed that the consulates-general, who furnished me
with the information given above, invariably speak of the sums paid
in duty “on-deposit,” or using the term better known with us, “under
protest.” Paying under protest carries the question of the customs
administration at Constantinople,
[Page 1383]
and in case the protest is sustained the duty
is refunded. Neither France, Great Britain, nor Germany, appear ever
to have been denied the right to pay duties under protest, since the
withholding of the immunities in 1899 from the powers except
Germany.
A telegram received from our minister at Constantinople announces
that instructions have been sent the customs here directing that the
immunities be again accorded the college. A later dispatch reports
that the director of customs has been directed to allow the mission
the privilege of paying duty until further notice under protest. The
members of these institutions are highly appreciative of the zeal
with which the department insists upon the full recognition of their
rights. A copy of my communication, No. 41, of January 18, 1906, to
the minister acknowledging the receipt of his telegrams, is
enclosed.
I am, etc.,
