No. 323.
Mr. Carter
to Mr. Blaine.
Caracas, November 29, 1881. (Received December 16.)
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 15, of November 1 instant, inclosing copy of a letter from Messrs. Boulton, Bliss & Dallett, of New York, relative to the special duty provided for by decree of the Venezuelan Congress on all goods transhipped from any of the West Indian islands into the republic. Without indicating the source where this complaint originated, I called the attention of the minister of exterior relations to this decree, and informed him that ill effects might come upon the commerce of the United States if the decree should be enforced. I ascertained from the minister that Trinidad and Curacoa generally were points from which smuggling ventures emanated, to the serious disadvantage of Venezuela, and they, particularly the latter, were the rendezvous of disaffected and seditious persons, who used these localities as points of organization for revolutionary movements against the Government of Venezuela. For these reasons the Venezuelan Congress had passed the decree referred to. The purpose was political rather than fiscal, and looked to the suspension of trade between these two islands especially and Venezuela as the price of protecting the government of the republic against revolution and the violation of its revenue laws. I suggested that this course might provoke retaliation from Holland and England; that thereby disaffection would be promoted and the facilities for the hurtful expression of it against the Government of Venezuela would be also increased; that the government could bear political agitation from malcontents better than this loss to its commerce; and finally suggested that the trade #f the United States with ‘South America, owing to the condition of the South American ports, required, in many cases, intermediary points for distribution and transhipment of its products, and that the collection of these differential duties might seriously embarrass our commercial interests. Mr. Seijas responded that there was great force in these considerations; that this legislation, prompted by political motives, was experimental, and its expediency doubtful; and finally, that the Congress would convene in February, and could, and probably would, repeal this law. I have no doubt, if urged thereto, on the ground of preventing hardship and injury to our commerce, the law would be suspended, but I did not deem it prudent at this juncture to make this the only or main reason for a repeal or suspension of the law, but attempted, in addition to this ground of action, to give other considerations that would justify the government in reversing its policy.
I have the honor to inclose, for your information, two copies of the Gaceta Oficial, containing the decree referred to, together with a translation thereof.
I have, &c.,