The French Ambassador to the Secretary of State.

[Translation.]

Mr. Secretary of State: My Government, to which I delivered, on my last visit to France, your excellency’s letter and memorandum of June 19 last, concerning the commercial relations between the two countries, has examined, with all the care that the importance of the questions involved demanded, the propositions formulated by the Federal Government in reply to ours. The result of the examination has just been communicated to me, and I hasten to bring it to your excellency’s knowledge.

As stated in the above-mentioned papers, the American authorities declared they could not be satisfied with the reduction offered by us on Porto Rican coffee as an offset for the reduction on our champagne and sparkling wines of $2 per dozen bottles, provided in section 3 of the American customs tariff act of July 24, 1897.

The figures and arguments on which this declaration is based do not appear admissible to my Government.

In the first place, the assertion is made, in Paragraph I of your excellency’s memorandum, that the extension granted in 1902 to Algeria and Porto Rico of the reduced duties provided in the commercial agreement of 1898 could not be understood unless the clause respecting Porto Rican coffee were continued in force for an indefinite period, as the advantages derived from the extension would otherwise be too great for France and too small for the United States.

My Government finds it impossible to concur in this view. The granting of the minimum tariff to Porto Rican coffee was, under the arrangement signed August 20, 1902, by the representatives of both countries, strictly limited as to time, and whenever an extension of time was consented to, by a voluntary decision of the Government of the Republic (in the expectation that a commercial reciprocity convention which was finally set aside by the American Government without even coming before the Senate for discussion), the revocable character of the extension was always brought to mind.

The Federal authorities, far from considering at the time when the aforesaid arrangement was elaborated that there would be injustice and disparity in the reciprocal advantages if the concession granted to Porto Rican coffee were not indefinitely continued in force, expressly recognized that the granting of that concession as a finality should be made the subject of separate negotiations in which examination would be made into “the conditions on which “such a favor could be obtained. The State Department’s letter of August 2, 1902, is clear on that point. In reply to a proposition of my Government looking to the conclusion of a special convention to “determine the conditions on which the benefit of the minimum tariff might be finally extended to Porto Rican coffee” the Department of State declared that it “fully appreciated” the good will shown by the Government of the Republic, but deemed it expedient to postpone those negotiations owing to the sentiment prevailing in the United States in regard to reciprocity treaties.

[Page 305]

Not only was there in fact no misunderstanding in this respect, but it is impossible to understand how there could have been any. It can not indeed be contended that there was disparity in the reciprocal concessions; there was none to the detriment of the United States, at any rate. Far from it. It appears from the American and French statistics, as shown in Statements I, II, and III hereto annexed, that on the basis of the average for the last two years French importations into Porto Rico profited by a reduction of duties amounting to 17,493 francs and Algerian importations into the United States by 10,951 francs. It is further found, without taking into account the Porto Rican coffee, that American merchandise imported in 1906 into Algeria profited, first, by a reduction of duties amounting to 16,330 francs, under the arrangement of 1898; second, by a reduction of duties on petroleum, amounting to 503,090 francs, under a decree issued by the French Government, proprio motu, under date of July 7, 1893. The decree is revocable, but was in force when the arrangement was signed and is still in force. So that the average reductions during the years 1905 and 1906 amounted to 372,505 francs in favor of American trade and to 28,444 francs in favor of French trade—that is to say, a difference of 344,061 francs in favor of the United States.

The connection with the same paragraphs of the memorandum endeavors to establish between the continuance of a minimum tariff in favor of Porto Rican coffee and the advantages granted to French still wines and vermuths by the commercial arrangement of May 28, 1898, has already been made by me the subject of express reservations at the time when the said document was delivered to me. By order of my Government, I have to renew them in the most formal manner. Such a connection could never have entered into the minds of the negotiators—first, because of the considerations I have just pointed out, which show that the Federal Government fully realized the necessity of a special negotiation on this point by which both parties would secure equal advantages; next, for the reason, sufficient by itself, that when the convention of May 28, 1898, was negotiated and signed Porto Rico was not American territory. Furthermore, the terms of the arrangement of 1902 are clear and it is quite obvious that the mere fact that the arrangement contained a special provision, of limited duration, concerning Porto Rican coffee proves that the Government of the United States itself did not believe that the terms of an agreement concluded by it four years earlier conferred the right to oppose the application of the general tariff to that article immediately upon the expiration of the period that had been set.

