Imágenes de páginas


“The equalization of the salt duties throughout India at a reduced rate was completed in 1882 under the government of Lord Ripon. The duty was then fixed at 2 rupees per maund (82 pounds). In January, 1888, in consequence of financial pressure, the duty was raised to 23 rupees per maund, but it may be confidently hoped that this will be again reduced when circumstances permit. At the present rate the duty is about equivalent to an annual tax of 5 pence per head of the population.

“This is the only obligatory tax which falls upon the masses of the population of India, and, although they are very poor, it can not be said that the additional price which they have to pay for their salt is felt as an appreciable burden. The case was different twenty or thirty years ago, when high duties and, still more, the absence of means of communication made it difficult for the poorer classes in some parts of India to obtain a sufficient supply of salt. In 1877 the Government declared that its policy would aim at giving to the people throughout India the means of obtaining an unlimited supply of salt at the cheapest possible cost; that the interests of the people and of the public revenue are identical, and that the only just and wise system is to levy a low rate of duty on an unrestricted consumption. This principle has been acted on ever since with satisfactory results. The consumption has steadily increased, and the combined effect of reduction of duty, the extension of railways, and the general improvement in the means of communication has been to make salt cheaper in the greater part of India than it had ever been before, while the revenue is larger than before the reform of the old system was begun.

Unfortunately the temptation is always great in time of financial pressure to have recourse to the easy expedient of increasing the duty on salt. The vast majority of the people throughout India are probably unaware even of the existence of the tax; but it is on them that is, on the poorer classes-that the actual burden falls. The masses remain unmoved and silent, while the small and wealthier minority, who alone can make their voices heard, give loud approval to measures which impose no appreciable obligation upon themselves. No efforts consistent with financial prudence should be spared to reduce to the utmost the price of salt throughout India, and thereby to stimulate consumption. * * *

“The stamp revenue is derived partly from stamps on commercial papers, and partly from fees, levied by means of stamps, on proceedings in the judicial courts. It amounted in 1892–93 to Rx. 4,458,000, of which more than Rx. 1,250,000 was derived from commercial stamps, the rest from court fees.


"The revenue under the head of Excise, is derived from duties on spirits and intoxicating drugs. The people of India generally are extremely abstemious; the consumption of spirits is for the most part confined to the lower classes, but even among them there is, in the words of the Government of India, 'a condition of things, which, if it existed in England, would almost be regarded as the millenium of temperance. Drunkenness in the English sense of the term hardly exists in India. There has been a large and steady increase in the excise revenue. In 1870 it was less than Rx. 1,250,000; in 1880 in was Rx. 2,810,000; and it was Rx. 5,204,000 in 1892-93 Benevolent people in this country, carried away by the enthusiasm of ignorance, have found in such figures as these the opportunities for indignant protest inst the wickedness of a government which, with the object of obtaining revenue, affords, in defiance of native opinion, constantly increased facilities for drinking. There is no foundation for such assertions. The sole cause of the increase of revenue has been improved administration and the suppression of illicit distillation and sale.





The following statement regarding methods of raising revenue in the Malayan Peninsula is from a paper read before the Royal Colonial Institute, London, 1896, by Hon. F. A. Swettenham, “ British resident" in the Federated Malay States:

"The combined revenues of the five States were estimated to amount last year to about $8,000,000, which means that in the time British residents have controlled the finances of the protected States they have succeeded in increasing the revenues at least twenty-fold. I should like to go into details of that revenue, for you may wonder how it is raised after what I have said about the abolition of imports and exports.


"In all the States there are three main sources of revenue. First, an export duty on tin. It is a very high duty, about 12 per cent of the value of the metal, but we are justified in imposing it, because it is the country's capital, and the Chinese can work at such low rates that while the Malay Peninsula produces five-sixths of the world's tin it is able to command the market in this sense, that it can undersell every other tin-producing country; and when the price of metal falls so low that our miners have to curtail their operations, it will mean that in other countries the mines have already been shut down, and the consequence will be a smaller production and a rise in price. The tin duty is, then, our principal source of revenue, and I have consistently held the opinion, hitherto justified by results, that the rise and fall of prices in European markets need cause us no great anxiety; and if, by reason of a further fall, our production should be reduced, I do not think that fact should be regarded as an unmixed evil.

