Report of Mr. Mallory, of Florida, on the relations of the United States with Cuba

77S3
M24

rS3
24

F 1783

.1124

*>

Copy 1

4

■ ^*

/

(J^C&ttLj

%.

OF

MR. MALEOM, OF FLOEIDA,

St

ON THE

RELATIONS OP THE UNITED STATES WITH CUBA.

Towbrs, printer.

Library of Congress.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Chap.-
Shelf-

<f

»• .«..._.- . •

JI'Ai?/o

OP

\ MR. MALLOET, OF FLORIDA,

■■ On the delations between Cuba and the United States ;
and on the Expediency of modifying Commercial Res-
trictions on the Cuban Trade.

A bill for the repeal of the acts " concerning tonnage duty on
Spanish vessels," passed the 13th of July, 1832, and the 30th of
June, 1834, is now before Congress; and the object of this re-
port is to awaken public attention to our trade and commercial
regulations with Cuba, and to point out, especially to the agri-
cultural and manufacturing interests of our country, the blight-
ing effects thereon of the acts in question, and the expediency of
rescinding them. The attention of these leading interests has, on
several occasions, been called to this subject, but various causes,
aided by a srr all opposing interest, have combined to divert it ;
and it is believed that this important branch of trade, lying at
our very doors, is less accurately understood than is our trade
with Europe generally.

In the year 1849, in compliance with a resolution passed by the
Senate, calling upon "the Secretary of the Treasury to commu-
nicate to the Senate such information as he may have in relation
to the expediency of repealing or modifying the act of June 30,
183 i, concerning tonnage duty on Spanish vessels," Mr. Walker,
Secretary of the Treasury, made a report, from which the follow-
ing extracts are taken :

" I have the honor respectfully to report that the law referred
to, as well as a former law on the same subject, approved 13th
July, 1832, were passed, it is believed, under an erroneous im-
pression at the time respecting the true nature and effect of the
navigation and commercial laws of Spain, so far as they operated
upon American shipping and commerce.

" It seems to have been supposed that the law of Spain made
special discrimination against the United States vessels and car-
goes, but so far as this Department is advised, it appears that no
such discrimination existed, either at the date of those laws, or
has since been established, operating exclusively upon the ship-
ping and cargoes of the United States. The laws of Spain regu-
lating commercial relations with her colonies, discriminate in
favor of her own vessels and cargoes, as against the vessels and
cargoes of all foreign nations.

" The right exercised by. Spain to favx>r her own vessels in
trading with her colonies is conceded, and cannot with propriety
be complained of on our pa"rt. 'All that the United States can
ask or expect, is to be placed on a perfect equality with the ves-
sels of other nations participating in such trade ; and in this re-
spect it is believed our vessels enjoy the same privileges as those
of other foreign nations.

" It is confidently believed that the operations of the acts of
1832 and 1834 have had, and still have, an injurious effect on the
revenue and trade between the United States and the islands of
Cuba and Porto Rico, especially at such ports of the United States
as have the most direct and intermediate intercourse with said
islands.

"In view of the foregoing circumstances, and being firmly im-
pressed with the importance to the revenue of the United States,
that the trade with the islands referred to should be relieved from
the existing restrictions and embarrassments imposed by the law
adverted to, I would respectfully recommend the repeal of the
acts concerning tonnage duty on Spanish vessels, approved 13th
July, 1832 and 30th June, 1834."

Recent events beyond our own country, bearing directly upon
Cuba and its trade, with the prospective and certain transit of a
commerce of boundless wealth over the Tehuantepec route, throw
around this subject an importance which it has never before pos-
sessed ; and without investigating in detail their probable effects
upon our relations with that island, the slightest political forecast
will enable us to perceive the propriety and expediency of adopt-
ing any measure which will shorten the distance between its
shores and its people and our own.

Strict observance of political justice in our intercourse with a
foreign people — the special and prospective importance of culti-
vating cordial relations with the inhabitants of Cuba — and due
regard for the agricultural and manufacturing interests of our
country — combine to demonstrate the propriety and expediency of
adopting the measure which either of these considerations would
so manifestly justify.

The first consideration, fair dealing in our intercourse with for-
eign nations, has ever been the established rule of our Govern-
ment, and the importance of guarding it from the slightest inno-
vation is too manifest to admit of a doubt. Our course in the
matter now under consideration has neither been just to Spain
nor to ourselves. But, by many of our people, and of those too
whose interests are most involved, though as a people, the most
intelligent on earth, the second and third considerations just ad-
verted to, are either misunderstood, or they are regarded not in
the light which their importance demands.

A glance at the map of the Mexican Gulf will show the re-
markable position of Cuba with reference to the trade of Texas,
Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, the Mississippi, and Tehuantepec
and Panama routes. This Gulf, like the Mediterranean sea, has

but one outlet ; for, though a passage may at some particular
times be successfully made through the Yucatan channel to the
Caribbean sea, and thence out through the Mond passage to the
windward islands, such a passage is always considered hazard-
ous, if not impracticable, against the violent and opposing winds
and currents which sweep over the entire route. Passages from
the Gulf out on the south side of Cuba, are at all seasons tedious
and uncertain ; but they are deemed by navigators as almost im-
practicable from January to April, inclusive, and this is the very
season when the Mississippi, the great artery of our commercial
capital, with the ports of Texas, Florida, Alabama, and Louis-
iana, sends abroad the cotton crop of the country, and when the
immense agricultural wealth of the Great West is upon the sea,
threading its devious way between the Cuba and Florida shores.
From the statistics of the past, the value of American produce
which will thus seek an outlet to the Atlantic highway of com-
merce during the year 1852, cannot be estimated at less than
$200,000,000 ; and this estimate is irrespective of the California
and Pacific trade over the routes alluded to, and which, in the
course of twenty years, will exceed all our present China and
East India trade. The hills of Cuba overhang this passing
wealth, and her people look down upon it as from sentry boxes.
The right bank of the Mississippi is the north side of Cuba, as its
left bank is the Florida Keys. Six steamers may bridge the in-
termediate strait, and speak each other every fifty minutes ; and
hence we may confidently predict that the first naval contest in
which we shall ever be engaged, will be here near the Cuban
shores,* whose secure harbors and abundant resources are open
to all belligerents.

