Mr. ROMERO. I have a few unimportant amendments to propose to this report; but in order to save time, I prefer to consult privately with the members of the committee, and if the report is not put to a vote to-day, I shall do so; but I have one observation to make at this time, and before I do so, I would ask the committee to be kind enough to tell me if by "registered ton" is understood to mean gross tonnage or net tonnage.

Mr. VARAS. The committee has taken as a basis what is generally understood by "registered ton," that is to say, the capacity of the vessel, according to the registry of its tonnage capacity. I think that when we say "registered ton," we mean exactly what is understood by the term.

Mr. HURTADO. The result of the measurement of the vessel shows the number of tons entered in her register; but there are two kinds of registered tonnage, the old and the new, and it would be well to explain which of these two systems is taken as a basis, because some countries have adopted one and others the other system.

Mr. VARAS. It appears to me that a slight explanation will remove the difficulty raised by the honorable delegate from Colombia as regards the recommendation. When we employ here the term registered ton, we mean the capacity which is given by each country to a vessel when it is officially registered; therefore, when a vessel sails from the United States it carries with it a statement of its official tonnage capacity, and this is what we take. Each vessel is obliged to carry with it its register, which sets forth its capacity stated in tons. Now, then, we are not

going to establish, nor do we think ourselves authorized to establish, any one method of ascertaining this, but to accept that register or tonnage capacity which each country establishes for its vessels. So that when a vessel which sails from New York with its tonnage capacity registered, be it by the old or the new method, that measurement is the one which is accepted as official and upon that the tonnage dues are assessed. I think that this explanation removes the difficulty upon this point.

Mr. ROMERO. The chairman of the committee having been good enough to reply to my question, I will proceed to discuss the point. I will commence by stating that I have read the report with great satisfaction, because it seems to me that the committee has studied the subject very carefully and that it has treated it properly.

Now, then, the honorable chairman of the committee has informed us that article second refers to the ship's register; but the register expresses both the gross and the net tonnage; and if nothing is said as to which kind of tonnage should be charged with this duty of 10 cents the point remains ambiguous. I must call attention to the remarks made by the honorable delegate from Colombia that, among the maritime nations of the world, and especially England, as I am informed, in order that only small dues should be collected upon her ships there has been established a system of measuring vessels, in virtue of which the register shows a relatively minimum capacity.

There are, as I am informed, three systems for measuring the capacity of a vessel; one called the English method, in use in England and in other na

tions; another called the German method, and yet another, the result of a convention concluded in Constantinople which was signed by various European nations; this method was subscribed to by the United States, France, Holland, Belgium, Spain, and Greece and is called the Danubian.

In view of this it seems to me that it would be preferable, for the sake of uniformity in the measurement of tonnage capacity, to collect these dues upon the gross tonnage, imposing a smaller quota than that fixed for the net tonnage, even if it be 7 or 5 cents; but if this is impossible perhaps it might be better, in accordance with the suggestion made by the honorable delegate from Colombia, to state the system under which the measurement should be made, so that there should be uniformity in the system of tonnage measurement. For these reasons I asked the committee to be kind enough to inform me what is understood by tonnage register, whether it is gross tonnage or net tonnage; but be it what it may it seems to me worth while to take into consideration the suggestion I made to the Conference.

Mr. VARAS. I regret to be compelled to occupy the attention of the Conference upon the subject of the report offered by the committee and I hope that it will excuse me. I had the honor to say, Mr. President, and I again declare that the committee in saying tonnage register intended it to be understood as the official measurement of the capacity of the vessel made by the country to which it belongs.

That for fixing this official measurement there are several systems is for us a matter of secondary importance; no matter which of these systems is used,

the vessel still will have some registered tonnage, and the country to which the vessel sails is bound to accept the registry basis given it by the country to which it belongs, and which has fixed, let us suppose, a capacity of 4,000 tons. According to another system, for example that in use in Russia, this same ship might be given a capacity of 10,000 tons. Now, then, the foreign country to which this ship sails should take as a basis of computation for the tonnage dues this official capacity measurement, which has been given by the Russian Government.

We thought, Mr. President, that we should not depart from this rule, because any other system whatever might produce grave difficulties as can be easily

shown.

The honorable delegate from Mexico, as I understand, calls net tonnage what we call the official or registered tonnage; and he calls gross tonnage a greater carrying capacity than what is called net or registered tonnage. Now, then, a vessel which arrives at a Chilian port with its official registered or net tonnage, as the honorable delegate from Mexico calls it, would have to submit to an examination by the maritime authorities of Valparaiso in order to test the measurement and see whether this tonnage is the real carrying capacity of the vessel.

It will be easily understood that this one circumstance might be sufficient to create not only embarrassment but make the estimate of the dues a very costly matter, and then to what demands might this not lend itself? Would the captain of the vessel, who carries an authentic official tonnage registry of the

capacity of his vessel, accept a different estimate made by the Chilian authorities?

It will be seen that even if this did not bring about diplomatic controversy it would at least give rise to lasting, disagreeable, annoying, and costly complications.

For this reason we set aside the distinction between net and gross tonnage and used instead registered tonnage, understanding by this the official capacity assigned to the vessel by the nation to which it belongs.

I believe, sir, even though it might happen, at times, that a vessel paid a little less, this circumstance is of much less account than the conveniences which would result from accepting the official data and affording facilities for navigation.

Because of these considerations the committee insists that we should adhere to the present wording of the report, which embodies this idea, an idea which after discussion must remain clearly defined and established.

Mr. BOLET PERAZA. Mr. President, I beg to be allowed to say a word in addition to what has been said by my honorable colleague and fellow committeeman, Mr. Varas. We adopted the phrase "registered tonnage" without determining the system to which it belongs; but as, according to the statement made by the honorable delegate from Mexico, there are three distinct systems which are recognized, the following conclusion may be drawn: If this honorable delegate desires that there should be uniformity in the system this will come of itself, because one of the three systems must be more advantageous than the other two,