APRIL 6, 1832.]

Appropriation Bill--Colonial Trade.

[SENATE.

His resolutions declare in substance: parts of the British dominions or possessions shall be left 1st. That "the arrangement" gives to "British ves- on a footing not less favorable to the United States than it 'sels, in the trade between this country and the colonial now is," imply a positive condition to maintain unchanged, 'possessions of Great Britain, advantages in transporting or upon any particular footing of favor, every part of the articles to the West Indies, greater than is secured to British system of trade with the United States? The an'American vessels, and violates that reciprocity in navi-swer was, no. 'gation which our Government has heretofore sedulously 5. The British minister notified the American minister and firmly endeavored to maintain. that the British Government had it in view to modify the schedule of duties attached to their act of Parliament of 1825, so as to support the interests of her colonies, which had been incidentally fostered during the suspension of the intercourse.

2d. "The President's proclamation of October, 1830, 'was not authorized by the act of Congress of 29th of 'May, 1830."

The truth of these propositions is to be determined by a reference to the terms of the arrangement, which are found in the act of Congress of 29th May, 1830, and to the construction fixed upon that law by the President of the United States and the British authorities.

The act of Congress provides, in substance, 1st. That, when the President shall be satisfied that the ports of the West Indies, Bahama islands, &c. will be opened to the vessels of the United States, for an indefinite or a limited term, that such vessels and their cargoes, entering the West India ports, shall be subject to no other or higher charges than would be imposed on British vessels or their cargoes arriving from the United States.

The act of Congress thus construed constitutes the basis of the arrangement. Permit me, sir, before going into an examination of the correctness of this construction, to notice an objection to this arrangement, on the ground that British vessels may take from the ports of the United States foreign produce to the British colonies, and American vessels cannot. This privilege, now enjoyed by Great Britain, is no part of "the arrangement.' It is enjoyed under our navigation laws. It is, at this moment, competent for Congress to alter that law, without the slightest impeachment of our faith under the arrangement of the West India trade. An equivalent for this surren !er, if there is, in fact, any surrender about it, is found in the privilege given to the American vessel to export from the colonies foreign produce to any part of the world, (the dominions of Great Britain excepted.) But, sir, what com3d. That vessels of the United States might export mercial nation ever thought of prohibiting exports as a from the British colonies to any country whatever, (other mean of advancing her commercial prosperity, unless, than the dominions or possessions of Great Britain,) any indeed, it might be for the purpose of forcing, by some articles which can be exported therefrom in a British ves-measure of retaliation, upon foreign States a more libesel, to any country other than the British dominions or possessions as aforesaid.

2d. That the vessels of the United States might import into said ports, from the United States, any articles which could be imported in British vessels from the United States into the same ports.

4th. That the commercial intercourse of the United States with all other ports of the British dominions or possessions, shall not be left on a footing less favorable to the United States than it then was.

ral commerce? Instead of prohibiting exports, the course of most commercial nations has been to encourage them (says Adam Smith) by drawbacks, bounties, by advantageous treaties of commerce with foreign States, and sometimes by the establishment of colonies in distant countries. If the principle of the federal constitution, prohibiting du5th. That then, and in that case, the President is au- ties upon exports, could be considered consistent with the thorized to issue his proclamation, declaring that he has policy of prohibition upon exports in foreign vessels, are received such evidence: and, thereupon, the ports of the there any considerations which should induce us to follow United States shall be opened, indefinitely, or for a term such a course? Foreign articles will never be exported fixed, to British vessels coming from the said British colo-unless they are worth more abroad than at home, and will nial possessions, and their cargoes subject to no other or only be exported when there is a surplus. The Governhigher duty of tonnage, or impost, or charge of any de- ment get the benefit of the duty upon the importation; and scription whatever, than would be levied on the vessels if a drawback is allowed, our navigation will have had of the United States, or their cargoes, arriving from the the benefit of the freight. said British possessions; and British vessels might import into, and export from, the United States, any article which might be imported or exported in American vessels; and the President was, moreover, authorized to suspend, or declare to be repealed, the restrictive acts of Congress of 1818 and 1820.

Upon the first point of inquiry made by Lord Aberdeen, that minister says: It "can scarcely, indeed, have been intended that this stipulation should extend to American vessels coming with cargoes from any other places than the United States, because it is well known that, under the navigation laws of Great Britain, no foreign vessel could bring a cargo to any British colonial port from any other country than its own.

