Upon request of this department you informed me by letter of September 26 that the ministers in Denmark and the Netherlands had been informed of the appointments of these gentlemen as agents in those countries, respectively. In view of the fact that it may be necessary to send these agents into Finland, Sweden, and Norway, we will appreciate it if you will give the ministers of those countries the proper instructions. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 23, 1906. SIR: Referring to your No. 114, of the 21st ultimo, I inclose for your information copy of a letter from the Secretary of Commerce and Labor in regard to the probable classification of immigrants for whom passage money has been paid in advance by Mr. Watson, immigration agent for the State of South Carolina. I am, etc., E. ROOT. [Same, mutatis mutandis, to American diplomatic representatives in Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden.] [Inclosure.] The Secretary of Commerce and Labor to the Secretary of State. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR, SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 8th instant, No. 907-11, with which you forward a copy of a dispatch received from the American minister at Brussels in regard to the efforts of Mr. E. J. Watson, immigration agent of the State of South Carolina, to secure the emigration of Belgian families to this country by the payment of their passage money in advance. Referring to previous correspondence had with your department on this subject, I beg to reiterate the views therein expressed to the effect that the prepayment by Agent Watson of the passage of the aliens will not necessarily, under the immigration laws, result in the rejection of the applicants upon arrival at ports in this country. The effect of such action is to place the aliens within that class described in section 2 of the act approved March 3, 1903, as those who shall be excluded from admission into the United States on the ground that they are persons whose passage is paid for with the money of another, or who are assisted by others to come, unless it is affirmatively and satisfactorily shown that such persons do not belong to one of the classes named in the said section. If, therefore, upon arrival at a United States port any of these prospective settlers should be found upon examination to belong to any one of the classes named in the said section of the act-for instance, if they should be found to be "persons likely to become a public charge," or persons under "promises or agreements to perform labor or service "-it would be necessary to refuse them admission. Mr. Watson, in his efforts to secure settlers for the State of South Carolina, is doubtless proceeding under the exception contained in the proviso of section 6 of the act of March 3, 1903, reading: "Provided, That this section shall not apply to States or Territories, the District of Columbia, or places subject to the jurisdiction of the United States advertising the inducements they offer for immigration thereto, respectively." Respectfully, V. H. METCALF. No. 81.] TAXATION OF CORPORATIONS IN BELGIUM. Minister Wilson to the Secretary of State. Brussels, March 26, 1906. SIR: I have the honor to report to the department that the AngloAmerican Chamber of Commerce at Brussels recently presented, through the medium of the British legation, to the Belgian ministry a protest against the enactment of proposed legislation relative to the taxation of corporations doing business in Belgium, alleging that the proposed legislation was in the nature of a discrimination against foreign corporations. A copy of the protest was filed with this legation, together with a note requesting my good offices in the premises. I confined my efforts, however, to the transmission of the protest to the ministry for foreign affairs, with the simple request that it might receive the attention of the proper department. I inclose herewith a translation of the verbal note of Count de Smet de Naeyer, minister of finance, in reply to the protest. The original in the French text has been forwarded to the AngloAmerican Chamber of Commerce. The reply of Count de Smet de Naeyer seems to me to be convincing and conclusive. I have, etc., HENRY LANE WILSON. [Inclosure.] Verbal note from the ministry for foreign affairs of Belgium to Mr. Wilson for transmission to the Anglo-American Chamber of Commerce at Brussels. The Anglo-American Chamber of Commerce at Brussels has requested the elimination of paragraph 3, article 6, of the proposed bill relative to the licensing of insurers and limited companies. This paragraph reads as follows: "Deduction on account of expenses of administration, or otherwise, will only be admitted when such expenses have been incurred in Belgium." The petitioners' claim is that the effect of this stipulation will be to compel limited foreign companies located in Belgium to bear a heavier burden of taxation than similar Belgian companies, the latter being authorized to deduct from their gross profits all expenses of administration, including those made outside the limits of Belgium. From this it is concluded that the proposed bill makes a discrimination contrary to the principle of commercial treaties. The argument is not sound. The proposed bill taxes the foreign limited companies located in Belgium at the same rate as that levied upon similar Belgian companies and upon the same fundamental principle. If the proposed bill limits the expenses in the manner indicated above, it is only because no other system is practicable. It would be opening the door to abuses to permit foreign companies to deduct from profits realized in Belgian establishments expenses incurred for administration purposes at the home offices for Belgian branches. The statement of expenses made by the agents of the companies could be wholly arbitrary in the absence of means for the Belgian authorities to determine its accuracy. It is conceivable that the Belgian fiscal authorities should be bound to make investigations at London, New York, Paris, Hamburg, etc., of the expenses of administration of the English, American, French, and German companies located in Belgium. On the one hand, the acceptance without investigation of the taxpayer's declaration would be contrary to the essential principle underlining the whole of our fiscal legislation; in no case does the latter admit the undisputed acceptance of the taxpayer's declaration. On the other hand, the Belgian administration has neither the power nor practical means to verify abroad the exactitude of expenses of administration which it might be claimed had been made for the Belgian branch. The Belgian legislator, in deciding a question closely related to the fundamental principle of taxation, can and must take into account these special considerations. As a matter of fact, the expenses referred to in the petition of the AngloAmerican Chamber of Commerce are generally very slight, so that their exclusion will have very little weight in the determination of the sum total of taxable profits. In support of its position the Anglo-American Chamber of Commerce cites the fact that the Province of Brabant will admit its contention, so far as the proportion of tax for the Province is concerned. The provincial resolutions do not mention such decision and the argument is, moreover, irrelevant. In the conception and application of their fiscal regulations the Provinces are more active in securing resources than in observing the rules of law, to which the State, on the contrary, must remain faithful in order to be consistent. The provision established by paragraph 3, article 6, is moreover so rational and so equitable that it will be applied to foreign branches of Belgian companies in the determination of the profits realized in these establishments. (Art. 9 and following of the bill.) For these reasons the Government can not take into consideration the protest of the Anglo-American Chamber of Commerce. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME CONVENTION IN REGARD TO COLLISIONS AND SALVAGE AT SEA. [Continued from Foreign Relations, 1905, pp. 69-78.] LEGATION OF BELGIUM, Washington, January 4, 1906. MEMORANDUM. The delegates of the countries represented at the conference of maritime law in Brussels signed, on October 20 last, a protocol submitting for the approbation of their respective governments two drafts of agreements for the unification of certain rules on the subjects of collision and salvage. The Belgian Government is prepared, as far as its own interests are concerned, to adopt both agreements immediately, and it entertains the hope that the Government of the United States will take a similar action. The signing of these two agreements would be a first step toward the very important work of the unification of maritime law. Communications to the same end have also been made by the foreign office to H. E. Mr. Henry Lane Wilson at Brussels. a Printed in For. Rels., 1905, pp. 74-78. MEMORANDUM. The Department of State has received the memorandum of the 4th instant from the Belgian legation, wherein is expressed the hope that this Government will see its way to adopt, at an early date, the conventions relating to salvage and collisions at sea, submitted by the recent international maritime conference of Brussels. These conventions are being considered by the Department of Commerce and Labor, to which a copy of the memorandum has been referred. JANUARY 12, 1906. No. 47.] The Secretary of State to Minister Wilson. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 29, 1906. SIR: The department is in receipt of a letter, dated December 30, 1905, from Judge William W. Goodrich, stating that he is advised by Mr. Franck, of Belgium, who was secretary of the international maritime conference held in Brussels last October, that "a third session will be held within a delay which shall not exceed one year, unless the different governments may see in the meantime their way to notify the Belgian Government by the diplomatic way their adhesion without further deliberation." The department has also received a letter, dated the 18th instant, from the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, from which I quote as follows: In principle this department desires that Congress hereafter shall appropriate money for the adequate compensation as well as for the necessary expenses of all persons sent abroad as American representatives to international conferences upon matters relating especially to this department, such as the Brussels conference to promote uniform international rules in the settlement of cases of collision and salvage. This department, however, is uncertain whether there is to be a third session of the Brussels conference. I have the honor to suggest, therefore, that your department ascertain, if practicable, whether such a session is probable. The department will be pleased if you will inform it as to this, in order that Congress may be asked to provide for expert American representation at the conference. The Secretary of Commerce and Labor also desires to be advised as to what governments, if any, have adopted the conventions submitted by the October conference. I am, etc., No. 67.] ELIHU ROOT. Minister Wilson to the Secretary of State. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of department's No. 47, of January 29, instructing me to ascertain the views of the Belgian Government relative to the holding of a third session of the Brussels international maritime conference, and to report what governments, if any, have adopted the conventions submitted by the October conference. I inclose herewith a copy of a note which, in compliance with your instructions, I addressed to the Belgian minister for foreign affairs, and a copy and translation of the reply thereto, from which it will be seen that definite action has not been taken relative to the holding of a third session, and that the only powers which have announced their adhesion to the conventions are Belgium and the Independent State of the Kongo. I have, etc., HENRY LANE WILSON. [Inclosure 1.] Mr. Wilson to the Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs, February 15, 1906. Mr. MINISTER: The Department of State at Washington has been advised, through unofficial channels-the information, I believe, came from Secretary Frank, in the course of a correspondence with Judge Goodrich, one of the American delegates-that a third session of the international maritime conference will be held within a delay which shall not exceed a year, unless the different Governments may see, in the meantime, their way to notify the Belgian Government, by diplomatic channels, their adhesion without further deliberation. My Government will be pleased to know whether this unofficial information which it has received expresses an actual intention and purpose, in order that Congress may be asked to provide for expert American representation at the conference. I am also instructed to ascertain what Governments, if any, have adopted the conventions submitted by the October conference, and I will be obliged to your excellency for the information. Etc., etc., etc. HENRY LANE WILSON. [Inclosure 2.] The Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs to Mr. Wilson, February 26, 1906. [Translation.] Mr. MINISTER: I have had the honor of receiving the letter that your excellency has kindly addressed me on the 15th instant, relative to the international maritime conference. The Government of the King still continues to hope that the complete study which the conference has made, during the course of its sessions, will make it possible for the different States represented to sign the conventions regarding collision and salvage without resorting to a third meeting. The calling of a third session has not yet been proposed. The Governments of the interested countries have not yet made known their views relative to the projects of conventions referred to. I may, however, declare from now on that the Government of the King is disposed to proceed to the signature of the two conventions. The Government of the Independent State of the Kongo has made the same declaration. Etc., etc., etc. DE FAVEREAU. Baron Moncheur to the Secretary of State. [Translation.] LEGATION OF BELGIUM, Washington, March 26, 1906. Mr. SECRETARY OF STATE: In continuation of the memorandum I had the honor to address to your excellency on January 4 respecting |