[ocr errors]


“Our next principal source of revenue is the heavy duty we impose on all opium imported. In some States the right of collecting this duty is sold for a term of years at a fixed monthly rental. That plan has objections, and I prefer the collection of the actual duty by Government officers. The opium question has so recently been the subject of exhaustive inquiry that I will refrain from further allusion to it, except to say that Eastern people are not altogether lacking in intelligence, and they, unfortunately, know that ii the great mass of Europeans are free from the opium habit, they indulge in intoxicants, and European governments profit by the indulgence. To the Eastern it appears preposterous and illogical that people at the other end of the world, alien to him in religion and sympathy, should busy themselves over his moral obliquities, when their own are so open to criticism.

The third principal source of revenue is a monopoly of the import duty on spirits, and the exclusive right to manufacture them for native consumption. This monopoly is usually ‘farmed,' as it is termed, to Chinese, and there is often included with it a similar monopoly of the right to license public gambling places and pawnbroking shops. It was perhaps natural that those in this country, who understand nothing of the conditions of society in the Malay Peninsula, who judge Chinese and natives of the Malay Peninsula and

Archipelago by their own standards of morality, and their own somewhat narrow-I had almost said ignorant-conception of the daily life of human beings in parts of the world beyond the reach of their study, should desire to see licensed gambling abolished in countries where British officers influence the administration ; but while I must deny myself the opportunity of giving you the multitude of reasong advanced by those who, with full knowledge and experience of the subject, hold contrary views, I will only say that where the gamblers are Chinese and the conditions of life such as prevail in the Malay States you may stop licensed gambling, but you can not put a stop to the far more pernicious practice of unlicensed gambling. In the wake of unlicensed gambling follows a train of evils that make the attempt at cure—and that a fruitless attempt-far more objectionable than the disease. This is exactly one of those points where it is assuredly wise to remember that our position in the Malay States is that of advisers.



“I have told you the main sources of revenue in all the States, sources which existed long before the days of British residents, but I must now mention two new items for which we are responsible. One is a land revenue. We put the people in absolute possession of the land they required, and in return for that we charge them with the payment of a quitrent, which varies in accordance with the class of land occupied. The revenue raised from this source in 1894 was: In Perak

$235, 666 Selangor....

138, 216 Sungei Ujong

35, 537 Negri Sembilan

32, 797 Pahang.

28, 367 Total.....

470, 583 “This item of revenue is capable of great expansion, especially when we undertake, as we have already in Pêrak begun to do, large schemes of irrigation to enable us to produce a rice crop at least sufficient for the consumption of our own people, and possibly surplus enough to feed the native population of the neighboring British colony.



"The other source of revenue is derived from railway receipts, and it is considerable. In Pêrak the railways are expected to produce this year $622, 750, and in Selangor $720,000, sums which give a very high rate of interest on the capital invested. In Sungei Ujong there is also a railway, but it belongs to a private company; it carries a Government guarantee, and so far has been a source of expense to the government of the State, though of course it has been a great public convenience. I trust these railways will, as funds permit, be considerably extended, and though it can not be expected that such proportionately high returns will be secured, still, the total receipts may be largely increased. The revenues derived from land and railways, the result of British advice and direction, are more satisfactory contributions to public funds than the monopolies which, as far as the railways are concerned, have supplied the means to construct them."



An analysis of the tariff relations existing between the colony and mother country, in countries other than the United Kingdom, was presented to the British Parliament in 1895 in the form of a series of reports made by British representatives located at the capitals of the countries in question. The question upon which they were directed to report was, in form, “The fiscal advantages accorded by foreign countries to goods imported from their colonial possessions, and conversely by the said colonial possessions to goods from their mother country.” The following is the full text of the reports in question:


The commercial relations between France and her colonies and foreign possessions are now governed by articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the Customs Law of January 11, 1892, which run as follows:

"Art. 3. The duties and immunities applicable to products imported into the mother country from colonies, from French possessions, and from countries of the Indo-Chinese Protectorate are established in Schedule E, annexed to the present law.

“The French territories of the western coast of Africa (with the exception of Gaboon), Tahiti and dependencies, the French establishments in India, Obock, Diego-Suarez, Nossi-Be, and Sainte Marie, of Madagascar, are exempt from the stipulations of Schedule E. French longeloth proceeding from the French establishments in India shall, however, be free of duty. Exemptions or reductions may, in addition, be granted for other natural products, or for those originally manufactured in the above-mentioned establishments. Such reductions and exemptions shall be established by means of decrees issued by the council of state. Natural products, or those originally manufactured in the aforesaid establishments, for which no exemption or reduction has been granted, shall pay, when imported into France, the duties stipulated in the minimum tariff.

* Foreign products imported into colonies, French possessions, and countries of the Indo-Chinese Protectorate, with exception of the territories enumerated in the preceding paragraph, shall be subject to duty as if imported into France.