These facts speak for themselves ; and comment upon the
matchless geographical position of this island, and its inevitable
connection with our future commercial and naval history, is un-
necessary ; but they are rendered more significant when regarded
in connection with the positions already occupied by Great Bri-
tain on this continent, and her apparent disposition to "re-annex"
territory at the South.

She has, with that remarkable forecast which has ever distin-
guished her statesmen, secured almost every important or salient
point between the Coast of Yucatan and the Orinoco. She oc-
cupies every rock and harbor of the Bahamas where a. gun can
be planted or a ship moored ; and her military stations, her naval
refitting and repairing resorts, extend from Trinidad, through the
Caribbean sea and the windward islands, to Cuba ; and even at
the lone and distant Bermudas she has a naval rendezvous. From
these numerous points she looks out upon our immense commerce
defiling through the Florida straits ; and were she possessed of
Cuba, and a decided naval superiority, she would have her hand
upon the gate of the Mississippi, and wayfarers to or from it
would consult her. She has long been aware of the importance

* Commodore Rodgers, in 1824.

6

of commanding this strait ; and in 1819, Mr. Huskisson, whose
mind grasped every subject within the political horizon of his coun-
try, called the attention of Parliament to the importance of tak-
ing possession of the Tortugas Islands.

These brief observations, hints rather, are made to illustrate in
a measure the special and prospective importance of cultivating
cordial relations with the people of Cuba in its present political
condition. To those who look forward to or speculate upon the
probabilities of its acquisition by purchase or otherwise, the wis-
dom of connecting ourselves, and consequently our government,
more intimately with it, is apparent. Open our markets to its
vessels, invite her ships, her seamen, and her traders to our ports,
multiply intercommunication with her people, educate her chil-
dren, and let time pass on and bring about the rest. But while
we have sent ships and presents to Muscat to induce its people
to come to trade with us — while we have been endeavoring for
years to increase our trade with China — and while we are at this
moment engaged in an attempt to induce the Japanese to come
to our ports to trade — we have effectually closed them to the ton-
nage of Cuba, by making it the interest of its shipping to keep
away.

It may be useful to recur to the treaties that have existed, or
are now in force, between this Government and that of Spain.
The first treaty between the United States and Spain was that of
"San Lorenzo et Real," made on the 27th of October, 1795, by
Mr. Pinckney and Godoy, " Prince of Peace." It will be found
in the 8th vol. U. S. Statutes at Large, p. 138.

The next was a convention of indemnification between the Uni-
ted States and Spain, made August 11, 1802, by "Don Pedro Ce-
vallos" and Mr. Pinckney, ratified by the United States January
9, 1804, and by the King of Spain, July 9, 1818. (See 8th vol.
U. S. Stat, at Large, 198.)

The Florida treaty, made 22d February, 1819, by Mr. Adams
and " Don Louis de Onis," ratified by the King of Spain 24th Oc-
tober, 1820, and by the U. States 19th February, 1821, and final
ratifications exchanged February 22. (See 8 vol. U. S. Stat, at
Large, p. 252.

The last was a convention for the settlement of claims, made
17th February, 1834, by Mr. C. P. Van Ness and Don Jose de He-
redia, and ratifications of which were exchanged at Madrid Au-
gust 14, 18j4. (See 8th vol. U. S. Stat, at Large, p. 450.)

No provision in any of these treaties touches the subject under
consideration, except perhaps the fifteenth article of the Florida
treaty, which is in these words :

" The United States, to give to his Catholic Majesty a proof of
their desire to cement the relations of amity subsisting between
the two nations, and to favor the commerce of the subjects of His
Catholic Majesty, agree that Spanish vessels coming laden only
with the productions of Spanish growth or manufactures, directly
from the ports of Spain or of her colonies, shall be admitted for

the term of twelve years to the ports of Pensacola and St. Augus-
tine, in the Floridas, without paying other or higher duties on
their cargoes or of tonnage than will be paid by vessels of the
United States. During the said terra uo other nation shall enjoy
the same privileges within the ceded Territories. The twelve
years shall commence three months after the exchange of the
ratification of this treaty."

This term of twelve years expired on the 22d May, 1833.

The commercial policy of Spain has ever been restrictive upon
other nations, and especially so with reference to their trade with
her colonies. The United States have made frequent attempts to
effect a relaxation of these restrictions ; and though with some
success as to the trade with the mother country, they have utter-
ly failed to produce, to any important extent, an amelioration of
the onerous restrictions upon the trade and navigation with the
latter. The published documents of Congress show, it is believed,
all the negotiation that has been had with Spain upon this sub-
ject. I refer to the most important of them in note A.

The duties charged by Spain on American shipping entering her
ports (not those of her colonies) was, for many years prior to
1817, about five cents per ton ; whilst at that very time, and for
years afterwards, the United States charged upon Spanish ship-
ping fifty cents tonnage, and fifty cents light money per ton.

