accompanied by certificates and proofs of their origin, this will entail considerable expense, trouble, and loss of time. Proceeding next to investigate the extent of the trade in these articles between the United States aud this country, it will be seen that the importation of live swine, owing to the heavy expenses and risks attending the long sea voyage, may be classed as nil; whereas the trade in hog products has gradually been on the increase in the latter years, the importation of pork and hams in 1881 amounting to 4,175,000 pounds, of the value of 1,566,000 kroners; and of beef and sausages of 357,000 pounds, to the value of 98,000 kroners. It will thus be seen that a restriction simply confined to a prohibition of the importation of live swine would not have any injurious effects on the commercial relations between the United States and this country; and taking into consideration that the swine products are imported for home consumption, and not for re-export, thus tending to the welfare of the general community by lessening the cost of living, I am of the opinion that these views will tend to outweigh with the Danish authorities any pressure that might be brought to bear upon them from the commercial and agricultural interests for the furtherance of any such injurious restrictions. The restrictive measure enacted by the German Empire under the pretense of sanitary reasons is but a flimsy veil, which might easily be torn into shreds; it has more the appearance of a sop to satisfy the clamors of the agricultural classes, which have no doubt been suffering from the bad harvests in the last years; but, fortunately, this class of the community in Denmark has, from various circumstances, certainly not been subjected to such unfavorable results as has been the case in most of the other European states, and consequently the Danish Government will be in better position to withstand similar pressure from this class of their community. I have, &c., No. 15.] Mr. Ryder to Mr. Frelinghugsen. [Extract.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Copenhagen, April 28, 1883. (Received May 14.) SIR: I have the honor to refer you to my dispatch No. 206, addressed to the Hon. John Davis, Assistant Secretary of State, under date of the 5th instant, and to report now that the Danish Government, finding the regulations put in force by the German Government on the importation of live swine into the German Empire of such a character as to materially interfere with the trade, have proposed, through their minister at Berlin, to the German Government to prohibit the importation of live swine from the United States of America into the Kingdom of Denmark, providing the German Government would agree to remove the restrictions lately placed by said Government on the importation of live swine from Denmark into Germany. I was at first informed on good authority that the proposition from this Government to Germany was a general one with reference to the importation of pork produce from the United States, but on calling to-day on the foreign minister I found this to be a mistake. His excellency remarked that said proposition only had reference to live swine, and that it was very uncertain whether it would lead to any results. As no live swine are imported from the United States of America to this country, a restriction simply confined to a prohibition of this article would not have any injurious effects on the commercial relations of the United States and Denmark. * I have written Mr. Sargent, our minister at Berlin, about this matter. I am, &c., Faure, under secretary commerce, thinks bill introduced in Chamber Saturday will result practically in free admission American salted meats. He had hopes early passage both houses. MORTON. No. 107.] No. 10. Mr. Morton to Mr. Frelinghuysen. [Extract.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Paris, January 20, 1882. (Received February 8.) SIR: I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy and translation of a bill in relation to American salted meats, which was introduced in the Chamber on the 14th instant by Mr. Faure, deputy and under secretary of commerce. This bill repeals the decree prohibiting the importation of American pork, and provides for its introduction into France upon certain restrictions which will, I believe, practically result in its free admission. The minister in presenting this bill explained the reasons which dictated its action. At the time the decree was issued, anxiety and alarm existed, microscopic examination could not be resorted to, and prohibition under the circumstances was necessary. But since that time nearly all the chambers of commerce of France have protested against the measure, and the Government has been led to question seriously the propriety of maintaining it. A careful examination elicited the fact that from 1878 to 1880, 95,000,000 kilograms of American pork were consumed in France without danger, and that Belgium, where the consumption is about six times as large as in France, and England, where it is eight times as large, did not suffer at all from trichinosis. It was found besides that the cooking of the meat afforded an additional protection against trichinosis to the one already secured by its process of curing. Upon the evidence of these facts the committee of public hygiene rescinded its former advice, and declared that, in its opinion, prohibition was unnecessary, provided the meat introduced into France was