"Decrees in the form of public administrative regulations, issued on the proposal of the minister of commerce, industry, and colonies, with the advice of the general councils or the administrative councils, shall designate the products which, in exception to the preceding provision, shall be subject to special duties.

“Paragraphs 1 and 3 of the present article shall not be executory for any colony until the regulations mentioned in paragraph 4 have been issued. The effect of this provision is limited to one year. The Government may, however, immediately grant all or part of the privileges stipulated in Schedule E to colonies which at the present time levy on foreign products the whole of the tariff duties of the mother country, or who subject colonial goods coming from abroad to the duties stipulated in the said tariff.

“Art. 4. The general councils and the administrative colonial councils may also suggest that modifications be made in the tariff of the mother country. The suggestions shall be submitted to the council of state, whose decisions thereon shall be issued in the same manner as the public administrative regulations mentioned in the preceding article.

“Art. 5. Native products of a French colony which are imported into another French colony shall be exempt from customs duty.

"Foreign proclucts imported from a French colony into another French colony shall be subject in the latter to the payrerit of the difference between the duties of the local tariff and those in the tariff of the exporting colony.

"Art. 6. The method of assessment, the regulations for collection and for the repartition of the sea octroi ("'octroi de mer?), shall be established by the general or the administrative councils, and ratified by decrees issued in the form of public asiministrative regulations.

“The sea octroi tariffs shall be voted by the general or administrative colonial councils. They shall be rendered executory by decrees issued on the proposal of the minister of commerce, industry, and colonies.

They may, however, be temporarily put in force in virtue of a governor's decree. The expenditure of the customs service for salaries, etc., shall be entered as obligatory expenses in the local colonial budgets.

"Art. 7. The provisions of article 10 of the law of the 29th December, 1884, relating to Algeria, are maintained in force.

"Art. 8. The government is authorized to levy surtaxes on, or to prohibit the importations of, all or part of goods the product of countries who levy or may levy surtaxes on, or prohibit the importation of, French goods.

“These measures must be submitted immediately to the chambers for ratitication, should they be sitting; should the chambers not be sitting, they must be submitted at the opening of the following session.”

The tariff for products imported into the mother country from French colonies and possessions, and from countries of the IndoChinese Protectorate, are set forth in Schedule E, referred to in article 3, section 1, as follows:

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Duties stipulated in the tariff of the mother country.


One-hall of duty stipulated in tariff of mother country.


Products of colonial origin:a

Sugar, molasses not for distilling purposes
Sirups and bonbons, sweet biscuiis..
Jams and fruits of all kinds preserved with sugar or honey
Coffee, in the bean, or roasted, or ground.
Pepper. pimento, cloves, cinnamon, cassia, lignes, amomums and cardamoms, nutmegs, mace, and


All products not above mentioned, the origin of colonies or possessions....
Products of forcign origin:
Imported from Algeria-

After having been nationalized there through the payment of the duties specified in the tariff of

the mother country,
Aiter payinent there of special duties.....

Hlaving paid no duty in Algeria, or arriving after being warehoused or transshipped there....
Imported from other French colonies or possessions.
The prohibitions or restrictions established by the customs tariff, whether in the interest of public

order or in consequence of the existence of a monopoly, are applicable to goods imported from the
French colonies and possessions, whether such articles be colonial or the produce of foreign countries.


Pay the difference between the duties of the Algerian
. Tariff and that of the mother country.
Duties stipulated in the tariff of the mother country,


a The products of French colonies and possessions shall only enjoy this favor on condition that the importation be direct, and on production of the proper certificates of origin.


By implication, all French goods imported into the colonies, etc., are admitted free of duty.

The application of this law is not, however, as yet universal, as by article 3, section 2, certain colonies are excepted from its provisions, the practical result being that, as regards tariff legislation, the French colonies may be divided into three groups:


These colonies are as follows:

Comoro Islands.
Guadeloupe and dependencies.

New Caledonia and dependencies.

Indo-China (French).

St. Pierre and Miquelon.

(Madagascar. 2)
Mayotte and dependencies.

The customs law (article 3, paragraph 2) authorizes, however, the Government to alter by decree the French tariff as applied in the colonies. This faculty has been freely used, and it is only hy carefully comparing these decrees with the French tariff that an exact knowledge of the French colonial rates can be arrived at.

In all the colonies of this group French products enjoy a privileged treatment as compared with those of foreign countries.


These colonies are:
Benin (Gulf of).

Oceania, French establishments of.
Congo, French (Conventional Basin).

(iuinea, French,

Soudan, French.
Ivory Coast.