66

That there might be no after difficulties in the construction of this act, and the British minister no doubt remembering that the arrangement supposed to have been made I shall have occasion before I have done, Mr. President, by mutual acts of legislation in 1822, had been broken to show that the object both of the late and of the present down by the construction of the then Executive of, the administration was to obtain the benefit of that celebrated United States, Lord Aberdeen asks for explanations upon act of the British Parliament regulating the trade of the the following points: British possessions abroad, which became a law on the 5th of July, 1825, and that ultimately the arrangement in question was made upon that basis; and, by that act, (says Mr. McLane in his letter to Mr. Van Buren, of 20th August, 1830,) the importation both into her European and colonial ports is restricted to the vessels of the country of which the articles imported shall be the produce. Nor has this restriction been considered inconsistent with our commercial convention with Great Britain, which we have anxiously sought to extend to the colonial intercourse.

1. Are American vessels, coming with cargoes from any other place than the United States, to be admitted under the arrangement into the colonial ports of Great Britain? The answer was, no.

2. Are the articles to be imported on equal terms in British or American vessels, to be the produce of the United States? The answer was, yes.

3. Was the trade between the American continental colonies of Great Britain to be placed upon the same footing with the trade between the British West Indies and the United States? The answer was, yes.

The same letter proceeds to say: "She (Great Britain) 4. Do these words of the act of Congress, "the com- moreover places the United States in the intercourse with mercial intercourse of the United States with all other the colonies on the same footing with all other nations; and,

by assenting to regulations, though by legislative enact- any hope of success. More than has been secured by ment in the colonial trade, similar to those provided by the present labors, the concessions of the last administra our commercial convention for the intercourse between tion precluded us from demanding; but if this had not the United States and the British possessions in Europe, she been so, more could not have been obtained." now concedes to us, in this respect, substantially that which As to the third inquiry, whether ships coming from the we have been ineffectually seeking since the year 1815." British North American continental colonies are to be Upon the second inquiry of the British minister, in re- placed upon the same footing with vessels coming from the ference to the kind of articles to be imported into the colonies of the West Indies, it may be observed that there colonies from the United States, there is still less difficulty is nothing in the act of Congress of 29th May, 1830, inin pronouncing upon the correctness of the agreed con- consistent with the construction given upon this point. struction. Upon this point Lord Aberdeen, in his letter That act provides for "admitting to entry, in the ports of to Mr. McLane, of the 17th August, 1830, observes: "In the United States, British vessels, or their cargoes, from this passage, (referring to a passage in the act of Congress the islands, provinces, or colonies of Great Britain, on or of 29th May, 1830,) it is not made sufficiently clear that near the North American continent, and north or east the articles to be imported on equal terms by British or of the United States;" and the only question about it American vessels from the United States must be the is, whether vessels coming either from "islands, or proproduce of the United States." He goes on to say that vinces, or colonies,” are to be admitted into our ports upon "he cannot but suppose that such a limitation must have the same footing in all respects. been contemplated, because the clause of the navigation Here, sir, I must again recur to the fact that the late act already adverted to, whereby an American would as well as the present administration have claimed the be precluded from bringing any article, not the produce benefit of this trade, upon the principles of the act of of America, to a British colonial port, is not only a sub- of Parliament, of July, 1825.

ject of universal notoriety, but the same provision is Every demand beyond the privileges of that act, predistinctly made in the act of Parliament of 1825, which has viously set up by the late administration, was, by that been so often referred to in the discussions on this subject." administration, waived or abandoned. The present admiThis restriction is also contained in the commercial con- nistration asked nothing more than that act intended to vention of 1815, regulating the intercourse between this give; and, for the purpose of showing what were the country and the British European possessions. The act views of both Governments upon the particular point unof Congress of March 3d, 1815, which has formed the der consideration, I read from the letter of Mr. Gallatin to basis of all our commercial conventions since the period Mr. Clay, of the 27th of October, 1826, the following of its passage, and which repeals all acts imposing discri- language: "It will not escape you that the intercourse minating duties with regard to the vessels and cargoes of by sea between the United States and the British West all other nations who would adopt similar regulations with regard to the United States, repeals them in reference to such cargoes only as may consist of "the produce or manufacture of the nation to which such foreign ships or vessels may belong." Of this act of Congress I shall have occasion hereafter to speak more at large.

