You might be wondering what those three items have in common, but they do tell a story. In 1814, during the War of 1812, the vessel, privateer brig General Armstrong, was engaged in the Battle of Fayal. She fought hard against England off the coast of Portugal and sustained significant damage along. In that battle two Americans were killed and seven wounded. After the war, the owners, officers, and crew of the privateer General Armstrong made claims to the Portugal government for the losses suffered. They argued that they had entered a friendly port as an asylum and that the Portuguese authorities had failed to provide their vessel with the protection she was entitled. They believed that he government of Portugal was bound by the law of nations to make good on all suffering and damages sustained due to the consequence of neglect and duty.
In the years following the war, trade between Portugal and the United States suffered under dual discriminating duties. Most notably, the United States placed discriminatory duties on Portuguese wine including that coming from the Portuguese Madeira Islands. This was no small matter. Americans had grown quite fond of wines from Portugal especially from the Portuguese Madeira Islands. In fact, according to many sources Madeira wine was a favorite of the founding fathers and even used to toast the signing of the Declaration. The removal of these discriminating duties seemed to be tied to the resolution of the General Armstrong affairs. If America wanted to reduce the price of Madeira Wine, President Jackson and his predecessor Martin Van Buren would need to resolve the claims of the privateer General Armstrong.
In 1835, President Andrew Jackson was determined and instructed his then acting Secretary of State, Ashbury Dickens to demand that Portugal make good on these claims. Secretary Dickens sent a letter to the Portuguese government placing the blame and responsibility squarely on them.
"The Portuguese authorities at that place having failed to afford to this vessel the protection to which she was entitled in a friendly port, which she had entered as an asylum, the government is unquestionably bound by the law of nations to make good to the sufferers all the damages sustained in consequence of the neglect of so obvious and acknowledged a duty."
Following this, Congress reached out with an olive branch by passing an act to remove all discriminatory tonnage duties on Portugal vessels and reduce the duties on wines. "An Act to suspend the discriminating duties upon goods imported in vessels of Portugal, and to reduce the duties on wines" was passed on July 4th, 1836. Perhaps, they celebrated with some Madeira wine, as did their forefathers exactly 60 years earlier. I can only imagine that for some that was on their minds.
By time, President Andrew Jackson delivered his 1836 State of the Union address, he seemed confident the matter would be resolved and that regarding trade with Portugal, "perfect reciprocity will be established". Unfortunately, after two years had passed, then President Martin Van Buren had to share with congress less optimistic news that Portugal was still refusing to pay the claims of the General Armstrong and this conflict was a clear sign that Portugal was not ready for Jackson's "perfect reciprocity". In Van Buren's 1837 state of the union address, he relayed information obtained from correspondence between the ambassador to Portugal, Kevin Kavanaugh and Secretary of State, John Forsythe. In the letter, Mr. Kavanaugh wrote that the "claim of the- owners, officers, and crew of the privateer General Armstrong" were going to going to be ruled inadmissible by the Portuguese government and no claims would be paid. The Portuguese government claimed that they were "at the time of the destruction of the privateer, totally incompetent to resist the assailing British squadron; and the commander of the fort had done all in his power to dissuade the assailants from their threatened attack."
Here are the words President Martin Van Buren wrote in his first State of the Union address regarding Portugal. The "charge d'affaires at Lisbon" is Mr. Kavanagh, and in that letter from September he describes the current situation regarding the claims of the General Armstrong. The letter is included below.
"The act of July 4, 1836, suspending the discriminating duties upon the produce of Portugal imported into this country in Portuguese vessels, was passed, upon the application of that Government through its representative here, under the belief that no similar discrimination existed in Portugal to the prejudice of the United States. I regret to state that such duties are now exacted in that country upon the cargoes of American vessels, and as the act referred to vests no discretion in the Executive, it is for Congress to determine upon the expediency of further legislation on the subject. Against these discriminations affecting the vessels of this country and their cargoes seasonable remonstrance was made, and notice was given to the Portuguese Government that unless they should be discontinued the adoption of countervailing measures on the part of the United States would become necessary; but the reply of that Government, received at the Department of State through our charge d'affaires at Lisbon in the month of September last, afforded no ground to hope for the abandonment of a system so little in harmony with the treatment shown to the vessels of Portugal and their cargoes in the ports of this country and so contrary to the expectations we had a right to entertain."
Ten months later, on October 11, 1837, President Van Buren signed an executive order placing discriminating duties back on Portuguese vessels. The claims of the owners and crew of the General Armstrong would eventually go to international court for arbitration. The case was submitted for arbitration in 1850 where they lost. The owners finally sued in the Court of Claims.
References
“First Annual Message.” First Annual Message | The American Presidency Project, 5 Dec. 1837, www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/first-annual-message-4
“Seventh Annual Message.” Seventh Annual Message | The American Presidency Project, 8 Dec. 1835, www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/seventh-annual-message-2
“Proclamation 45-Levying Tonnage Duty on Portuguese Vessels.” Proclamation 45-Levying Tonnage Duty on Portuguese Vessels | The American Presidency Project, 11 Oct. 1837, www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/proclamation-45-levying-tonnage-duty-portuguese-vessels
305. “Madeira: Wine of Choice of the Founding Fathers 🇺🇸.” 305Wines, 12 Apr. 2023, 305wines.com/madeira-wine-of-choice-of-the-founding-fathers
“U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 5 (1836-1845), 24th through 28th Congress.” The Library of Congress, www.loc.gov/item/llsl-v5/. Accessed 23 Feb. 2024.