Again, your excellency, in Paragraphs II and III of your memorandum, directs attention to the loss the American Treasury would suffer from the reduction of duties on our champagnes, which would be considerable, while the trade of the United States is placed in France at a disadvantage by having to pay on a number of articles duties from 15 to 50 per cent higher than those collected on the same articles imported from several other countries. In consequence, and in order to put an end to such. “discriminations,” reductions of duties are asked in favor of a number of articles, which reductions would be all the more legitimate as the “whole of the American conventional tariff” would be granted us if our request in regard to champagne were complied with.

[Page 306]

Without laying any stress on the fact that the “whole of the American conventional tariff” includes, in all and for all, five articles out of a general total of seven hundred and five, I can but recall to mind that France never practiced “discrimination” of any kind against the United States. She offered to negotiate, just as she did with the other countries mentioned by your excellency. The other countries assented thereto on the basis of reciprocal advantages. The United States also assented, but it is certainly through no fault of France that the ratification of the treaty thus concluded was put off from year to year and finally given up, whereby the very situation with which the Federal Government finds fault was created.

The statistics adduced by your excellency, in your aforesaid communication, would seem to prove that French commerce at the present time is benefited here by reductions of duties much greater than those now enjoyed in France by American articles. On this point my Government observes that the nomenclature of these last articles is incomplete and that, therefore, the whole argument based thereon is vitiated. No mention is made either in the memoranda or the accompanying statements of the favorable treatment accorded to American petroleum; the favor is revocable, to be sure, but, nevertheless, confers upon that product a considerable advantage, which, as a matter of fact, it has continued to enjoy since 1893.

By taking this into account, it is found, and the inclosed statement, No. IV, shows, that the difference in revenue caused by the minimum tariff being applied to the American product imported into France, as compared with the rates of the general tariff, amounted to 26,385,790 francs for 1905 and to 29,322,743 francs for 1906; that is to say, an average of 27,854,266 francs for both years, to which it is proper to acid the sum of 372,505 francs representing the average reduction of duties on American products imported into Algeria, making an aggregate of 28,226,771 francs.

The French and Algerian merchandise enumerated in the agreements of 1898 and 1902, imported into the United States, according to the average for the two fiscal years 1904–5 and 1905–6, have been favored as follows: The French merchandise imported into the United States by a reduction of 2,711,266 francs (Statement V), the Algerian merchandise imported into the United States by a reduction of 10,951 francs, and the French merchandise imported into Porto Rico by a reduction of 17,493 francs, which make up a total of 2,779,710 francs. It follows that the sacrifice made by the French Treasury in favor of American merchandise was greater by 25,487,061 francs than that of the American Treasury in favor of French merchandise and that, therefore, the present situation is to the full advantage of the United States.

Hence, my Government does not deem it possible to accept propositions the effect of which would be to intensify these differences in the most impressive manner, and to agree to concessions or consolidations of duties which have, for the greater part, already been refused to the countries with which France has concluded commercial conventions in recent years.

It is, however, disposed to modify, in a spirit of concilliation which the Federal authorities will appreciate, its original propositions. In return for the concession to champagne and our sparkling wines of the reduced rates of section 3 of the Dingley tariff, my Government [Page 307] will grant, as a finality, the concession of our minimum tariff to the colonial products of the United States as well as to Porto Rican coffee. It can not be alleged that there would not be a fair equilibrium between these reciprocal concessions. According to the annexed statements (Nos. VI and VII) the concession of the minimum tariff to those products would represent for the French Treasury a sacrifice amounting, on the average of the years 1905 and 1906, to 5,162,580 francs, while the concession of reduced rates to sparkling wines imported into the United States and Porto Rico would, according to the American statistics of 1904–5 and 1905–6, represent a sacrifice of only 3,752,228 francs for the United States. The United States would thus profit by a difference of 1,410,352 francs in reduced duties.

Apart from this advantage and in its desire to evidence its appreciation of the value of the customs facilities which your excellency was good enough to notify me would be applied to French merchandise, my Government is ready to agree that the French decree of July 7, 1893, now revocable at will, which extends to American petroleum the benefit of the minimum tariff, shall be especially dealt with in one of the stipulations of the contemplated arrangement, whereby the reduction of duty would assume a contractual character and an important advantage would in consequence accrue to the United States. My Government expects in return that the arrangement to be made will guarantee to French commerce, as already agreed upon, the benefit of all customs facilities granted to other nations.

With respect to the various other points mentioned by your excellency, I have the honor, by order of my Government, to submit to you the following remarks: Article V of the draft drawn up by your excellency’s direction provides that American products imported by way of a third country shall continue to enjoy the rates of the minimum tariff, if entitled thereto. Thus worded, the stipulation would preclude the application of the bonded warehouse surtax to American products coming to France from European ports. It would further defeat our regulations which deny the benefits of our minimum tariff to merchandise shipped through a country subject to the general tariff. For both these reasons my Government finds it impossible to accept that Article V.

As regards the provisions relative to the sanitary police of domestic animals and to protection against insects, cryptogamous and other noxious vegetables, the French department of agriculture can not admit, as specified in Article IV of the draft, that these questions be settled by means of a convention. That department has always positively refused to assume in a convention any obligation likely to restrict its freedom of action in that special field which involves the responsibility of the minister of agriculture alone. But the principle once accepted, the said department will be quite ready to examine with the greatest benevolence, and a sincere desire to comply with them as far as possible, such applications as may be submitted to it. For instance, it has already decided that salt pork meats from the United States shall, provisionally and while the negotiations entered into with the American Government are carried on, be admitted into France on the presentation of a certificate of the inspector of the Federal Department of Agriculture detailed by the latter to supervise the establishment in which the animals have been slaughtered or the [Page 308] meats prepared, which certificate shall state that the meats are from sound animals and are fit for consumption. No mention of microscopical inspection shall be required, provided the cases bear the stamp of the Government inspector who conducted the sanitary examination.

The French minister of agriculture, in this connection, has acquainted me with his desire to receive as accurate information as possible regarding the means employed in the United States for the purpose of ascertaining whether pork is free from trichinae, adding that if the inspection of imported meats should, on their entering France, disclose the presence of trichinae their importation would forthwith be prohibited.

In compliance with the desire of Mr. Ruau, who is of opinion that if the above-mentioned information were received the sending of a special commission could be dispensed with, I am forwarding to him an additional copy of the set of the several regulations and successive decisions bearing on the matter which I have been able to gather through the kindness of the Department of Agriculture. Any further explanations that the Federal Government should see fit to send to me would be most welcome and I shall lose no time in forwarding them to the proper French authorities.

As for the measures taken to prevent the introduction of the Aspidiotus perniciosus, or San José scale, into France, my Government deems it impossible to modify the provisions of the decree of November 30, 1898. Owing to the habits of that insect, the greatest precautions are needful to prevent the transfer of females to vegetables and fruits or their refuse. Cast off indiscriminately with fruit peelings, the insects would soon overrun our orchards and forests, all the more as the young larvae can live several days without food until they find the vegetable that suits them. American entomologists themselves admit that the strictest precautions must be taken to prevent the propagation of the San José scale, and, without succeeding in entirely checking the evil, the Department of Agriculture recommends that the most particular measures be taken for protection from the Aspidiotus, and that any tree showing traces of infection be burned.

Lastly, I am instructed by my Government to make special mention of the wording of the article in which the American products admitted to the benefit of the minimum tariff are to be enumerated, and to say that the present language of the French tariff, as it actually stands, describing all those articles, should be reproduced, which does not appear to offer any difficulty, as the differences that can be noted undoubtedly are the result of clerical errors.