Our exaction of this heavy duty caused countervailing regula-
tions by Spain upon our vessels, which operated quite onerously ;
and in 1832, by the efforts of Mr. Van Ness, our Minister at Mad-
rid, the Royal Order of the 29th April, 1832, was issued. This
reduced the tonnage duty on American vessels in the ports of
Spain to that charged prior to 1817, which was five cents per
ton ; but the order was not to take effect until the tonnage duty
on Spanish vessels in the United States should be equally reduced.
This order did not include the colonies. We had charged tonnage
duty on Spanish shipping under the act of 20th July, 1790, (Rev.
laws U. S., p. 8,) and light money under the act of 27th March,
1800, (Rev. laws U. S. p. 169,) and the discontinuance of these
charges was authorized by the act of July 13, 1832. (Rev. laws
U. S., p. 351.) Mr. Van Ness sought to induce the Spanish Gov-
ernment to embrace within this royal order Cuba and Porto Rico,
but it was refused. The charges in both islands were, however,
reduced on American shipping to some extent, and have since,
without reference to this order, been modified at different times.

In applying a different rule to her colonial trade from that
which she was willing to frame for her home trade, Spain but
followed the lead of every commercial nation. The powers of
Europe possessing colonies have ever claimed, that the carrying
trade with them belongs exclusively to the mother country ; and
general regulations respecting the trade of foreign nations with
such mother country do not apply to the colonial trade, unless spe-
cially included. Sound policy, without reference to commerce,
dictates that the carrying trade of such colonies should be in their

8

hands, or in those of their colonies, and that the intercourse of
foreigners with such colonies should be subject in all respects to
the immediate exercise of their restraining power. Spain, above
all other nations, contended for this policy. She ascribed the loss
of her valuable possessions on this continent, in some measure, to
a departure from it. And this policy, thus maintained by the old
nations of Europe, is not dissimilar in principle to, and can, per-
haps, be as well sustained by argument, as that adopted by the
United States and enforced up to this hour, excluding foreign ves-
sels from participating in our coasting trade.

They are both based, as are all commercial restrictions, upon
pure selfishness ; and whenever this principle mingles with legis-
lation, its results, like those of selfishness in private life, are fre-
quently worse than the evils sought to be averted.

Finding that Spain would not permit us to participate equally
with herself in the carrying trade of her colonies, we adopted to-
wards her a coercive policy, and passed the act of 13th July,
1 832, (" An act concerning the tonnage duty on Spanish vessels")
the 2d section of which requires Spanish vessels coming from any
of the colonies of Spain to pay in the ports of the United States
the same tonnage duties that are levied on American vessels in
such colonies ; and it requires the Secretary of the Treasury to
ascertain these rates, and to instruct the collectors accordingly.

This act failed to produce the desired effect, and the act of 30th
June, 1834, still more stringent in its character, was passed. Its
provisions are remarkable. Spanish vessels leaving the ports of
the United States are required to file with the collector of the
port from whence they clear, a bond with sureties in double the
value of the vessel and cargo, that no portion of the cargo shall
be landed in Cuba or Porto Rico. If they fail to give the bond,
(as must be the case of all vessels destined to either island,) then
the collector is required to collect from them a duty which shall be
equal to the diferential duty chargeable in Cuba (or Porto Rico)
upon the same cargo in a foreign vessel ; and this duty is called
and returned by the collector as a discriminating tonnage duty.
To place this in a broader light, I will state the following exam-
ple : Suppose a Spanish and an American vessel, each of 200
tons burden, and laden with one thousand barrels of flour, to
clear from New York at the same time for Havana. On ente-
ring at Havana the charges on the Spanish ship would be —

Two hundred tons, at 5 reals (.$g) - - - $125 00

"Ponton" duty, at If reals per ton - - - 43 75

168 75
On 1,000 barrels of flour, at $8 50 - - 8,500 00

Total duty on ship and cargo - 8,668 75

9

On the American ship 200 tons, at $1 50 per ton - $300 00
Per ton duty: If reals - - - - 43 75

343 75
On 1,000 barrels flour, at $9 50 - - - 9,500 00

9,843 75

Difference between the tonnage and cargo duties - $1,175*

And the American collector in such a case would exact from
the Spanish ship, before permitting her to depart, this difference
of $1,175, which, as a tonnage duty on such a vessel, would be
equivalent to $5 87j per ton.

I have taken the article of flour as an illustration, because it
is one of the first necessity, and because it is one upon which the
Government of Spain is powerless to rescind her protective duty.
A proposition in the Spanish cortes to admit foreign flour into
the colonies on an equality with Spanish flour would be heard
and treated with about the same excitement and indignation as
would be a proposition in Lowel or Boston to abolish all duties
upon the manufactures of cotton.

Castile and La Mancha are the great producers of wheat,
and have been called the granaries of the world, and in exchange
for their flour they receive from Cuba her sugar, coffee, and man-
ufactured tobacco. The article of flour too, strongly illustrates
the suicidal effects of the acts in question.

The returns of the Havana customs show that from 1826 to
1833, both inclusive, there were 522,136 barrels of American
flour entered there; of which, 318,244 were carried in Spanish
bottoms; and that from 1834 to 1843, (after these acts were
passed,) both inclusive, there were but 466,534 barrels of Ameri-
can flour entered, only 135,197 barrels of which were carried in
Spanish bottoms ; and that during the last year, 1843, there were
but 310 barrels thus carried. During the eight years previous to
the act of 1834, there were 55,602 more barrels than during the
ten years subsequent to it. The annual average number of bar-
rels carried from the United States in Spanish bottoms before the
passage of the act, was 39,780, whereas but 310 were thus car-
ried in 1843, after it had been in force nine years, and it is be-
lieved that none have been so carried since that date. During
the year 1849, as shown by La Balanza General del Comercio de
la Isla de Cuba, the importation of flour into the Island was
215,837| barrels, valued at $2,696,334^. Of this, there came
from Spain, in Spanish vessels, 213,800 barrels, worth $2,672,500 ;
and from the United States, in vessels other than Spanish, but
797 barrels, worth $9,334^. Not one barrel is shown to have
been imported from the United States in a Spanish vessel.