Tahiti and dependencies. Nossi-Bé. In all these colonies, with the exception of Sénégal, Nossi-Bé, and Oceania, French goods pay the same rates as those of foreign origin. In Sénégal, however, there are certain additional ad valorem duties imposed on foreign produce from which French produce is exempted. İn Vossi-Bé and Oceania the customs tariffs apply only to foreign goods.

GROUP 3.-COLONIES TIERE XO Customs DUTIES Esist. In Obock and the French possessions of India, at Sainte-Marie de Madagascar and Diego-Suarez, there are practically no customs duties.

In the case of countries having commercial treaties with France this will be the minimum tariff.
Since the above was written Madagascar has been added to this list.

[ocr errors][merged small]

As regards duties on colonial produce imported into France, all the colonies in group 1 are exempt from any duty except those duties specified in the ta given above.

As regards colonies in group 2, their produce pays the rates of the French minimum tariff, but Article III of the law of the 11th of January, 1892, provides that special exemptions or reductions can be made by decrees of the Conseil d'État, and there is scarcely one of the colonies which has not obtained in this manner considerable privileges for their produce.


Algeria, as shown above, is classed among the colonies in group 1, where all French imports are free, but foreign imports pay the duties of the French taríf. There are, however, certain special rates for salted meats, coffee, sugars, tobacco, cigars, etc. Matches, which are a Government monopoly in France, and are altogether prohibited, may be imported into Algeria, where there is no monopoly,

Goods, the produce of Tunis and Morocco, are admitted free when imported by land, the only exception being for barks from Tunis, which are prohibited.

All Algerian goods imported into France are free of duty.


There is an ad valorem duty of 8 per cent on foreign goods, generally, imported into Tunis from France and other foreign countries. Up till 1890 all Tunisian produce imported into France was subject to the duties of the general tariff

. By the law of the 19th of July, 1890, however, certain produce, such as cereals, olive oils, animals, etc., are admitted free up to a certain quantity, which is fixed annually by decree. All other produce pays the rates of the minimum tariff.

Export duties are levied on dates, sponges, halia, olive oil, fresh olives, wool, bones, skins, and a few other articles.

It may be useful to add that the commercial relations between Great Britain and Tunis are fixed by the convention of the 19th of July, 1875, Article VII of which provides that in no case shall the rate of duty exceed 8 per cent ad valorem, while Article XI stipulates that the convention shall remain in force until its revision shall have been accomplished by common consent after the expiration of seven years from the date of its conclusion.


[ocr errors]

By article 2 of the law of the 13th July, 1886, sugars from the French colonies imported into France are entitled to an allowance called ** déchet de fabrication,” equivalent to the average of the excess of yields obtained by native sugars during the previous season's working. The amount of this allowance is fixed every year by decree. In the years 1892-93, 1893–94, 1894–95, and 1895–96 it has been 23 iranes 80 centimes, 19 francs 47 centimes, 21 francs 19 centimes, and 21 francs 73 centimes per cent, respectively. Though not a bounty in the proper sense of the word, its effect is to protect colonial sugars.


Goods imported into the French colonies are subject to a tax called "octroi de mer,” which is levied upon all produce, whether of French or foreign origin.

These taxes are fixed by the colonial administrations, and vary considerably in the different colonies. They are local taxes and devoted to local purposes.

"TAXES DE CONSOMMATION." In many, if not all, the French colonies special taxes ("taxes de consommation") are levied on spirits, wines, beers, tobacco, etc., of foreign and local origin.

This memorandum only gives the general principles on which the commercial relations of France with her colonies are established. Their intention has been to protect, as far as possible, the produce of each colony in competition with foreign countries, and to bring the colonies, as far as circumstances will permit, within the French customs frontier.

In the case of the colonies in group 2, however, geographical conditions or diplomatic obligations have hitherto prevented a complete fulfillment of the object aimed at; but every opportunity will no doubt be taken of putting the law of the 11th January, 1892, into full execution, and of thus placing French produce imported into the colonies on a privileged footing as regards the produce of foreign countries.

The following tables show briefly the position of the customs relations of the French colonies as regards their import and export trade with France and foreign countries:


[blocks in formation]


Comoro Islands
Guadeloupe and dependencies
Guiana, French
Indo-China, French
Mayotte and dependencies
St. Pierre and Miquelon
Benin (Gulf of)
Congo, French (Conventional Basin)
Diego-Suarez and dependencies..
Guinea, French
India, French?.
Ivory Coast
Nossi- Bé
Oceania, French establishments of
Sainte-Marie de Madagascar?.
Soudan, French
Tahiti and dependencies


.do Special tarifi 1

.do .do .do .do


Special tariff. 2


1 French and foreign produce pay in principle the same duties.

. Practically no customs duties.