The foregoing are the terms on which my Government is ready to sign an arrangement sanctioning the reciprocal concessions the two countries would make in the interest of both, and which might be put into effect, on both parts, without delay. I am fain to believe that the propositions I am instructed to lay before your excellency will prove acceptable and that their early execution will contribute to promote between the two countries a commerce that is already prosperous, thus carrying out the wishes of the Federal Government, which are, I know, identical in this respect with those of the Government of the Republic.

Be pleased to accept, etc.,

Jusserand.
[Page 309]

Table I.—Reduction for the benefit of France in consequence of the application of the reduced tariff of the agreement of 1898 to Porto Rico, by virtue of the agreement of 1902 (according to American statistics).

American tariff No. Articles. Unit. Tariff. Difference. 1904–5 1905–6
General. Reduced. Importations from France. Amount of reduction. Importations from France. Amount of reduction.
289 Brandies and other spirits Proof gallon $2.25 $1.75 $0.50
{ 3,176
553
$1,588 3,742 $1,871
276 917 458
296 Still wines and vermuth:
In casks Gallon 0.40 0.35 0.05 3,476 173 11,060 553
In bottles Dozen bottles 1.60 1.25 0.35 1,790 626 4,314 1,109
2,663 3,991

Average for the two years 1904–5 and 1905–6, $3,377, or 17,493 francs.

Table II.—Reduction for the benefit of France in consequence of the application to Algerian goods of the tariff of the agreement of 1898, by virtue of the agreement of 1902 (according to American statistics).

American tariff No. Articles. Unit. Tariff. Difference. 1904–5 1905–6
General. Reduced. Importations from French Africa (Algeria). Amount of reduction. Importations from French Africa (Algeria). Amount of reduction.
6 Crude tarter, or wine less crude
{ Pound
Value
$0.01 601,208 438,562
0.01 5 per ct. 54,566 $3,284.00 48,873 $1,942.00
296 Still wines and vermouth:
In casks Gallon 0.40 $0.35 $0.05 60 3.00
In bottles Dozen bottles 1.60 1.25 0.35 1 0.35 4 1.05
454 Paintings, in oil or water colors, pastels, pen and ink drawings, statuary Value 20 per ct. 15 per ct. 5 per ct. 2 0.10 35 1.75
3,287.45 1,944.80

Average for the two years 1904–5 and 1905–6, $2,114.15, or 10,951 francs.

[Page 310]

Table III.—Reduction for the benefit of the United States on entry into Algeria in consequence of the concession of the minimum tariff to American products by virtue of the agreement of August 24, 1902, and extended voluntarily by the French Government to petroleum.

Tariff No. Articles. Tariff (per 100 kg.). Difference. Year 1905. Year 1906.
General. Minimum. Importations from United States. Amount of reduction. Importations from United States. Amount of reduction.
Francs. Francs.
17 bis Manufactured and prepared pork meats 100 50 50 5,014 kg 2,500
19 Canned meats 20 15 5 5,446 kg. 275
30 Lard 40 25 15 1,225 kg. 180
128 Common woods:
Squared or sawed, 80 mm or more in thickness 1.50 1 0.50 924,000 4,620 1,782,00 8,910
130 Staves 1.25 0.75 0.50 982,800 4,914 1,484,000 7,420
197 Refined petroleum and schist oils and essences 25
{ 10hl.
12.50
} 12.50
{ 21,297 hl.
or
17,038 qt.
} 212,970
{ 50,309 hl.
or
40,267 qt.
} 503,090
198 Heavy oils and residues of petroleum 12 9 3 4,446 132
1 225,591 2519,420

Average for the years 1905–6, 372,505 francs.

[Page 311]

Table IV.—Reduction for the benefit of the United States on entry into France in consequence of the application of the minimum tariff provided by the agreement of 1898, and extended voluntarily and provisionally by the French Government to petroleum.