* A small duty upon the value of the flour, estimated at $12 50 per barrel, and a bo-
lanza duty — i. e., a per centage on the duty, makes the duty on Americon flour, in
American bottoms, about $9 84| per barrel.

10

The object of the acts of 1832 and 1834, and the only object,
was to coerce Spain into the adoption of regulations for the bene-
fit of our commerce at the expense of her own ; and this object
was sought without regard to her commercial treaties with other
countries, which precluded her from extending modifications or
favors to our shipping which would not apply equally to theirs.
The act of 1834 was reported, advocated, and passed, exclusively
as a retaliatory measure. As such, it was recommended by the
President and sustained by his administration ; and Congress was
informed that our Minister at Madrid believed that it would com-
pel Spain to relax her restrictions upon our trade with Cuba and
Porto Rico. Had a doubt of such a result been entertained, or
had its consequences been foreseen, it could never have passed.
The Congressional documents upon the subject show that it was
passed at the instance of the navigation interest, and to protect
that interest and "the honor of the American flag," as it was said,
from Spain's "unjust" restrictions upon it, when at that very mo-
ment our shipping actually engrossed twenty -six per cent, of the
entire carrying trade of Cuba, while the flags of all the world, be-
sides covered but twenty-four per cent, of it. The act was passed
hurriedly, and without regard to the importance of the principle
it involved. Had it imposed still heavier burdens upon Spanish
vessels from Cuba, had its restrictions amounted to prohibitions
upon entering our ports, its effects, so far as respects the repeal
of the restrictions we sought to remove, would have been the
same. Those restrictions were the result of Spain's peculiar con-
dition. From having been the first naval power of the world,
she saw herself stripped of almost every ship of war, and utterly
destitute of a merchant marine. Possessing a seacoast of great
extent, with some of the finest harbors in the world, the noblest
colonies that ever a nation nourished, and material for seamen
of admitted excellence, her carrying trade, even to her own colo-
nies, was largely engrossed, if not monopolized by foreigners.
She saw the policy of fostering a merchant marine, and this could
only be done by encouraging the construction and navigation of
vessels by her subjects, and by discriminating in their favor. Self
preservation dictated this policy, and national pride sustained it.
All commercial nations, our own included, have adopted it.

The work was begun about twenty-eight years ago, and has
been steadfastly pursued, and the result is that the Spanish Hag
now covers a large merchant marine embracing some of the
finest vessels afloat.

This act, in effect, is equivalent to a declaration to Spain, (and
thus is it regarded by the business men of Cuba,) that we will op-
pose any attempt of hers to reduce, the burdens upon her own
shipping.

The following extract from the report of the " Fiscal " to the
Captain General of Cuba, 1844, part 2d, No. 33, pages 278 to
287, and No. 34, pages 288 to 201, will show how this question
was regarded by the superintendency of the public revenue:

11

"To show the injustice of the measure, (alluding to the act of 1834,) let us compare
the imports of the two countries — (Cuba and the United States.) Our vessels coming
from the United States pay, on the value of their cargoes, from 174 to 214 per cent., and
those of the Americans, with the same cargoes, from 24^ to 30^ per cent.; the difference
between the two is from 7 to 9 per cent., giving a mean difference of eight per cent. —
(p. 283.)

"The government of the Union has the indisputable right to exercise equal discrimina-
tions upon our vessels to protect theirs and the products of their country, as have all other
nations ; but has it done so by the enactment of this law1? No! may it please your ex-
cellency, the American government has said that, in addition to the contributions com-
mon to other vessels, those of Spain engaged in the trade of Cuba and Porto Rico shall
pay an additional duty equal to the difference imposed in these islands between national
and American vessels ; that is to say, if foreign vessels pay in the United States 20 per
cent, more than American vessels, those of the islands must pay a differential duty of 28
per cent., a duty which augments just in proportion as we decrease the burdens imposed
on our vessels, though we do not increase those of the American vessels ! — (pp. 283-4.) *

" In other words, may it please your excellency, it is equivalent to the declaration of
the American government to that of his Majesty: In vain you think to protect your
shipping, even at the cost of the public revenue; because just so much as you lighten
your burthens upon it, just so much will we augment ours upon it! Such a violaton of
the rights of nations can hardly be conceived on the part of a great and liberal govern-
ment, and still less that it should be tolerated by Spain. — (Ibid.)

" This violation is more flagrant and manifest as it respects exhortations. As to im-
portations it is very well to levy equal (not different) duties upon cargoes imported into
both nations reciprocally, because the productions of the country thus have protection;
but with respect to exportations, what motive can the government of the United States
have to levy this differential duty, if it be not the extinction of our shipping, even at the
cost of her own productions? — (Ibid.)

" Thus, then, if to-morrow our government shall deem it right to make a sacrifice of
all parts of the imposts upon our marine, which it now pays, have strangers the right to
.receive the same in their ports? Evidently no, your excellency! all they can rightfully
do is to imitate the government of Spain, and to protect their marine at the cost of the
same sacrifice. But to augment the duties on our vessels in proportion as we decrease
them, when we do not increase those upon American vessels, and to convert this sacri-
fice made by the Spanish government into a means for its destruction, is what has never
been pretended to by any other nation, and cannot be tolerated by Spain without dis-
grace."— (pp. 284-'5.)