Indies and North American colonies has already been considered as necessarily connected together by the British Government, and that this connexion has been kept up in the acts of Parliament, in the articles proposed to Mr. Rush, and, indeed, in all former proposals on their part." And, on the 11th April, 1827, Mr. Gallatin was instructed, in the manner I shall hereafter show, upon the subject of this trade, without regard to any distinction between the West Indies and the continental colonies of Great Britain. These considerations, and others which

So far as any subsequent law of the United States has had in view the establishment of our commercial intercourse with foreign States upon terms of reciprocity, the same limitation is imposed. The famous "elsewhere" act of 1823, as it is called, the provisions of which I shall pre- will be submitted upon another branch of this argument, sently recur to more particularly, is limited by the same

restriction.

leave upon my mind no doubt that it was not the design of the act of Congress to make any such discrimination.

With regard to the points I have been discussing, Mr. The fourth inquiry involves the question, whether cerMcLane, in his letter to the Secretary of State, before tain words introduced into the act of Congress were inalluded to, holds the following language: "I am not tended to imply that the then existing British system of aware that the restriction of the right of importation trade with the United States was to remain unchanged. into the colonies to articles of American produce was, These words are introduced in the nature of a condition, at any period, seriously objected to by our Govern- and read thus: "The commercial intercourse of the United ment: nor can the difference, in this respect, between States with all other parts of the British dominions or posAmerican and British vessels, if we allow it to continue, sessions shall be left on a footing not less favorable to the be an object of much importance in any point of view. It United States than it now is." The opinion of the British will, generally, be our interest, as it is that of every other minister was, that the intercourse referred to, whether renation, to allow the exportation of its surplus foreign newed or not, should remain as free as it then was to both produce in the vessels of any other country. It must be Governments, to adopt, from time to time, such commer observed, also, that this is a privilege resulting from the cial regulations as either State may deem to be expedient general spirit of our laws, and, therefore, resting in our for its own interests, consistently with the obligations of discretion. There is nothing in the arrangement now pro- existing treaties. Mr. McLane considered, as every other posed, to prevent the United States from hereafter deny-man would, that these words, if not altogether nugatory ing to British vessels this advantage, if it prove injurious and out of place, seemed rather to apprehend some evil, to our commerce, and in placing, by that means, the not understood or explained, from advantages to be convessels of both countries, in this respect, upon an equal ferred upon our trade by Great Britain. footing." mercial intercourse "with all other parts of the British doBut, sir, in the next paragraph, we are furnished with minions, " was either regulated by convention with Great conclusive proof that, if the American negotiator did not Britain, or was absolutely prohibited by act of Parliament, demand terms of a different complexion in these respects, saving the right of the British King, by order in council, the fault is not of this administration: for he says, "It is to open the colonial ports, as occasion should require. certain that both the restrictions now reserved by the con- I have now, Mr. President, gone through all the points struction adopted by this Government, were absolutely of construction settled between the two Governments, so conceded by ours before the present negotiation com- far as the act of Congress of 29th May, 1830, called for menced, and could not have been renewed at present with construction in the opinion of the negotiators. As to the

That our com

APRIL 6, 1832.]

Appropriation Bill--Colonial Trade.

exception taken by the Senator from Maine, [Mr. SPRAGUE,] to the notification given by the British Government of its intention to modify the then existing scale of duties, with a view to foster interests which had grown up incidentally in some of the colonies, it being no part of "the arrangement," I shall postpone the consideration of it until I arrive at another part of my argument, and proceed to examine the broad and bold declaration of an honorable Senator, [Mr. HOLMES,] that by this arrangement every demand ever made by this Government upon Great Britain, with respect to this intercourse, had been surrendered.

[SENATE.

regulating the intercourse with the West India colonies of Great Britain was rejected by the Senate, I invite the attention of the Senate, for the purpose of showing what were the views of some of the eminent men of that day upon some of the points of this discussion. The twelfth article of that treaty opened to our vessels not exceeding seventy tons burden, an intercourse direct between the British West India islands and the United States during the war, (then existing between England and France,) and for two years afterwards. The cargoes of such ships were to consist of "any goods or merchandises being of the growth, manufacture, or produce of the said States, which it is or may be lawful to carry to the said islands or ports, from the said States, in British vessels."

