Daniel E. Sickles to Hamilton Fish, October 17, 1873

No. 425. Mr. Sickles to Mr. Fish.

Sir: I have the honor to forward herewith a copy of a note sent to the minister of state, on the 16th instant, asking such reforms in the customs regulations and administration in Cuba as will prevent the abuses practiced on foreign vessels in the ports of that island.

On the same day Mr. Layard and Mr. Lindstrand made similar representations on the part of their governments respectively.

I am promised a conference with the ministers of state and of the colonies about pending matters before the departure of the latter for Cuba and Porto Rico, in which I propose to invite the particular attention of his excellency to the grievances of which our ship-masters complain.

You will observe that the note as sent differs in several passages from the draught heretofore forwarded, and that the argument is fortified by additional citations from the revenue laws and customs regulations of Spain.

I am, &c.,

Sir: We, the undersigned, citizens of the United States, and owners and agents of vessels trading between this port and the several ports of the island of Cuba, would respectfully state that the practice of imposing fines on vessels arriving in Cuban ports by the Spanish customs authorities thereof, for so-called errors in manifesting cargo, has become so onerous and burdensome that we feel constrained to solicit the interference of your Department in our behalf.

The Spanish laws require that a vessel bound for Cuban ports shall make out manifests of cargo, the same to be certified by the Spanish consul residing at, or nearest to, the port of loading, in which manifest the captain must declare positively and without qualification, the several and different kinds of packages, their marks, the generic class of contents, as well as the weights and values of the same, and for every instance where, on arrival in Cuba, the examination of the cargo shows a difference between the packages and the weights, and contents of same as actually found, and the same as manifested, the vessel is fined, while the goods escape all responsibility.

That although the generic class of the goods is stated on the manifest, in compliance with the requirements of the Spanish laws, and said manifests accepted and certified to by the Spanish consul, yet the vessel is fined for not stating the specific class.

That we are entirely dependent on shippers of cargo for information as to weights, values, and contents of packages shipped, from which to make out manifests, and irresponsible parties often give erroneous description of their part of cargo, resulting in fines imposed on the vessels, at times greatly in excess of the freight, against which we have no redress.

That the customs authorities at the several ports in Cuba place different constructions on the laws relative to vessels, and the manifests of same, and fines have been imposed in one port for stating that for which fines were imposed in another port for omitting.

That the captain is only informed of any fines imposed on his vessel when he attempts to clear her at the custom-house, whereby he has either to pay the fines or detain the vessel indefinitely while contesting the same.

That although we are willing and endeavor to comply with the said laws regulating manifests, yet, under the conflicting constructions placed on same by the different collectors of customs in Cuba, we find it impossible to do so, or to avoid fines.

In cases where fines are imposed, an appeal to the superior authorities at Havana is permitted on payment, under protest, of said fines, but unless the amount of such fine is excessive, the delay occasioned by the detention of the vessel would exceed in most cases the amount of such fine, even if recovered.

We would respectfully represent to the Department that as the vessel, through her agents, is entirely dependent on the shippers of cargo for information necessary to describe on the manifest the contents and weights of packages shipped, the propriety of imposing fines on the goods erroneously described on manifest, instead of on the vessel, as then the shipper would have a sure remedy against the vessel in case of error on her part or on the part of her agents in making out manifests, while under existing regulations it is in most cases almost, if not impossible, for the vessel to recover the amount of fines from the shipper.

Therefore your memorialists pray that the Department will take such action in the matter as may seem most advisable to obtain such relief in the premises as they may be equitably entitled to.

New York, January 13, 1873.

• Waydell & Co.
• James Henry.
• R. P. Buck & Co.
• John Chrystal.
• Charles Cooper.
• Snow & Richardson.
• Oliver Bryan.
• Samuel Duncan.
• Lunt Dras. Brothers.
• H. W. Loud & Co.
• B. T. Thurlow & Son.
• John Swan.
• James E. Ward & Co.
• J. H. Winchester & Co.
• Miller & Houghton.
• Hand & Swan.
• Walch, Field & Way.
• Simpson, Clapp & Co.
• Henry Moss.
• Carver & Barnes.
• Evans, Ball & Co.
• H. D. & I. W. Brockman.
• Thompson & Hunter.
• Brett, Son & Co.
• R. H. Griffith.
• B. J. Wenberg.
• L. C. Wenberg.
• F. Alexandre & Sons.
• Boyd Hincken.
• S. C. Loud & Co.
• T. M. Mayhew & Co.
• James W. Elwell & Co.
• Abiel Abbot.
• J. O. Ward.
• Borland, Dearborn & Co.
• Atlantic Mail Steamship Co.
• A. W. Dimock, president.
• E. Sanches y Dolz.
• Warren Ray.
• Snow & Burgess.
• Jonas Smith & Co.
• E. D. Hurlbut & Co.
• Van Brunt & Brother.
• I. B. Phillips & Sons.
• C. H. Trumbull.

Boston, January 28, 1873.

• Bridge, Lord & Co.
• Aug’t B. Perry & Co.
• Gilmore, Kingsbury & Co.
• John S. Emery & Co.
• Kilham, Londt & Co.
• Cutter, McLean & Co.
• John Walter & Co.
• Doane & Crowell.
• Gammans & Co.
• Hinckley Brothers & Co.
• Pendleton & Rose.
• Thayer & Lincoln.
• Baker & Humphrey.
• Davis & Coker.
• Pitcher, Flinter & Co.
• Enoch Benner & Co.
• Alfred Blanchard & Co.
• Mayo & Tyler.
• Peters & Chase.
• Fowle & Carroll.
• William Haskins & Son.
• William McGilvery.
• Issac Coombs.
• Henry F. Lawrence.
• J. Baker & Co.
• Fitz, Brothers & Co.
• J. R. Coombs.
• John Rich & Co.
• Ambrose White.
• Love Joy.
• J. W. Linnell.
• Franklin Curtis.
• Edw. D. Peters & Co.
• Joseph Wilkerson & Co.

Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.