well cured. The Government, therefore, proposes the free admission of American pork upon the conditions stated in the bill. It has taken nearly two years to establish the fact that the remonstrances which our Government made from the beginning to this unjustifiable measure, and which have been constantly pressed upon the French authorities by my predecessor and myself, were just and well founded in every respect. I regret that the bill proposed still maintains the prohibition of sausages and hashed meat, the reasons for which I do not understand. But, as the bill is, if its provisions are applied in a liberal spirit, as I believe they will be, our packers will have no reason to complain. Mr. Faure expressed to me the opinion that the bill would pass both houses within four or five weeks. I have, &c., L. P. MORTON. [Inclosure in No. 107.-Translation.] BILL ON IMPORTATION OF AMERICAN PORK. The minister of commerce presented yesterday, in the name of the Government, the bill relating to the withdrawal of the decree prohibiting the importation into France of American pork. This is the text of this document: ARTICLE 1. The decree of February 18, 1881, prohibiting the importation into France of salt meats of American production is annulled. ART. 2. Salted pork of foreign production, accompanied by a certificate testifying that the meat has undergone a perfect preparation, and that it corresponds with the type known in commerce under the name " fully cured," can be imported into France. These certificates will be made out in the places of their origin with promptitude, and at the cost of the parties interested, by local experts, whose qualifications will be attested and the signature authenticated by the consular agents of the republic. ART. 3. At the moment of the payment of custom-house dues in France the importers must prove that the meats which they propose to hand over for consumption are healthy; that they are in a perfect state of preservation, and that the salting is not defective. This authentication will be made at the expense of the importers by inspectors appointed by the prefects of the frontier departments. ART. 4. The present arrangements are not applicable to meats hashed and uncooked, such as different kinds of sausage (saucisses, saucissons, cervelas, &c.), nor to guts (boyaux) intended for culinary preparations, the importation of which into France is absolutely prohibited. ART. 5. Will be punished by imprisonment of from two to six months, and by a fine of from 100 to 300 francs, those who will have brought into France uncooked and hashed pork, such as the various kinds of sausages (saucisses, saucissons, cervelas, &c.), or guts (boyaux) intended for culinary preparations, those who will have imported into France pork of foreign production which would not have been subjected to the inspection imposed by the present law, or which would not have been refused after examination. In the two above-mentioned cases the imported meats will be, in addition, seized or destroyed. The article 463 of the penal code is applicable in the cases provided for in the present article (fifth). No. 96.] No. 11. Mr. Davis to Mr. Morton. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: I am gratified to learn from your dispatch No. 107, of the 20th ultimo, that it is very probable that the objectionable decree of the French Government against American pork will soon be repealed. Thanking you for your full and interesting report on the subject, I am, &c., J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS, Acting Secretary. No. 130.] No. 12. Mr. Morton to Mr. Frelinghuysen. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Paris, February 28, 1882. (Received March 18.) SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch No. 96, of date February 10, conveying the gratification of the Department for the information that the decree of the French Government prohibiting the importation of American pork would probably soon be repealed. With the defeat of the Gambetta cabinet, which was pledged to the withdrawal of the decree, and the reinstallation of Mr. Tirard, who originated the measures of prohibition as minister of commerce, I regret to say that the prospects of an equitable and liberal settlement of this long-pending question are not now as favorable as heretofore. The bill which was drawn up by the late minister of commerce, of which I gave you the substance in my No. 107, is still before the Chamber, and will not, I think, be withdrawn. But it is somewhat doubtful whether the committee to which it was referred will now report it favorably. I must state that the renewal of the objection made to the importation of American pork is not to be attributed solely to the hostile influence of the minister of commerce, and of those who have adverse private interests in the matter, but mainly to the publication in some American papers of supposed fatal cases of trichinosis. These reports, which have been circulated unfortunately by the American Correspondence, a New York Franco-American weekly sheet, printed partly in French, are copied by the French papers, and its paragraphs upon American trichinosis have received a rather wide circulation. I inclose herewith, for your information, two of these paragraphs, which appeared in the Correspondence of January 28 and February 11. Many people have called at the legation to ascertain if there was any foundation for these reports. I have not hesitated to declare that, in my opinion, they were spurious, and that there was nothing like an epidemic of trichinosis existing in the United States. It might, however, be useful if I could speak with official authority from the State Department in the matter. I have, &c., L. P. MORTON. [Inclosure in No. 130.