****************************************************
Mr. Kavanagh to Mr. Forsyth,
Legation op the United States of America Lisbon, September 4, 1837.
For the measures taken in regard to the claim of the- owners, officers, and crew of the privateer General Armstrong, permit me to refer to my despatches numbered 9, 19, 35, 36, 39, (with the paper annexed, marked C,) 40 and 44. I have already stated in my previous numbers, that no written answer has been received to the note which I addressed to the minister of foreign affairs on the 17th of February last, a copy of which accompanied my No. 39 aforesaid. He has, however, stated to me verbally, that, although not prepared to give a definitive decision, for want of time to examine the subject with due consideration, the claim appeared inadmissible; that the Portuguese force at Fayal was, at the time of the destruction of the privateer, totally incompetent to resist the assailing British squadron ; and the commander of the fort had done all in his power to dissuade the assailants from their ' threatened attack. Reference has also been made, on two or three occasions, to the great damages sustained by Portuguese commerce from armed vessels sailing under the flag of Artigas, whose prizes were alleged to have been taken into ports of the United States, and there wasted or destroyed, without any indemnity to the sufferers. I have been lately informed by a gentleman that a correspondence was had with the British minister in relation to the destruction of the General Armstrong, but he 35 [14] was unable to say how it resulted. I have already stated that there are not, in this legation, any traces of the correspondence between the ministers of the United States (my predecessors) and the government of Portugal, until the arrival of General Dearborn at Lisbon, in 1822. All the archives were probably taken to Brazil, when our first mission was established there, after the emigration of the Portuguese court to Rio de Janeiro, in 1807. In my No. 44 it is stated that on the 30th of June, 1834, Congress ap propriated ten thousand dollars to be distributed as prize money among the officers and crew of this privateer; probably to indemnify them for the breaking up of their cruise, and to reward their gallantry in defending their flag. If the grant was made upon that consideration, should it be considered in estimating the damages which they claim against this government? If so, I know no rule which I may safely adopt in fixing upon the additional sum which ought to be demanded. Captain Samuel C. Reid, who represents himself as the authorized agent of the parties interested, has stated the claim as follows, viz : “ In relation*to the officers and crew of said vessel, including myself as com¬ mander, our loss in baggage, stores, and private property, cannot now be determined with any degree of certainty. Sufficient to say that our all was staked, and that our all was lost; to which may be added a long train of troubles, privations, and poverty, consequent upon the said disaster. We, the said officers and crew, as well as myself, therefore claim and demand from the Portuguese government, for loss and damages aforesaid, the sum of 50,000 dollars.” It appears that the privateer, with a crew of 90 officers and men, sailed from New York on the 9th of September, 1814, and was destroyed at Fayal on the 27th of the same month ; their cruise had then lasted 19 days. They probably suffered great inconvenience, and incurred considerable cost, in reaching the United States, unless assisted by our consul at Fayal, at the expense of the government.
The claim which Captain Reid makes, in behalf of the owners of the vessel, he has stated as follows, viz:
Cost and outfits of the brig Gen. Armstrong - - $>42,000
Damages to the owners in being deprived of the capital in vested in said brig, for at least 20 years - - -. 5S,800
Reasonable profits that were to have been expected from the cruise ------- 50,000
$150,800
Such are the character and present situation of this-business; and the statement is respectfully submitted for your consideration.
****************************************************
An Act to suspend the discriminating duties upon goods imported in vessels of Portugal, and to reduce the duties on wines. (a)
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That so much of the several acts of Congress as imposes a discriminating duty upon goods, wares, and merchandise, imported in foreign vessels, be, and hereby is, suspended, so far as respects the produce or manufactures of Portugal proper, including Madeira, Porto Santo, and the Azores, when imported in vessels wholly and truly belonging to the subjects or citizens of said places; so that such produce or manufactures shall be subject to the same duties only as if imported in vessels of the United States: Provided, however, And [that] this suspension shall continue no longer than this section remains in force.
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That from and after the thirtieth day of July, eighteen hundred and thirty-six, the duty on all kinds of wine imported into the United States shall be reduced one-half, so that no more than one-half the amount now assessed shall be thereafter assessed.
SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That all kinds of wine, whether imported before or after the passage of this act, may be put into the custom-house stores, under the bond of the importer or owner; and such of the said wines as shall remain under the control of the proper officer of the customs, on the thirtieth day of July, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, shall be subject to no other duty than if the same were imported after that day; and if the duties or any part thereof, on the wines deposited, as aforesaid, shall have been paid previous to the said thirtieth day of July, one thousand eight hundred and thirty- six, the amount of excess of duty shall be refunded to the person im- porting and depositing the same: Provided, That no wines shall be so deposited unless in the casks or bottles as imported: And provided, further, That the benefit of this act shall not be extended to any wines not entitled to debenture.
APPROVED, July 4, 1836.
No comments:
Post a Comment