French tariff No. Articles. Tariff (per 100 kg.). Difference. Year 1905. Year 1906.
General. Minimum. Importations from United States. Amount of reduction. Importations from United States. Amount of reduction.
17 bis. Manufactured and prepared pork meats 100 50 50 744,224 kg. 372,112 fr. 900.304 kg. 451,650 fr.
19 Canned meats 20 15 5 170,969 kg. 8,545 fr. 166,173 kg 8,310 fr.
30 Animal fat: Lard 20 15 5 170,969 kg. 8,545 fr. 166,173 kg. 8,310 fr.
84 Fresh table fruits:
Lemons, oranges, cedrats, and their varieties not mentioned
} 15
5 10
{ Gross 6,400
Net 5,400
} 490 fr.
Mandarin and China oranges 25 10 15
Common table grapes 25 8 17 300 kg. 51 fr.
Apples and pears for the table 5 2 3
Gross 1,079,448 kg.
32,385 fr.
Gross 936,662 kg.
28,098 fr.
Apples and pears for cider and perry 2 1.50 0.50
Other fruits except hot-house grapes and fruits 5 3 2 1,900 kg. 38 fr.
85 Fruits, dry and pressed, except raisins:
Apples and pears for the table 15 10 5
{ Gross 329,829 kg.
Net 296,846 kg.
} 11,555 fr.
{ Gross 846,467 kg.
Net 761,800 kg.
} 29,620 fr.
Apples and pears for cider and perry 6 4 2 1,613,523 kg. 32,270 fr. 2,174,960 kg. 43,500 fr.
Plums and prunes 15 10 5
{ Gross 61,829 kg.
Net 55,646 kg.
} 2,160 fr.
{ Gross 99,979 kg.
Net 90,000 kg.
} 3,500 fr.
Other fruits 15 5 10
{ Gross 1,033,809 kg.
Net 930,428 kg.
} 87,870 fr.
{ Gross 413,378 kg.
Net 373,000 kg.
} 35,362 fr.
128 Common woods:
Logs, rough, not squared 1.00 0.65 0.35 1,920,000 kg. 6,720 fr.
Sawed or squared timber, 80 mm. or more in thickness 1.50 1.00 0.50 49,529,000 kg. 247,695 fr. 38,242,000 kg. 191,210 fr.
Squared or sawed lumber, exceeding 35 mm. and less than 80 mm. in thickness 1.75 1.25 0.50 18,214,000 kg. 91,070 fr. 9,913,000 kg. 49,565 fr.
Wood, sawed, 35 mm. or less in thickness 2.50 1.75 0.75 34,229,000 kg. 256,718 fr. 28,385,000 kg. 212,887 fr.
129 Wooden paving blocks 2.50 1.75 0.75
130 Staves 1.25 0.75 0.50 50,165,000 kg. 250,825 fr. 58,340,000 kg. 291,700 fr.
160 Hops 45 30 15 1,500 kg. 225 fr.
174 Apples and pears, crushed or cut and dried 2 1.50 0.50
197 Mineral oils (petroleum and schist):
Crude—
Quantities assessed by weight 18 9 9 25,008 qx. 2,286,072 fr. 94,554 qx. 850,986 fr.
Quantities assessed by volume — per hl. 7.20 per hl. 1,764,354 hl. 12,703,347 fr. 1,657,770 hl. 11,932,650 fr.
Refined and essences 25 12.50 12.50
10 per hl. 853,536 hl. 8,535,362 fr. 1,307,058 hl. 13,127,696 fr
198 Heavy oils and residues of petroleum 12 9 3 373,423 qx. 1,120,269 fr. 548,802 qx. 1,646,406 fr.
126,385,790 fr. 229,322,743 fr.

Averages for the year 1905–6,27,854,266 francs.

[Page 312]

Table V.—Reduction for the benefit of France in consequence of the application to French goods of the reduced tariff provided for by the agreement of 1898.

American tariff No. Articles. Unit. Tariff. Difference. 1904–5. 1905–6.
General. Reduced. Importations from France. Amount of reduction. Importations from France. Amount of reduction.
6 Crude tartar or wine lees, crude
{ Pound
Value
0.01 c. 11,208,908 12,132,784
0.01½ 5 per ct. 1,047,757 59,702 1,087,173 66,969
289 Brandies Proof gallon 2.25 1.75 0.50 347,213 173,606 402,696 201,348
Other spirits do 171,777 85,888 205,890 102,995
296 Still wines and vermuth:
In cakes Gallon 0.40 0.35 0.05 386,335 19,316 379,949 18,997
In bottles Case of 12 bottles 1.60 1.25 0.35 162,922 57,023 192,024 67,208
454 Paintings in oil or water colors, pastels, pen and ink drawings, statuary. Value 20 per ct. 15 per ct. 5 per ct. 1,494,119 74,705 2,371,188 118,559
Total of reduction 470,240 576,076

Average for the two years 1904–5 and 1905–6, $523,158, or 2,711,266 francs.