For the purpose of ascertaining the accuracy of this declaration, I propose to go into an examination of the history of this trade, in order to show what has been demand- The American ships and their cargoes to be admitted ed by this Government, and what demands have been into the said ports from the United States were subjected surrendered, and by whom. In limine, sir, I must make to no higher duties or charges than British vessels and my acknowledgments to a distinguished American states- their cargoes coming from the United States to the same man, to whom certain letters originally published in this ports. country have been attributed, and which I find republished in a London pamphlet, for many of the important facts connected with the history of the proceedings of both Governments on this subject.

A clause of the same article provides that American citizens might purchase, load, and carry away from such Bri. tish ports and islands all such articles "being the growth, manufacture, or produce of the said islands, as may now, One main object of European nations in planting colo- by law, be carried from thence to the said States in British nies in this hemisphere, and in sustaining them at great vessels." Then followed a provision, requiring that such sacrifices of life and money, undoubtedly was to open new American vessel should carry and land their cargoes in the channels of trade, to augment their exports, and to secure United States only; and requiring further, that the United to the mother country the exclusive advantages of their States should prohibit the carrying away any molasses, commerce. The Spaniards colonized South America, and sugar, cocoa, or cotton, in American vessels, either from secured to themselves, for ages, the exclusive benefit of his Majesty's islands, or from the United States, to any their colonies in trade and commerce. The Dutch acted part of the world except the United States, reasonable sea upon the same principle, and their views as to their exclu- stores excepted. So careful was the British Government sive right to monopolize the trade of their colonies in the as to the language of this article, in order to assert her West were carried so far as to put them under the go- right of monopoly, as to commence the same with the vernment of an exclusive company. "The French colo- words his Majesty "consents," and so with regard to the ny of Canada (says Adam Smith) was, during the greater next article on the subject of the trade with the British part of the last century, and some part of the present, un- East India possessions; all other articles contained in the der the government of an exclusive company. Other treaty are clothed in the language of promise or agreenations, (says the same author,) without establishing an ment; and amongst all the complaints against this twelfth exclusive company, have confined the whole commerce of article, existing at that period, I have not been able to find their colonies to a particular part of the mother country." one, grounded upon the fact that the negotiators on both The English, since the dissolution of the Plymouth com- sides considered the opening of these ports a privilege. pany, have left the trade of their colonies free to be car- It is the opinion of the distinguished American statesman ried on with all the ports of the mother country. Each to whom I have referred, that narrow as the terms of this European nation, so far as I have been enabled to ascer- article were, they yet would have been accepted by the tain the fact, have, without distinction, and without com- American Government, had not the "equivalent proposplaint from any other European nation, held to the right of ed as the price of the concession" been "deemed quite an exclusive monopoly to the trade of its colonies, and disproportionate to the right so derived." The complaints have refused an equal participation to any other country of the day against the article of the treaty in question were, in the trade with them. Hence, whatever trade has been that in time of war, which was then existing, and the terallowed, has been considered a privilege, never granted, mination of which could not be seen, greater privileges however, except upon some considerations connected would be enjoyed under the temporary proclamations of with the interests either of the mother country or the co- the colonial Governors than the article of the treaty adlonies. mitted. That the articles prohibited from exportation formed a valuable part of the trade of the United States. That cocoa was chiefly cultivated by the Spaniards. That our consumption was not equal to the importation and growth of the prohibited articles, &c. &c.

From the peace of 1783 to the adoption of the federal constitution, no effort seems to have been made by the United States to place this trade upon any other footing different from that upon which the English Government chose to place it. Within this period of time however, Sir, it has been said by the Senator from Maine, [Mr. the British navigation laws were so far modified as to au- SPRAGUE,] that President Washington disapproved of this thorize the King in council to open the colonial ports at article. I infer the reverse from the fact that he submitted his discretion. During this period, an attempt was made the treaty to the Senate for their sanction, without saying by Mr. Pitt to place the intercourse between the United so. Had he disapproved of the treaty, it was entirely comStates and Great Britain and her colonies upon terms of petent for him to have rejected it without sending it to the reciprocity, and for this purpose that statesman introduced Senate; and had he disapproved this article of the treaty a bill into Parliament. This measure failed, and its failure only, he would have informed the Senate of the fact when is attributed to the interference of a disaffected American he communicated the treaty for ratification. But, sir, we citizen then in England. The first attempt made by this have positive testimony on this point. Judge Marshall, in Government to place this intercourse upon a permanent his Life of Washington, says: "Although in the mind of basis, was during the administration of General Washing- the President several objections to the treaty had occurred, ton. He sent Mr. Jay, in 1793, charged with instructions they were overbalanced by its advantages; and before upon this and other important subjects; and to the arrange- transmitting it to the Senate, he had resolved to ratify it, ment made by Mr. Jay, although the article of the treaty if approved by that body. It was fortunate for the coun