[blocks in formation]

According to the legislation actually in force, the German colonies, in so far as customs tariff regulations are concerned, are treated by Germany as foreign countries (“Zollausland”); the goods exported from the colonies into the German customs union are consequently subjected to the same treatment as regards customs rates and charges as the like products imported here from foreign countries.

Previously to 1893 German colonial products imported into the customs union did not even get the benefit of the conventional tariff, but came under the operation of the so-called “autonomous” tariff.

This state of things was regarded as a gross injustice by those engaged in colonial trade, and on the 2d of June, 1893, the Bundesrath adopted a resolution whereby the conventional tariff was for the future to be applied to the products of German colonies and protectorates.

In 1990 a representation, drawn up by those interested in the trade of the colonies, was addressed to the Imperial Government, pointing out the advantages which would accrue if, following the example set by Spain in regard to her colonies, differential duties were established in favor of German colonial produce imported into the German customs union.

The Government referred this representation to the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce for its opinion as to the adoption of the suggestion made therein, and in consequence of the chamber reporting strongly in favor of the maintenance of the existing system, and in particular against the introduction of differential duties, the application of the petitioners was rejected.

in the report upon the trade of Hamburg for 1891, issued under the sanction of the Chamber of Commerce of that city, the matter is referred to in the following terms:

"Our colonial policy has unhappily claimed during the past year numerous regrettable sacrifices; at the same time the economic development of most of our colonies seems to be progressing steadily, if slowly; we should, however, regret if the scheme which under various shapes has recently found advocates, viz, to lavor German colonial imports by means of differential duties, should be realized. We took last year the opportunity, when a recommendation to this effect was submitted for our opinion, to express the conviction that, whilst the keystone of the commercial development of the German colonies is to be found in Germany herself and in the trade of those colonies with the Empire, that development can not fail to benefit by the participation of other nations in our colonial trade, and by full liberty being left to colonial produce to seek its natural market wherever the most favorable conditions for value may exist."

From inquiries since made, it may be taken for granted that no change has taken place in the attitude adopted upon this subject by the ruling commercial authorities at Hamburg, who continue to adhere to the opinion indicated above.

On the other hand, the introduction of a preferential treatment in favor of German colonial products is undoubtedly still one of the desiderata put forward in colonial circles, but I am informed that the question has not been officially raised during the last few years.

With regard to the treatment accorded in the German colonial possessions to goods imported from the mother country, Germany is likewise treated by her colonies, as regards customs duties, as a foreign country (“Zollausland”), and no especially favored treatment has hitherto been accorded by the German colonial customs administration to the imports from other foreign states.

With regard to the hypothetical question, What might be expected to be the bearing of a policy of differential duties upon the obligations incurred through the most-favored-nation clause in commercial treaties? The general impression in this country appears to be that iferential duties in favor of the trade of the motherland with her colonies, and vice versa, might be introduced, in spite of the most favored-nation clause, in the absence of an express stipulation to the contrary in the treaties.


In compliance with the instructions contained in the Earl of Kimberley's circular dispatch of the 25th ultimo, I have the honor to report that no fiscal advantages are accorded in the colonial possessions of the Netherlands to goods imported from the mother country over goods imported from foreign countries; and that, similarly, Dutch colonial goods enjoy no preferential treatment on their introduction into this country, no differential duties of any kind existing here.

Previous to the year 1872 certain products of the Dutch East Indian colonies were charged at a lower rate of the duties levied on exportation irom those colonies, and thus practically enjoyed a more favored treatment on their introduction into the mother country than that applied to similar goods imported from foreign countries. The last Dutch East Indian differential export tariff dates from the year 1865 (“Indish Staatblad,” No. 99, p. 22), and since the 1st January, 1874, when the reform of the Indian export tariff decreed in 1872 finally came into operation, all Dutch colonial products have been and are treated on exactly the same footing as similar products imported irom elsewhere.

I may add that by clause 2 of the treaty of the November 2, 1871, between Great Britain and the Netherlands, the conditions of British and Dutch trade with the island of Sumatra were completely assimilated.


Merchandise which has been produced in the Portuguese transmarine provinces and conveyed direct in Portuguese vessels pays in the custom-houses of the mother country or the adjacent islands one-half of the duties fixed in the general tariff.

Merchandise which has been produced in the provinces of Mozambique, Portuguese India, and Timor enjoys a similar privilege, whatever the flag under which it is conveyed.

« AnteriorContinuar »