[A translation of other extracts from the same numbers of the " Fiscal' s Report" would
(further exhibit the views of the Spanish authorities in Cuba, of the injustice of the act
of 1834. The 34th number contains an exposition by the Fiscal of the loss of their
revenue by the present mode of estimating the tonnage of American vessels, and sug-
gesting that the American registered tonnage should no longer be taken, but that our
vessels should be re-admeasured by the Spanish custom-house officers.]

In levying tonnage duties upon foreign vessels we disregard
their registered capacity, and subject them to the same admeas-
urement prescribed for our vessels, though our system is different
from those of England and Spain, and less accurate than either-
Spain, on the contrary, in levying tonnage duty on our vessels,
adopts their registered burden, which is generally from ten to
twenty-live per cent, less than their actual capacity, and the
Spanish authorities state that, as applied to American vessels in
the Cuba trade, the difference is from thirty-seven to fifty per
cent. It is unnecessary to explain how this occurs; it is no
mystery to the shipmaster or merchant in that trade. On the
20th January, 1840, a proposition was submitted by the "Fiscal"
to ascertain the actual capacity of American vessels entering
Cuban ports, and to charge tonnage duty accordingly, and the al-
legation was then made that the registers of vessels in the trade
did not show truly their tonnage even according to the American
system of admeasurement. He also submitted the proposition

12

that provisions imported in Spanish vessels should be admitted to
" deposite," (public storage free of duty on certain conditions,) and
that this privilege should be withheld from American vessels.
Spain may very properly adopt both these measures, and produce
an immediate effect upon our shipping. A rigorous admeasure-
ment of vessels alone would augment her revenue materially.
And when we reflect that just to the extent that our vessels are
undermeasured, the important objects contemplated, viz : the
increase of her revenues from tonnage duties are frustrated, we
must not be surprised to find that she has adopted them. Spain,
or the Cuban Colonial Government, may otherwise, in various
ways, annoy our traders, our citizens, and our shipping, within
the jurisdiction of Cuba.

May not Spain, upon the same principle that we have put
forth to sustain the acts of 1832 and 1834, adopt other measures
tending to the most disagreeable results to this government. By
those acts we claim the right to disregard the internal political
and commercial relations of Spain, founded on her constitutional
laws with respect to her colonies, and to disregard her local and
internal regulations ; and we claim the right and insist that, with
reference to us, those relations and regulations should be held as
nothing ; and that we may trade with the colonies precisely as
with the mother country. To test the propriety of such claim, let
us suppose that Spain should say to the United States, " Well, we
will concede this principle ; we know nothing about your local
internal relations in the United States ; we know nothing about
your constitutional arrangements — we care nothing about them ;
if we did know all about them, we have a right to disregard them
in our commercial regulations with respect to your country. The
law of self-interest is the law of nations on such subjects, and to
that law only will we conform.

Suppose she should say further, " the odious and and restrictive
laws of 1832 and 1834 were for the benefit of one portion of the
United States ; it is the portion whose interests are most antago-
nistic to ours ; it is the portion whose feelings and sympathies are
less congenial to my people in my colonies of Cuba and Porto
Rico, than are those of the other sections of the United States,
and my interests also prompt me to restrict my Cuba and Porto
Rico commerce with the United States to the Atlantic ports south
of Delaware bay, and to the gulf ports." What answer could be
made by the United States to such arguments ? Could we, in the
face of the acts of 1832 and 1834, gainsay the claim of Spain to
disregard our internal relations, though founded on the Federal
Constitution ? Would not Spain, in defence of such distinction
made by her with respect to ports of the United States, be fur-
nished as to us, by these acts, with a conclusive justification for
such course ? Could we consistently remonstrate with Spain
that by our constitutional laws all the States in the Union, with
reference to foreign governments, are one, and that the laws and
regulations as to trade and commerce with us must regard those

-^

13

laws ? Would such argument be any stronger than that Spain
now urges? "My colonies, by my constitutional law, are not in-
cluded in my general regulations of trade and commerce with
other governments, and it is a fundamental principle of policy of
my government to look to their trade as exclusively my own ; and
when I have waived this rule, it has been because it was dictated
by my own interests, or as a favor to my colonies, or to other
governments." Would it be any answer to contend that our
course is to coerce Spain to adopt the principle of "free trade"
between her colonies and us, and that in her policy hitherto per-
sisted in, and in the measures it is intimated she may adopt, the
restrictive principle is sustained. It is presumed such answer
would have little cogency till the principle of free trade becomes
a part of the code of international law, extending to all coun-
tries and their colonies. Nor will the argument that our resis-
tance to such distinction between the States of this Confederacy
and that between Spain and her colonies is based in both instan-
ces upon the same rule, that one government is to look to every
portion of another as one, receive much greater consideration.
Spain can, with great force, dispute the analogy urged to sustain
our consistency, and contend lor the wiser and more reasonable
rule founded on dictates of comity, that every government should,
in its relations with other governments, recognise and conform to
their local and internal arrangements and laws ; and for her vio-
lation of that rule in the measures adverted to, she would con-
tent herself with a simple reference to the acts of 1832 and 1834,
founded upon our assumed right to disregard the relations be-
tween her and her colonies, as her justification. She would in-
sist on the same right to adopt such commercial regulations as
her interests might dictate, without reference to our local and in-
ternal laws, as we have to do so in disregard of her internal
laws.

The encouragement of her own tonnage and seamen, and not
the injury of those of other nations was her aim ; and to this end
she chose to make a distinction in favor of her own tonnage in
her coasting trade, (for the trade between the mother country and
Cuba is nothing else ;) a distinction neither onerous nor invidious
upon any particular flag, but equally applicable to all, and in fa-
vor only of her own. And this discrimination, made in the exer-
cise of a wise and patriotic discretion, was barely sufficient to
effect the great national object in view. We have discriminated
in various ways in favor of our tonnage and seamen, from our
national birth to the present hour. We do not permit foreign
vessels, or vessels in which foreigners own a timber head, to en-
gage in our coasting trade ; and, to encourage our seamen, we
compel our vessels to have two-thirds of the crew, exclusive of
officers, Americans, under heavy penalties. And here, it may be
remarked, that if the island of Cuba were to come into our pos-
session, and be held and governed by a Territorial organization,
we would most certainly withhold from Spain, and from every

14

other nation, the very privilege which we have attempted to co-
erce from her. We demand the privilege of trading with her
colony upon an equality with her ; and we say at the same time,
if the colony should become ours, a similar proposition from her
would not be listened to for a moment. We acquired from her
the Floridas, and we limited the continuance of her commerce
with them to the period of twelve years by a special article of the
treaty of 1819, a privilege for which she gave an equivalent.

Our flag was not particularized by her discriminations; and
the attempt to coerce her into rescinding them, so far as regarded
our flag, and to the abandonment of her settled policy, at the very
moment, too, when we engrossed twenty-six per cent, of her car-
rying trade of those islands, was unwise and ill-timed. Her restric-
tions were confined to her colonial trade. We do not permit
foreign tonnage to engage in our trade between the Atlantic
States and California, a trade embracing voyages of three times
the duration, distance, and hazards of those between Spain and
Cuba ; and while we are endeavoring to force from her the privi-
lege of thus engaging in her colonial trade, as if they were home
ports, it may be as well to reflect whether we are prepared to
reciprocate and permit her to share with us our coasting trade to
Oregon and California.

The act of 1834, professedly retaliatory, contemplated more
than reciprocity. Its exactions upon Spanish tonnage from Cuba
and Porto Rico exceed those which our vessels are subjected to in
those islands ; and to this extent, at least, its operation is not only
retaliatory, but vindictive. Upon foreign importations to Cuba in
Spanish bottoms, the ad valorem duties vary from 17^ to 2\\
per cent ; and upon the same cargoes in American (or other
foreign) vessels, 24| to 33^ per cent., the difference being seven
and nine per cent., giving a mean discriminating duty in favor of
Spanish vessels against all the world of eight per cent.

The Cuba Tariff of 1847 assessed duties a little differently, but
made the discrimination less by one per cent, at least.

Now, it might be presumed that, if we designed retaliation
simply, we would assimilate our restrictions to theirs, and charge
but eight per cent, additional duty upon their cargoes brought
into our ports. But such is not the operation of the act. Our
tariff of 1842 levied a discriminating duty of ten per cent, upon
dutiable merchandize imported in foreign vessels generally ; and
by this act of 1834, section first, the eight per cent, duty collected
as above stated on our vessels was imposed, and the differential
duty of ten per cent, besides, making our discriminations against
the vessels of Spain eighteen jjer cent., whilst her's against us
amounted to but eight per cent. The tariff of 1846 levies a duty
of twenty per cent, upon Cuba coffee in Spanish bottoms, though
it is a free article in our own, and in this case the twenty per
cent, being in addition to the eight per cent, before mentioned,
our exactions exceed theirs in analagous cases by twenty per
cent.

15

It is suggested that a comparison of the rates paid by Spanish
and American vessels in Cuba with those paid by the same ves-
sels in our ports, will demonstrate that our exactions far exceed
those of Spain. I make no reference to the Havana local and
port charge, called the " mud" or " dredge" duty, because it is
analagous to various local charges collected in some of our own
ports, and indeed in many ports of all countries, and is no more a
just subject of complaint than pilotage or quarantine fees. But
the most objectionable feature of the act of 1834 is, that its ex-
actions are not fixed and determined, but vary with the legisla-
tion of Spain upon her own shipping, though she may abstain
from increasing the burdens of ours. If Spain, still more to en-
courage her shipping, shall reduce its tonnage duties without in-
creasing her charges upon our vessels, our exactions increase in
exact proportion to such reduction. Suppose, for example, that
the present rates were one dollar per ton on Spanish, and two
dollars per ton on American vessels, the discrimination in favor
of Spain would be one dollar per ton. But if she abolish the duty
on her own vessels the discrimination becomes two dollars per
ton, and this rate we would exact from her vessels clearing from
our ports " in addition to all other legal charges^

The navigation interest of Spain is annually increasing, and
relaxations upon her tonnage have been gradually made for years
past, and will continue to be made, even at a great sacrifice of
her public revenues. The importations into Cuba in Spanish ves-
sels in the year 1849 amounted to $16,367,000, and in foreign
vessels to $9,954,000 ; and hence it will be seen how greatly the
revenue of the Island must have suffered by the discrimination in
favor of her own shipping.

Supposing that but half of these $16,000,000 would have been
imported under her former laws in Spanish vessels, the differen-
tial duty of eight per cent, on the other half would have been
$640,000, a sum equal to five per cent, on her gross revenues.
But her aim is to create a flourishing merchant marine, and this
she will accomplish. Our legislation she believes is designed to
thwart or retard the work ; and this belief, which is current
amongst the merchants and ship owners of Cuba, has thus far
disappointed, and will forever disappoint, the hopes which those
who framed the act in question had of coercing her into our mea-
sures. The operation of this legislation is thoroughly understood
in Cuba to be unequal, unjust, and vindictive ; and it has not only
failed to induce the slightest amelioration of the restrictions com-
plained of, but has actually brought forth propositions from dis-
tinguished officials to the government of Cuba for meeting it by
countervailing exactions. We must not be surprised to see mea-
sures of this character adopted there.

