CO129-384 - Public Offices - 1911 — Page 356

!

Enclosure in her Comont General Willman's ho 13 Commercial of July 3. 1911

C O

! 27699

RIC

R 23 AUG

THE ONE BOTTOM LAW AGAIN

THERE is sure to be some protest at the decision of the insular collector of customs that goods entitled to free entry into the Philip- pines from the United States under the Philippine tariff act of 1909 must still be sent from the United States in one bottom, despite the ruling of the court of customs appeal that direct shipment from the Philippines to the United States does not necessarily mean shipment in one vessel but rather shipment covered by a through bill of lading, One cannot but sympathize with the reasons back of this ruling-that the United States court of customs appeal did not interpret the Philippine tariff law but the United States tariff law, which does not apply to im- portations into the islands. One must also feel with the insular collector: of customs, that the court of customs appeals dealt a serious blow to the ambitions of those who saw in the provisions of the so-called one bottom law, an active force working for the adoption of Manila as a perma nent port of call by steamship lines which otherwise would have omitted this port from their itinerary. But it is difficult for many local importers, to see the logic in a decision so diametrically opposed to the dictum of a court which passed on a clause in the United States tariff bin whose phraseology is almost identical with a similar clause in the local tariff law.

But there is another side to the question. Beyond poradventure of a doubt when Congress framed the direct shipment clause in the Payne tariff bill, it meant to confer a boon on American shipping and meant to encourage big steamship lines to include the Philippines in their itinerary, When Elhui Root was secretary of war, he interpreted the clause to mean shipment of goods in one bottom, and Root ranks with the greatest of American lawyers. The insular collector of customs in his ruling undoubt edly had both these facts in mind as well as a realization of the fact that while the decision of the United States court of customs appeal! is final for American shippers, the question can be brought to the attention of the Supreme court of the United States only by present- ation to insular courte for solution.

There is also a world of truth in the theory that the abrogation of the one bottom law means a serious loss to interisland shipping interests. If cargo may be transhipped at Hongkong, interisland vessels will lose perhaps 100,000 a year in the diversion of interisland trade to other. vessels, whose home port is Hongkong.

The enforcement of the one bottom law has undoubtedly worked for the best interests of interisland snipping and has induced a num- ber of steamship lines to make Manila a permanent port of call, but it has often delayed much needed shipments which had to await the sailing of a vessel direct from an American port to Manila. The weight of economic argument, however, favore the one bottom law, despite the inconvenience it often causes local importers,

If the question comes before the local courts and they decide as did the United States court of customs appeal, then it is up to the friends of the Philippines and those who are working for our future pros- perity, to persuade Congress to pass a law whose phraseology will permit of no interpretation save that goods must be shipped in one! bottom to enjoy free entry,

|

353

31605

11 AUG 191: