1,1884; yet the states, most of which obtained their principal reveuue from this source, were strongly opposed to the measure, and in October 1883, at the instigation of the president, a conference of commissioners from the different states was held at the capital, to discuss the question. A commission was appointed to draw up a report on the matter, which was laid before the conference on the 15th. In the report, it was stated that most of the states derived from the alcabalas a portion of their revenue, varying from 30 per centum to 75 per centum of the total receipts; and that many of the states had attempted the abolishment of those duties, but had failed, from the fact that the new local imposts that had been decreed instead thereof had been inadequate to meet the pecuniary requirements for governmental purposes in the locality.[1]
With the view of preventing contraband traffic, the government of Mexico, in August 1825, decreed the establishment at convenient places of revenue guards.[2] Later, from time to time, further laws and regulations were issued to perfect the service on the coast of both seas, and on the frontiers. On November 24, 1849, a law was passed for stationing revenue-cutters in both the gulf of Mexico and Pacific sea, with authority to overhaul suspicious vessels. Like laws were adopted between 1872 and 1878,[3] and suitable vessels were procured.
Early in the present century smuggling was carried on, mostly at the ports of Vera Cruz, Túxpam, Tampico, and Campeche, in small vessels, bringing the prohibited goods from Jamaica. In time of war, it was not
- ↑ Mex., Mem. Gob., 1880-4, p. x. and doc. 3; Bol., Of. Gob. B. Cal., June 10, 1882, 1-2; Mex., Mem. Hac., 1884, pp. xxxv.-xxxviii.
- ↑ Mex., Guia de Hac., iv. 231-2, v. 3-4. During the Spanish rule, the government kept armed vessels on the coasts of America. Cortes, Diario Ofic., ii. 122.
- ↑ Mex., Col. Ley. y Dec., 1839, 163-4; Arrillaga, Recop., 1839, 117, 169-70, 302–3; 1847, 182–3; Mex., Legis. Mej., Jan.-Dec. 1850, 166-74; 1851, 276-86; Jan.-June 1856, 428; Sin., Boletin Ofic., May 23, 1872, 234-5; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., xi. 108-21; Mex., Diario Debates, 7th Cong., i. 173, 376, 525-8, 648-9; iv. 335-6; 8th Cong., iii. 200.