SENATE.]

open to us.

in four of the principal settlements of the East Indies, viz. Calcutta, Madras, Bombay, and Prince of Wales's island. Under the treaty of 1794, American citizens, with the consent of the local Government, might go into the interior country for the purposes of trade, and this permission was given, and our traders enjoyed the benefit of it. The convention of London contains no such privilege.

try, however, that the article was rejected. The war Indies." The convention of 1815 only admits such vessels which was declared by France against England in 1793, continued for nine years, and all Europe was involved in it. This country occupied the position of a neutral nation; and as neutral ships could navigate the ocean without being liable to dangers from capture or destruction, to which belligerents were subjected, and as the rates of insurance upon the vessels of a neutral were then lower than those of a nation at war, American navigation was as The treaties of 1794 and of 1815 both forbid American much in demand as such a state of the world could make vessels from carrying on the coasting trade in the East Init. The West India ports were, from necessity, thrown dies. But the former declared that "vessels going with This war ended in 1802, but broke out again their original cargoes, or part thereof, from one port of the following year; and down to the commencement of discharge to another, are not to be considered as carrying that system of unjust retaliation, so injurious to neutral on the coasting trade." The latter confers this privilege commerce, adopted by British orders in council and French (limiting it to the four enumerated ports) to such vessels of imperial decrees, this country enjoyed the advantages, and the United States as shall, in the first instance, have progathered the rich fruits of a neutral commerce, for a long ceeded to one of the enumerated settlements. To enjoy period of years. For, excepting the short period of peace this privilege now, a vessel must sail from the United States which followed the treaty of Amiens, (when England again direct to one of those named ports. Under Mr. Jay's resorted to the enforcement of her colonial system,) the treaty, an American vessel could go to Amsterdam, take most commercial nations of Europe were engaged in fla-specie, and from thence to any port in the British East Ingrant and dreadful war. This country, during that period dies. Under the convention of 1815, if specie is wanted of time, enjoyed a more prosperous and enriching com- for that trade, and cannot be obtained here upon as good merce, than the history of the world has assigned to any terms as it can in Amsterdam, the American vessel, after other nation, for a similar period of time, in any age." going thither and taking in specie, must return to the Sir, the Senator from Maine has exhibited a statement of United States, and go from hence to one of the named the amount of American tonnage employed in each year, ports. I am thus particular, Mr. President, in pointing for a long period of years, for the purpose of showing in out these differences, because I shall hereafter be enabled disparaging contrast its condition at those several periods, to show that the course of restriction so much resorted with its condition since the late arrangement. He also at- to by this Government, under the idea of forcing open the tributes to the laws of Congress imposing discriminating West India ports, has been also prompted by a desire to tonnage duties upon foreign vessels and their cargoes, pass-effect a change in the convention of London, with regard ed in 1789 and 1790, the virtue of having given the impe- to the East India intercourse. Mr. Adams, in his letter of tus to this long course of prosperous trade. Those duties 5th October, 1816, directed to the then Secretary of State, were laid, Mr. President, for the purpose of raising money says (with regard to the convention of 1815): "The to meet the debts of the revolution, and the current de- benefit of the convention to us, if any, is in the India trade: mands of the Government, and were in truth paid by Ame- but as its duration is to be short, the only chance of hav rican citizens, who consumed the articles imported. The British Government resorted to countervailing discriminating duties, and even went beyond the measure of exact retaliation. And the West India consumers paid that duty. If any benefit in trade was intended by our discriminations, that object was defeated by the countervailing discriminations of Great Britain. No, sir, it was the general war in which other portions of the trading world were involved, which, though a terrible scourge to them, heaped these great blessings upon us: and by referring to this fact as a standard, the Senator from Maine will readily and truly account for the state of our tonnage, as exhibited in

his statement.

ing it renewed at the end of its four years with additional articles of more liberality, will be effective, counteracting regulations in respect to the commerce in the British colonies in the West Indies.”"

