New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-07-11
SELECTIONS FROM THE MAIL.
TONNAGE DUES ON GERMAN STEAMERS.
THE LAW, NOT THE COMMISSIONER OF NAVI-
CATION, RESPONSIBLE.
TO the Editor of The Tribune.

CATION, RESPONSIBLE.
| To the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir In the issue Of June 80 you published dispatch
describing the "hgh-handed course Of the Bureau Oh
Navigation" in administering the laws relative to ton
mage dues which seems to call for correction. The
burden Of the complaint Is that the German steamers
! sailing from Germany to England and France, ana
thence to the United States not admitted here Tree
OF tonnage tax. The existing rule upon the subject
has been in force during the present and the past ad
ministration. The article errs in holding the Com
missioner Of Navigation responsible for the collection
Of the tax. AS matter of fact the action taken is
based on opinion OF the Attorney General OF the
United States, who holds follows
1t seems to this Department to be quite clear that
where vessel sails from Bremen, for instance, 10
southampton, with partial cargo, and at the latter
place completes the cargo, it should be subject to ton
mage duties.
The Government gave every facility for testing tho
disputed points in court. Suit brought by tho
German Line, and the Circuit Court OF the United States
has just decided the in favor Of the Government
The Court said "Soon after the passage OF the act OF
June &c. 1884, claims were presented BY the Govern
ments of Germany and of other foreign powers having
similar treaty spulatons with the United States III
relation to navigation for the benefit of the Scent rate
of tax under the favored nation clause. The claims
having been referred to the Department Of Justice tho
Attorney the 10th Of september, 1885, gave
| the following opinion:
The discrimination as to tonnage duty in favor OF
vessels sailing from the regions mentioned in the act
and entered in our ports Is, j think, purely geo.
any vessel OF any power that may choose to fetch and
carry between this country and any port embraced by
therefore, to claim that there Is anything in the most
favored nation clause OF the treaty between TINS
TO have the privileges OF the fourteenth section
tended to their vessels sailing 10 this country from ports
| outside tho limitations OF the act.
"The construction thus given to the statute is clearly
consistent with its terms, which grant the privilege of
the minimum tax to all vessels entered In the United
States from certain specified foreign ports and not ex
cusvey to the vessels of nations to whom those ports
belong, or in whose territories the ports situate, ex-
ccptng the vessels of those governments only which, in
the imposition of tonnage taxes, discriminate against
American vessels
Gin accordance with this construction, II follows
that particular favor conferred any nation and
that, with the exception noted, the vessels OF all
nations coming from the privileged ports entered In
the United States an equal footing. Further dis
cussion on this point would seem, therefore, to be
fruitless but it may be proper TO observe that the
| construction Of both tho act Of June 26, 1854,
and that Of June 10, 1886, and tho
complicated questions growing Of the claims of
foreign governments for the lower rate Of tonnage
tax by virtue Of their treaty rights brought to the
attention Of Congress by the Presidents message Of
January Ia, 1885, transmitting report Of the Secre-
tary Of State in reference the international questions
arising from tho imposition Of d!fcrential tonnage dues
upon vessels entering the United States from foreign
countries. (Ex. Doc. H. h. 90 Cong. cd SESSION.
The report after mentioning tho claims of the German
Minister FOR reduction Of the tax under the Act Of
1854, and for a proper refund OF tho dues charged
German ships entering the United states from German
ports since the date OF the Act OF 1886, stated TO
this suggestion the undersigned unable TO respond
the matter being one for the consideration OF Congress-
ain respect to the claim made by the plaintiff
that its ships coming from Bremen 10 NewYork by way
Of southampton Is not such to deprive the run Of
port in the United States within the meaning of the
Act OF 1886, the report says BUT 1t has been held
by the Commissioner of Navigation that the voyage
cannot be regarded, and that the vessels must pay
dues coming from southampton British port
| Similar rulings have been made in respect Of other
| vessels Of different nationality
From an examination OF the above extracts from
his report 1t Will be that the Secretary OF State
Of the opinion that the questions referred to were
10 be addressed TO the political and not to the judicial
branch Of the Government, and that Congress alone
could be IoOLed 10 for the redress of the class Of
wrongs complained Of by the plaintiff and to prevent
| their repetition.
1.-THE plaintiffs counsel deny the correctness of the
construction given to the Act Of 1884 by the Attorney
General and insist that the difference in tonnage
rates by which certain ports specially named in the
acts favored is particular favor to the countries
10 which those ports belong, in respect to their COM
merco and navigation which ipso acto aecrues, in
pursuance Of treaty rights to German vessels coming
treaty stipulatons with Germany paramount to
the later acts of Congress- and that the former cannot
| be annhllated by the latter. Admitting for the
moment that the Attorney General may have miscon-
| strued the act still 1t cannot be questioned that
treaty to the expression Of Judge swayne in the
Cherokee Tobacco case, 1! Wall. 616, "a treaty may
| supersede prior act Of Congress and act Of
Congress may suPersedc a prior treaty The Com
missioner of Navigation held that the acts Of 1884
Of later date must prevail and in SO ruling he is not
without authority Of adiudged cases. In Foster vs.
Nelson, Pet. 3l4, Chief Justice Marshall in delivering
tho opinion Of the court said: Our constitution de-
clares treaty TO be law Of the land. 1t is conse
10 act o. the Legislature whenever it operates Of
itself without the aid Of any legislative provision
| But when the terms Of the stipulation import CON
| tract when either Of the parties engage TO perform
particular act the treaty addresses itself 10 the
| political and TO the judicial department and the
| legislature must execute the contract before it
bec1me rIle for The ,; curt cn,,,. cou.
Judgment against the foreign line and favor Of the
a year ago. "The Lewiston Journal" owned by the
Hon Nelson Dngley who framed the law governing the
As soon as the act went into force in 1854 Sweden
and several other foreign countries which have treaties
vessels shall not be charged higher tonnage dues than
the vessels Of other Countries, demanded that swedish
vessels coming from European ports should be charged
only three cents per ton The question was referred
to Attorney General Brewster, who held that the dis,
and applied alike to vessels Of all nations. II swed
ish vessel or a Mexican vessel came ron nearby
port she would be charged only three cents per ton
But il either vessel from any European port she
| would he charged SIX cents. Tho distinction, there
| fore, not which applied to Swedish vessels
alone but b all alike, and therefore was not incon
sstent with the clause Of the treaty referred 10.
at should be borne in mind that II the contention
Of Sweden should be sustained would open the door
only TO the admission OF Swedish vessels, but OF
the vessels Of several other foreign nations into our
ports on payment OF less tonnage dues than arc i'm
posed on American vessels
n will be seen therefore, that the attempt OF the
| agents OF foreign steamship lines TO create the i'm
preston that IL Is simply the Commissioner Of Navga
ton who has made the decision OF which they com
| plain is without foundation. The decision not
| made originally by the Commissioner, but by the
Attorney General Of the United states and by Score
taries Frclinghuysen and Bayard. And moreover
The decision Is in accordance with the intention OF the
trainers of the law ana Of Congress, well as common
sense IL IS TO be hoped that American newspapers
will not aid tho unjust pretensions Of foreign steam
| ship lines
| That is the matter in a nutshell.
| WILLIAM w. RATES,
| Commissioner Of Navigation.