-Extract from the American Correspondence, January 28, 1882.] TRICHINOSIS IN THE UNITED STATES-EXPERT INSPECTORS OUT OF THE QUESTION LEGALLY. Like all Americans, we regret that the Chamber of Deputies did not instruct the Government to allow salt provisions from the United States to be admitted without restrictions, as we were in hopes that they would, and so expressed ourselves in our last number. We are confident, at any rate, that the French legislators will continue to overlook the publication in papers opposed to free importation of numerous cases of trichinosis; more, in fact, than have really occurred. Reliance can be placed upon our statement that there were only six cases last week, of which four were fatal, and but two this week; which shows conclusively that trichinosis is a scarecrow which has been made too much of. We also expressed the apprehension that the Chamber of Deputies at Paris would take offense at being placed by the Government on the same level with American corporations, or even with the petty legislatures of separate States, with which it is proposed to treat (and not with the American Congress), for licensing, as experts, those persons in America whose duty it will be to issue certificates of the wholesomeness of such provisions as they may agree to admit into France. But it would appear, unfortunately, that such appointments as experts are contrary to the laws of the United States, as we are informed by a friend and correspondent who is a well known jurist, and was at one time a United States judge. I call your attention to the text of the law as proposed, which will require the exporter to produce an inspection certificate from this side to identify the soundness of the provisions. It will be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to comply with such a requirement, for the simple reason that in this State and in Pennsylvania, if not in all the other States of the Union, there are no authorized legal inspectors. It is a matter of history that the inspection laws formerly existing in this country, requiring the inspection of exports and brands of the board on casks, barrels, or packages, hurt the sale of the article in the foreign market. It is unnecessary to detail the reason, but the abuse was so flagrant that in New York the constitution of the State forbid forever the appointment of inspectors or boards of inspection. And so it is in Pennsylvania. Whence is the exporter to obtain the inspection certificate demanded by the French law? In this country the purchaser must look out for himself. He has no other protection than the punishment of the person who, knowingly, sells putrid or unwholesome food. It is otherwise in France and other foreign countries, whose Governments deem it their duty to add to the common law requirements and a priori evidence that the article offered is sound. It is supposed that, perhaps, an inspection in the interior, or the place of manufacture, say at Cincinnati or Chicago, &c., by private parties, would be sufficient. This is a delusive idea. The French bill requires the inspection by a competent, impartial, and disinterested expert, authorized by the local government; but, whilst there may be voluntary inspectors, they are not the class to which France looks for the protection of the lives and health of its inhabitants. In the next place neither of these centers is the point of export. The shipment to France is made here in vessels loading at this port. But pending the transit from the interior to the shipboard, on which the package will leave this country, there are so many opportunities of fraudulent marks, substitution of packages, and other tricks of trade, that the original certificate, if in all respects correct, would not be proof of the identity of the article finally consigned to Havre. Nor will the French consular certificate of authenticity of signature, &c., be of any avail. French market still regrets with sorrow the certificate of authenticity of the signature to a document, pretending to emanate from authority, that Fremont's notorious Memphis and El Paso Railroad was a duly recognized and salable stock at the regular New York Stock Exchange, a paper by which millions of French money were gathered for an unsafe and judicially fraudulent stock. The The only remedy for the free export of meat and provisions from here to France is the absolute and unconditional repeal of the existing ordinance. The Chamber will not permit a change which can easily be evaded by illegitimate means. Will it permit a trade in natural course? This is the question. As we go to press we find the following dispatch published in all the New York papers of to-day (January 27), with displayed headings: "FIFTEEN PERSONS POISONED-TRICHINOSIS CAUSED BY EATING RAW HAM-THREE FATAL CASES. "MARSHALL, MINN., January 26.-Great excitement has been caused here by trichina poisoning from eating raw ham. Fifteen prominent citizens are afflicted, and three have died. An entire family, consisting of Mr. and Mrs. &c." Names and details are given. All which seems flatly to contradict those sanguine persons who, like ourselves, persistently maintain that the French Government ought |