[Page 313]

Table VI.—Reduction for the benefit of the United States in consequence of the application of the minimum tariff to colonial produce.

Tariff No. Articles. Tariff (per 100 Kg.). Difference. Year 1905. Year 1906.
General. Minimum. Importations from United States. Amount of reduction. Importations from United States. Amount of reduction.
Kg. Francs. Kg. Francs.
96 Coffee in the bean and husk 300 136 164 1,158,619 1,900,100 966,721 1,585,388
97 Cacao in the bean and husk 104 251,357 312,331
98 Chocolate
{ 300
200
150 150
100 100
100 Pimento 400 208 192 4,292 8,256 10,382 19,768
104 Nutmegs:
With shell 400 208 192
Without shell 600 312 288 16,355 46,944 11,412 32,832
107 Vanilla 800 416 384 3,639 13,824 4,832 19,432
11,969,124 21,657,620

Average for the years 1905–6, 1,813,372 francs, or $349,980.79.

Tariff No. Articles. Tariff (per 100 Kg.). Difference. Year 1905. Year 1906.
Reduction for the benefit of the United States in consequence of the application of the minimum tariff to Porto Rican coffee.
Kg. Francs. Kg. Francs.
96 Coffee in the bean and husk 300 136 164 2,191,364 3,593,896 1,893,027 3,104,520
35,563,020 44,762,140

Average for the years 1905–6, 5,162,580 francs, or $996,377.94.

[Page 314]

Table VII.—Reduction in favor of France from the concession of the reduced tariff on champagne in the United States and in Porto Rico (according to American statistics).

American tariff No. Articles. Unit. Tariff. Difference. 1904–5. 1905–6.
General. Reduced. Importations from France. Amount of reduction. Importations from France. Amount of reduction.
United States.
295 Champagne and all other sparkling wines:
In bottles containing not more than 1 quart and more than 1 pint. Dozen bottles 8 6 2 341,419 682,838 381,628 763,256
In bottles containing not more than 1 pint and more than ½ pint. do 4 3 1
In bottles containing ½ pint or less do 2 1.50 0.50
In vessels of more than ¼, additional duty of Gallon 2.50 1.90 0.60
Porto Rico.
295 Champagne and all other sparkling wines Dozen bottles 8 6 2 276 552 646 1,392
683,390 764,648

Average for the years 1904–5 and 1905–6, $724,019, or 3,752,228 francs.

recapitulation.

France. United States.
Reduction resulting from the agreement of 1898: Francs. Reduction resulting from the agreement of 1898, and from the repealable concessions on petroleum: Francs.
On French goods 2,711,266 $523,274.338
On Algerian goods 10,951 2,113.543 In France 27,854,266 $5,375,873.338
To Porto Rico 17,493 3,376.149 In Algeria 372,505 71,893.465
Reduction to result from the concession on champagne 3,752,228 724,180.004 Reduction to result from the concession of the minimum tariff to colonial produce:
Proceeding from the United States: 1,813,372 349,980.796
Proceeding from Porto Rico 3,399,208 656,047.144
6,491,938 1,252,944,034 33,439,351 6,453,794.743
  1. 225,591 francs=$43,539.06.
  2. 519,420 francs=$100,248.06.
  3. 26,385,790 francs = $5,092,457.47.
  4. 29,322,743 francs = $5,659,289.40.
  5. 1,969,124 francs= $380,040.93.
  6. 1,657,620 francs= $319,920.66
  7. 5,563,020 francs= $1,073,662.86.
  8. 4,762,140 francs= $919,093.02.