After the peace of Europe was restored, and an end was put to the late war in which we had been engaged with Great Britain, it was perceived that the nations of Europe would set themselves seriously to work to repair the ravages to which their belligerent condition had for so many years subjected them; that Great Britain would again resort to all her accustomed means to extend her commerce and navigation; and that she would not overlook her colonial system, which not only secured to her a monoA further attempt to place this trade upon a permanent poly in trade, but which also secured to her a nursery for footing, by treaty with the British Government, was made seamen, and an efficient mean of perpetuating her naval in 1807, and proved unsuccessful; and here Mr. Jefferson power. In this state of things, my venerable friend from took the course with regard to the treaty transmitted to Maryland, [Mr. SMITH,] whose experience had learned him by Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, which General him rightly to appreciate the skill of our seamen and shipWashington would have done with regard to Mr. Jay's builders, and the enterprise of our merchants, whose long treaty, had he disapproved it. Mr. Jefferson rejected the observation of and actual participation in trade had assur treaty without consulting the Senate, on the ground that ed him that the United States, upon equal terms, had it contained no regulation upon the subject of impressing nothing to fear from the competition of the whole world American seamen. The treaty, however, contained no upon the ocean, made an appeal to the commercial chivalry of all nations, by submitting to Congress a plan for

arrangement as to the colonial trade.

No further measures for the sole object of securing par- rendering the trade of the world as free as air. This plan ticipation in this trade, were resorted to by this country was adopted, and a law of Congress passed on the 3d of until 1815; and the convention of London, made in that March, 1815, declaring that so much of the several acts year, declares that the intercourse between the United imposing duties on the tonnage of ships and vessels, and States and the British possessions in the West Indies and on on goods, wares, and merchandise imported into the United the continent of North America, shall not be affected by it. States, as imposes a discriminating duty of tonnage beBut, sir, that convention does contain a provision plac- tween foreign vessels and vessels of the United States, ing our trade with the British East India possessions upon and between goods imported into the United States in a much worse footing than it was placed by Mr. Jay's treaty. foreign vessels and vessels of the United States, be, and The thirteenth article of the treaty of 1794 admits the the same is hereby, repealed, so far as the same respects vessels of the citizens of the United States into all the the produce or manufacture of the nation to which such seaports and harbors of the British territories in the East foreign ships or vessels may belong."

APRIL 6, 1832.]

Appropriation Bill--Colonial Trade.

[SENATE.

This repeal, Mr. President, went into effect with regard extent that they were then enjoyed by the vessels of Euto any foreign nation, whenever the President of the Unit-ropean nations, and to give a partial admission of our vesed States should be satisfied that the discriminating or sels to the island of Bermuda and to Turk's Island; and a countervailing duties of such foreign nation, so far as they draught of four articles was handed to Mr. Adams, expressoperated to the disadvantage of the United States, had ing these views in detail, upon which, in the same letter, he been abolished. This law, sir, was submitted by our says: "I do not think it possible to make any thing out of ministers at London, as the proposed basis, on the part of these articles, to which I can, under my present instructions, the United States, of the commercial treaty about to be agree." A copy of these articles this minister enclosed formed in 1815. It was accepted by Great Britain, so to the Secretary of State, and asks for immediate further far as her European possessions were concerned, but re-instructions.

jected so far as it applied to her colonies.

I must request the attention of the Senate to the terms Now, sir, although the principles of this act have been proposed in these articles, in order that we may see how extended in treaties more recently formed with countries far the British Government had relaxed their determinaof minor importance in a commercial point of view, yet tions with regard to this intercourse since 1794, in this the act of Congress of 1815 was the first authoritative their second offer of arrangement by treaty; for it is to be manifestation by legislative authority, on the part of the remarked that these articles contain the only terms proUnited States, of a desire to place the navigation of the posed by Great Britain for regulating by convention this world upon a footing of perfect equality. When I say trade since the period of Mr. Jay's treaty. It will be usethat the principles of this act have been extended in trea-ful also to inquire how far these terms were acceptable to ties formed since that period, I mean that the act in ques- the United States.

