Act, in lieu of the duties imposed by law on the articles in this section enumerated, there shall be levied, collected, and paid on the goods, wares, and merchandize in this section enumerated and provided for, imported from foreign countries, the following duties and rates of duties, that is to say : On hops, 8 cents per pound; On chromate and bichromate of potassa, 4 cents per pound; On macaroni and vermicelli, and on all similar preparations, 2 cents per pound; On nitro-benzole, or oil of mirbane, 10 cents per pound; On tin in plates or sheets and on terne and tagger's tin, 11th cents per pound; On anchovies and sardines, packed in oil or otherwise, in tin boxes, 15 cents per whole box, measuring not more than 5 inches long, 4 inches wide, and 3 inches deep; 7 cents for each half-box, measuring not more than 5 inches long, 4 inches wide, and 1 and ths inches deep; and 4 cents for each quarter-box, measuring not more than 4 inches long, 3 inches wide, and 14 inches deep; when imported in any other form, 60 per centum ad valorem : Provided, that cans or packages made of tin or other material containing fish of any kind admitted free of duty under any existing Law or Treaty, not exceeding one quart in contents, shall be subject to a duty of 1 cents on each can or package; and when exceeding one quart; shall be subject to an additional duty of 14 cents for each additional quart, or fractional part thereof. SIB, (Inclosure 4.)-Sir E. Thornton to Mr. Cadwalader. Washington, April 15, 1875. I HAVE the honour to invite your attention to the following circumstances which have been communicated to me by the Governor-General of the Dominion of Canada. It seems that the British schooner Lizzie Dakers, of St. John, New Brunswick, owned by Thomas G. Bourne, of St. John, New Brunswick, being, on or about the 16th of October last, under charter to proceed to Philadelphia, took on board 50 cases of preserved lobster in cans. On arrival at that port, the master requested entry of these goods under the terms of the Washington Treaty, as being free of duty. He states that they were refused entry, and that, on personal application to the Collector of the Port, he was told that they could only be entered subject to a duty of 35 per cent. ad valorem. The goods were accompanied by a proper certificate obtained from the United States' Consul at St. John; but, in consequence of the decision of the Collector, the master took the 50 cases back again, and they were relanded at St. John. The owner of the goods claims that the actual loss on the goods in freight, insurance, and other expenses has amounted to 52 dollars, without any allowance for loss of time on the goods or expenses at Philadelphia. If the facts are as stated by the master of the Lizzie Dakers, it seems to me that the refusal to receive the goods in question free of duty was an infraction of the Treaty of May 8, 1871, and of the Act of Congress of March 1, 1873,* and that the owner of the goods is entitled to compensation for the loss he has suffered; and I have the honour to ask that inquiries may be instituted upon the subject. A representation has also been forwarded to me by the GovernorGeneral of Canada, relative to a duty levied upon the tin cans containing lobster and other fresh fish imported into the United States from Canada. I presume that the imposition of this duty is in accordance with the proviso at the end of Section 4 of the Act of Congress of February 8, 1875, which enacts "that cans or packages made of tin or other material containing fish of any kind admitted free of duty under any existing Law or Treaty, not exceeding one quart in contents, shall be liable to a duty of 14 cents on each can or package." But I must be allowed to observe that this enactment seems to me to be entirely contrary to the spirit of Article XXI of the Treaty above mentioned, which provides for the free admission of fish of all kinds into each country. The tin can which contains lobster and other fresh fish is not like other packages or vessels containing duty-free articles, upon which packages or vessels, such as carboys, casks, barrels, &c., duty is levied; for these are, when emptied, saleable and useful articles, whilst the tin cans containing fish are necessary to the preservation of the contents, but, when opened, are necessarily destroyed, and are unsaleable and useless. I should hesitate to believe that this particular proviso of the Act of Congress of February 8, 1875, was especially directed against the fish preserved in cans, the produce of the Dominion of Canada and of Prince Edward Island, which suffers from this duty; whilst, on the other hand, no duty is levied in Canada upon tin cans containing fish, the produce of the United States. I venture to hope that the Government of the United States, which, I am convinced, is imbued with a spirit of liberality upon this matter, will acquiesce in my view, and that measures may at least be taken during the next Session of Congress for a reconsideration of the enactment in question. John L. Cadwalader, Esq. I have, &c., * Vol. LXIII. Page 34. EDWD. THORNTON. No. 8.-The Earl of Dufferin to the Earl of Carnarvon. MY LORD, Government House, Ottawa, May 1, 1875. IN my despatch of the 7th of April I had the honour of forwarding to your Lordship a copy of a Minute of the Privy Council, which has been communicated to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, remonstrating against the exaction by the United States' Customs authorities of the duty lately imposed upon tin cans containing fish, being the produce of the Canadian Fisheries. I have now the honour of inclosing a copy of a further Report of Council, which contains an urgent request from my Government that the attention of the United States may be drawn to the subject, and that the Executive may be moved to adopt measures for the removal of the impost complained of. I have, &c., The Earl of Carnarvon. DUFFERIN (Inclosure 1.)--Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General on the 30th day of April, 1875. THE Committee of Council have had under consideration the despatches from Sir Edward Thornton, British Minister at Washington, to your Excellency, under date the 12th and 16th April, 1875, in answer to a despatch inclosing the Minute of the Privy Council, dated April 7, 1875, remonstrating against the exaction by the United States' Customs authorities of the duty lately imposed upon tin cans containing fish imported from the Dominion of Canada, which, by Article XXI of the Treaty of Washington, is to be admitted free of duty. That Article reads as follows: "It is agreed that, for the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII of this Treaty, fish-oil and fish of all kinds (except fish of the inland lakes and of the rivers falling into them, and except fish preserved in oil) being the produce of the fisheries of the United States or of the Dominion of Canada, or of Prince Edward Island, shall be admitted into each country respectively free of duty." The trade between Canada and the United States in fish, including oysters and lobsters, inclosed in hermetically sealed cans of tin, is large and important; the value of American oysters imported into Canada last year in tin cans, chiefly from Baltimore, was 110,000 dollars, and since the Treaty of Washington no duty has been charged on tin or other packages containing fish from the United States, free under Article XXI of the Treaty, and as no complaints have been made to the Canadian authorities, it may fairly be assumed that the American Government considered the language of Article XXI sufficiently clear to admit the tin and other packages containing fish free of duty. That interpretation seemed consistent with the spirit of the Treaty, as a large portion of the fish trade could only be carried on successfully in hermetically sealed cans, and if it had been contemplated to exempt fish so prepared it is but reasonable to infer that the restriction would have been stated. On the 8th February last the Congress of the United States passed an Act, No. 11, amending "Existing Customs and Internal Revenue Laws, and for other purposes," Section 4 of which contains the following provision: "That cans or packages made of tin, or other material, containing fish of any kind admitted free of duty under any existing Law or Treaty, not exceeding one quart in contents, shall be subject to a duty of 1 cents on each can or package, and when exceeding one quart shall be subject to an additional duty of 14 cents for each additional quart or fractional part thereof." It seems clear, from the introduction of the word "Treaty," that this proviso expressly defeats the construction hitherto placed on Article XXI of the Treaty. The tin cans are necessary for the preservation and transportation of the fish, and on removal of the contents the cans have no value whatever; it is obvious, therefore, that the imposition of an arbitrary duty on the cans is equivalent to a duty on the fish, and in the opinion of the Committee is a violation of Article XXI of the Treaty. The Committee are disposed to think that the proviso in the Act of Congress referred to must have been inadvertently inserted, and without considering the restriction it would impose on the fair and reasonable interpretation of the Article in the Treaty, as it is impossible to believe that it was intended to violate express Treaty stipulations, and they trust that when the subject is brought under the notice of the United States' Government, the just grounds of complaint on the part of the Dominion Government will be removed. The Committee, therefore, advise that a copy of this Minnte, and also a copy of the Minute approved on the 7th April instant, with the letters and documents therein referred to, be transmitted by your Excellency to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with a request that the attention of the Government of the United States may be called to the subject, and that it may be moved to adopt measures for the removal of the duty complained of. Certified: W. A. HIMSWORTH, Clerk Privy Council, Canada. No. 9.-The Earl of Derby to Sir E. Thornton. SIR, despatch from the Canadian Government which suggests that a representation should be made to the United States' Government against the duty recently imposed upon tin cans and other packages containing duty-free fish imported into the United States, and I have to instruct you to take such steps as you may think advisable for obtaining the removal of the duty in question. Sir E. Thornton. I am, &c., DERBY. No. 11.-Sir E. Thornton to the Earl of Derby.-(Received July 3.) (Extract.) Washington, June 21, 1875. WITH reference to my despatch of the 19th of April last, I have the honour to inclose copies of a note and of its inclosures which I have at length received from Mr. Cadwalader, Acting Secretary of State, in answer to mine of the 15th April last, relative to the refusal of the Collector of Customs at Philadelphia to admit free of duty certain tins of lobster coming from Canada, and to the imposition of a duty upon tin cans containing fish, the latter being free of duty by the provisions of the Treaty of May 8, 1871. Your Lordship will perceive that, in the first instance, the Collector of Customs of Philadelphia excuses himself by supposing that the lobsters in question were preserved in oil, and therefore excepted from free admission by the terms of the Treaty. I must acknowledge that I am surprised that the master of the Lizzie Dakers took back the lobster in question without even entering a protest before Her Majesty's Consul or making any representation to Her Majesty's Minister, in either of which cases the matter would probably have been investigated, and it would have been proved whether the lobster could have been admitted or not under the terms of the Treaty. With regard to the duty imposed on tin cans containing fish which itself would be free of duty, Mr. Cadwalader, who has not sent me a copy of the communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, states that the latter thinks that it is not proper for him to express an opinion in reference to this legislation in the absence of a request from Congress so to do. The Secretary of the Treasury adds that, in a case of doubtful construction, he would be slow to construe an Act of Congress so that it might be held to do violence to a Treaty stipulation, but that in this instance the language of the Act is so clear as to admit of no doubt, and that he considers that the assessment of duty on tin cans containing fish imported under the Treaty is required by such Act. I am to-day forwarding copies of this note and of its inclosures to his Excellency the Administrator of the Government of Canada. |