Such a awtBfli by Spain would doubtless be opposed to the
spirit of the age, and unsustainable upon any principle except
that of retaliation. But passing events may, notwithstanding,
induce her to adopt measures which may place the impolicy of

16

our legislation in a still more glaring light. It is unnecessary to
name them. Another vexatious and onerous feature of the act
of 1834 is, that it operates to some extent, upon Spanish vessels
in the United States engaged in the trade with the mother coun-
try, though it was designed only to extend to those in the colo-
nial trade. As was before observed, the Spanish ship by her
owner or consignee clearing from the United States, is required
to give a bond, with two sureties, in double the value of the ves-
sel and cargo, conditioned that no part of her cargo shall be
landed in Cuba or Porto Rico. The amounts of such bonds are
necessarily large, and their conditions more or less hazardous and
responsible. Consignees and sureties can rarely be found wil-
ling to incur such risks, and peril their property without some per
centage above an ordinary commission of two and a half per
cent. ; and superadded to the labor and difficulty which the Span-
ish shipmaster encounters in a strange land in finding three
moneyed men willing to become his securities, is the loss of pay-
ing them for their risk. Thus even the trade between the United
States and Spain in Spanish vessels, which is protected by mu-
tual commercial stipulations, and which was not contemplated
by the act of 1834, is embarrassed and retarded.

The following statement of tonnage duties payable in Cuba,
is taken from the Cuban tariff of 1847, the charges being now
the same :

" All vessels entering any of the ports of the island pay, if
foreign, one dollar and fifty cents per ton, and sixty-two and a half
cents per ton, if national.

" All vessels clearing from any of said ports laden with molas-
ses are exempt from tonnage duties.

" All vessels that come and sail in ballast are not liable to duty ;
but if they lade with fruits of the country or other articles (car-
goes of molasses excepted) they pay according to the first regu-
lation.

" Vessels entering for water or provisions are exempted from
tonnage duty, but if they unload their cargoes in whole or in
part, or lade with the fruits of the country, or other articles (mo-
lasses excepted) they will pay tonnage duty according to the
first regulation.

" All vessels, foreign or national, which have paid tonnage du-
ties, and cleared from any port of the island, shall, if putting in-
to any other by gales of wind or other accident, be exempt from
new tonnage duty.

" All vessels, foreign or national, in whatever condition and
for whatever cause, entering the port of Havana, shall pay, in
addition to the foregoing, one and three quarter reals (21^ cts.)
for every ton of measurement, designed to maintain the ' ponton.' "

The evil effects in part of our retaliatory legislation will be
seen from the following facts :

When the acts of 1832-'34 were passed, the population of Cuba
was 750,000, and our exports to the island amounted to $5,672,700,

17

and they had been annually increasing in value. They consis-
ted chiefly of beef, pork, lard, butter, dried, smoked, and pickled
fish, cheese, flour, rice, hams, lumber, stoves, and manufactures of
iron, wood, and cotton. She received lumber and salted fish as
well from Florida as from the Eastern States. The produce of
the West went from New Orleans, and the manufactures of the
North from the Atlantic cities. The manufacturing and agri-
cultural interests of our country were rapidly acquiring a decided
preponderence over those of other nations in her markets. Situ-
ated within eight hours sail of some of our territories, and but
a few days distance from its large commercial and manufactur-
ing depots, it was the interest of the Spanish merchant, trader,
and navigator, to establish relations with our country for the
prompt and profitable supply of Cuban demands.

It was not uncommon at that time for flour to sell from thirty
to forty-five dollars per barrel in the Havana market ; and a scar-
city of any article of provisions or of manufactures, was readily
supplied by the Spanish vessels in the American trade. I have
shown that the export of flour in Spanish bottoms alone at
this time, was at the rate of over thirty-five thousand barrels per
annum. Cuba consumed (and this must ever be the case) large
amounts of the fine fabrics, silks, linen, lawns, and laces, &c, of
India, France, and England. These articles, subject to the ca-
prices of fashion, and liable to deterioration upon long voyages,
were exported from the United States to Cuba, with the privilege
of drawback, leaving in the hands of American merchants and
ship owners, commissions and freight ; and now that we have de-
creased the width of the Atlantic one-half, and have weekly com-
munication with the continent of Europe, it may be readily seen
that this particular trade would be carried on between New York
and Cuba if Spanish tonnage were permitted to engage in it.

The farmer and the manufacturer will readily appreciate the
difference between selling to the purchaser at his door, and send-
ing his productions abroad to abide the perils of a sea voyage,
and the expenses of freight, commissions, insurance, &c. And but
for the act in question, the lumber and salted fish and much of
the raw cotton of Florida, the provisions of the Great West, and
the manufactures of the North would be sold at home to the Cu-
ban trader.

The act of 1834 has now been in force seventeen years, a period
amply sufficient to test its policy ; and who can look at the pre-
sent condition of our trade, and of our relations generally with
Cuba, and fail to see how ill-timed and suicidal it was ?

The population of Cuba is now (1851) 1,200,000, and its trade has
greatly increased. In 1848 its imports amounted to $25,435,565, ^ /
and its exports to $*;077,067, and in 1849 its imports amounted «£*, ^
to $26,320,460, and its exports to $22,436,556, making the aggre-
gate trade of 1848, $51,512,632, and that of 1849, $48,757,016.