tion confines the foreign ship to the importation of the By the first article, his Britannic Majesty consents, "That produce or manufacture of the nation to which the ship be- any sloop, schooner, or other vessel whatever, not having longs. The treaties with Guatemala, and some other Pow-more than one deck, and owned and navigated by subjects ers, made by the late administration, do not contain this of the United States, may import into any of the free ports restriction. Undoubtedly could the principles of that law in his Majesty's possessions in the West Indies, from the be thus extended, and the more important commercial United States, any of the articles enumerated in the above nations of the world be induced to adopt reciprocal measures, the navigation of this country would be greatly ex

tended.

act, (45th Geo. 3d,) being of the growth or production of the United States; and any coin, bullion, diamonds, and precious stones, and the said articles being of the growth or production of the United States; and also all other articles imported into the said free ports by virtue of this convention, from the United States, shall be subject, in all respects, to the same rules, regulations, and restrictions, and shall enjoy the same advantages as to re-exportation as are now applied to similar articles when imported by authority of said act from any other foreign country, and re-exported from the said possessions of his Majesty."

But, Mr. President, my object, in this part of my argument, is to show what has heretofore been demanded by this country, and what has heretofore been offered by the British Government in reference to the colonial trade. Soon after the convention of 1815, Mr. Madison directed Mr. Adams, then in London, to open a negotiation with the British Government, upon several subjects, the colonial trade included. Mr. Adams, with his accustomed diligence, followed up these instructions, declaring to the By this article, his Britannic Majesty further consented, British Government, on the 17th September, 1816, the that any vessel of the United States, as before described, following sentiments: "In the amendments proposed, they might export from any of the said ports to the United (United States) do not contemplate any interference on States, rum produced in any British colony or possession, their part with the colonial monopoly of Great Britain. It and all manner of goods, wares, and merchandise, which is not asked that she (Great Britain) should renounce the had been legally imported into the said free ports, except right of prohibiting the importation into her colonies from masts, yards, or bowsprits, pitch, tar, and turpentine, and, the United States of whatever articles she may think fit, also, except such iron as should have been brought from but that the commerce which for their and her own advan- the British colonies or plantations in America. tage Great Britain allows between them and the United States, should be placed on the same footing of reciprocity as the direct trade between Great Britain and the United States was intended to be placed by the convention of 3d July, 1815."

It was proposed to add to the articles enumerated in the above cited act of Parliament, rice, grain, and flour; and these, too, might be imported in American vessels of one deck into the enumerated free ports. The facilities granted by the proposed convention to vessels of this country The next month, however, Mr. Adams, in a letter to the in these ports were to be reciprocally granted to British Secretary of State, says: "There is no reason to expect vessels of a similar description, in the ports of the United that any departure from the policy already determined States; and if further facilities during the existence of the upon [by Great Britain] will take place." And further-proposed convention should be afforded to American vesAny measures in the spirit and with the object of those sels by Great Britain, reciprocal advantages were to be proposed at the last session [viz. countervailing restraints] given to British vessels in our ports.

and then postponed, may be now adopted without hesita- It was also proposed that articles imported into the said tion. My own entire conviction is that the operation of free ports of the United States should pay the same duties such measures, if successful, will be the only possible means as should be made payable upon similar articles imported of convincing this Government of the expediency of relax- thither from any other foreign country, and the same rule ing from the rigor of their exclusive colonial system." was to be applied by the United States in regard to all Mr. Adams, in this letter, expresses the opinion that the duties chargeable upon articles under the proposed result of the equalization of duties would be to the advan- convention, exported from the said ports of the United tage of Great Britain, and to our disadvantage. But, says States. But the King of Great Britain reserved expressly he, "the principle was sanctioned by an act of Congress to himself the right to impose higher duties upon all artibefore the convention of 3d July, 1815, was negotiated." cies allowed to be imported into the said free ports from We learn from another letter of the same minister, of the United States, or from any other foreign country, than the 20th March, 1817, that he had had an interview with were or might be chargeable upon all similar articles when Lord Castlereagh, and was by him informed that the British imported from any of his Majesty's possessions. Government was not yet prepared to abandon their ancient The second article of these proposals related to our incolonial system, but they were willing to extend to the tercourse with Bermuda. United States the benefits of the free port acts to the same VOL. VIII.-46

The third to Turk's Island.