Our geographical position, our admirable merchant marine and
great agricultural and manufacturing interests, combine to iss-
2

18

sure us that our participation, in this trade would steadily and
measurably increase with the population and resources of Cuba ;
and such must inevitably have been the result but for our expe-
riment in retaliation. But, in fact, our exports have almost stood
still. Our own Treasury statistics show the value of exports to
Cuba for the year ending 30th June, 1851, to have been $6,524,1 13,
a gain in seventeen years of $851,413. Great Britain and the
continental countries trading with Cuba, adopted no retalitory
measures to countervail her restrictions, and they have been
greatly benefited by our unwise legislation, as the following table
of Cuban imports for 1849, will to some extent, show:

Imports in Spanish vessels.

From Spain ... $7,575,130 06^

United States - - - - 11,048 00

France ----- 770,920 00

Great Britain ... - 4,345,299 00

South America --- - 1,070,749 00^

Germany ----- 912,727 04

Belgium ----- 323,297 01

Holland - - - - - 17,104 00

Denmark ----- 320,206 01^

Total value of imports in Spanish vessels - $16,366,844 06^

Deduct value of imports from Spain - - 7,675,130 06|

The value brought in Spanish vessels from coun-
tries other than Spain - - - $8,691,714 00
Deduct imports in Spanish vessels from U. S. - 11,048 00

Total imports in Spanish vessels from foreign

countries other than the United States - $8,680,666 00

From this it will be seen that the imports from the United
States in Spanish vessels are but $11,048, while they amount to
$8,680,666 in Spanish vessels from other countries foreign to
Spain.

Assuming that Great Britain's exports during the last fiscal
year equalled those of the year 1849, (our last Spanish official
returns,) our exports exceed hers only by $713,443; the value of
ours being $6,524,113, and that of hers $5,810,670, while from
France the Cuban imports were (1849) $1,252,457, and from
South America, $2,197,630.

Before the passage of the act of 1834, Cuba obtained her rice
almost exclusively from our Southern States. It is subject to de-
terioration and fluctuation in price. In 1849, the Cuban import
of rice was 21,820,167 lbs., worth $1,092,597, of which the value
of $799,563 only came from the United States. She now gets rice
from Valencia, South America, England, Brazil, Holland, and,
even from the free port of St. Thomas, where it is carried in Ame-
rican vessels from the United States, and brought thence to Cuba

19

in Spanish vessels. What a commentary this upon commercial
restrictions ! The Cuban imports of cotton manufactures for the
same period amounted to $2,487,205, of which the value of all
imported from the United States was but $73,931.

Every traveller who lands from the United States in Cuba, a
voyage which may be performed in eight hours, is sensible at
once of the wonderful transition ; and the great feature of the
transition is, the absence of every thing American ; and he is sur-
prised, while English, French and German goods and manufac-
tures are everywhere seen, to discover so few of those of his own
country.

In enacting the laws of 1832 and 1834, we seem to have been
guided rather by the consideration of what Spain was gaining
than of what we should lose. Tbey were unjust and ill-timed,
and experience has fully shown their utter insufficiency to attain
the end proposed. We then engrossed more of Cuban trade than
all the rest of the world united, and forbearance on our part with
restrictions which Spain could not relax towards us without re-
laxing them equally with other nations, would have done more to
affect their amelioration than all the aggressive acts we might
have passed. We have driven her merchants and traders to seek
in the ports of France, England, the Low Countries, and Russia,
for a large class of products and manufactures which they would
otherwise have obtained from us. But for this mistaken policy,
the Northern and Eastern manufactures generally would have
found their way to Cuba in Spanish bottoms ; and a market of
great and progressive value would have been opened for a large
class of products of the Middle, Western, and Southern States,
which are now but rarely carried there. Spanish restrictions
upon our vessels have the effect of confining them to the carriage
of the ordinary staples of provisions, because they pay the best ;
and our restrictions upon Spanish vessels deprive them of all
chance of a profitable investment in any branches of the trade.
Our agricultural and manufacturing interests are thus made to
bear a heavy loss to foster a small portion of the shipping interest.

One reason formerly given for fostering this interest viz : that
our packets enjoyed a large passenger trade, in which it was un-
wise to permit Spanish vessels to participate — if it ever possessed
any weight, has lost it, since this branch of trade is now wholly
engrossed by our steamers, which will continue to engross it under
any circumstances. Previous to the acts in question, Cuba main-
tained a trade with the Southern Atlantic and Gulf States, mu-
tually beneficial. The South has but few vessels ; and many of
the agricultural products of her farmers, which would yield a
handsome profit if their Spanish customers were permitted to
come for them, will not pay for transportation under the present
restrictive system — and a market for them is therefore lost.
Spanish vessels that formerly engaged in this trade, taking from
the South live stock, lumber, salt, salted fish, breadstuffs, rice, cot-
ton, &c, brought in exchange their fruits, coffee, segars, and other

20

015

products. But the act in question has not only deprived the ag-
riculturalists of the South of a market, but it compels them, to
some extent, to pay for these articles, in addition to their original
cost, all the expense of importing them from Northern cities.
Florida gets her Cuba coffee, &c, from New York.

Florida possesses extensive and valuable fisheries, and great
facilities for raising cattle. Both branches of trade will become
highly profitable to her, and to Alabama, Texas, and every other
State similarly situated, if Cuban vessels shall be encouraged to
come to their ports to purchase.

We have tested for seventeen years the act of 1834 as a com-
mercial measure, and have sacrificed to it important interests ;
and sound policy certainly dictates its repeal or modification.
Should its repeal at this time be deemed inexpedient, its opera-
tion may be suspended for a definite period ; but if neither mea-
sure be adopted, it should certainly be so modified as to exempt
Spanish vessels of less than eighty tons burden from its opera-
tion. Such vessels could not compete with American shipping
now in the trade, and they would limit their voyages to American
ports contiguous to Cuba where no such trade now exists.

F/7S3

Conservation Resources
Lig-Free® Type I