The Sun.
London, England, 1827-01-11 00:00:00

RIMW-

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNAL.

1
The correspondence between Mr. Canning and'Mr.
Gallatin, which we opened in yesterday's journal by a
publication of the note of the British Foreign Minister, is .
continued to-day in the form of Mr. Gallatin's reply, and
some extracts from the instructions under which he has
acted. The main question between the parties discovers
itself at once to be, whether such a thing really exists in
the world as that which has hitherto at least, been ex-
plained, understood, and acted upon, by all European na-
: ions having colonies—as an exclusive right in the mother
country to a direct trade with her own colonial possessions.
I The object of Mr. Canning is rather to maintain, by argu-
ment, the existence of the right, than to stickle for the gene-
sal policy of its exercise—that of Mr. Gallatin is in effect
ro,confound the character of colony with that of mother
country, and to insist on the practical enjoyment of the
-ame rights by foreign nations, in regard both to colony and
parent state. We confess that, looking with calm and patient
attention at the logical performances of the disputants
on this subject, we must ascribe to Mr. Canning the honour
of stating truth and common sense with more than ordi-
nary force and clearness, while the praise belongs to Mr.
Gallatin, of exhibiting his full share of ingenuity in a
struggle with embarrassments through which it is impos-
sible for human skill , to break—of enveloping propositions
which will not bear the light, with a dexterous involution
of drapery, and a formidable depth of shadow. Not to
unravel too much of a tedious and thrice-told history, it
will be sufficient to state, that both England and America
have, within these few years, been professing to recom-
mend and encourage every where syiere the principles of a re-
ciprocal exemption from duties, and consequent equality
of commerce, on behalf of the merchantmen of each coun-
try. England, after opening her colonies in 1822 to
the ships of the United States, under certain condi-
tions—an offer which was gladly seized on by the '
United States, but accompanied by the imposition of
enormous charges and restrictions upon the trade carried
on ;is British vessels between our colonies and the ports
of the Republic, and by a further enactment, which
Mr. Canning correctly dwells upon, as bearing
a most extraordinary and inadmissible character—this was
no other than a positive prohibition to British ships to
clear out from any port in the United States to any Bri-
tish Nrest India Colony, if they had entered the United
States from Great Britain hefself, or from any part of the
world except sue]) West India colony. Mr. Canning re-
presents the relation between the parties, produced by this
proceeding, very justly, as we conceive, in the following
passage :—" To allow a foreign ship to enter colonial
ports at all, and upon any terms, is a boon ; to withhold
from a ship of a country having colonies, trading from the
mother country to a foreign State, under a regular treaty ,
between the two countries, the right of clearing for an- ,
other port belonging to that mother country, in another
part of the world, is an injury." This we repeat, and we
are apprehensive that our judgment will be borne out by'
that of a larger proportion of the American public, is by
no means an unfair description of the respective principles
which have been illustrated in these acts of the British and
the American Legislatures. The Government of Great i
Britain sat uneasily under the pressure of this unex-
ampled policy. In 1825 the trade to the West India
Islands was opened to all friendly States, having until that
period been for three years confined to the Republic, by
which it had, as we have observed,'been so unequally re-
quited. But it was so tendered to all nations, without ex-
oeption,on terms which were incompatible with the above un-
friendly law of the United States. By persisting in the main-
tenance of that law, the United States appeared to exact
from Great Britain the continuance of a favour to them,
%shish was :not merely injurious to the interests of this
country, but utterly inconsistent with the fair pretensions
of all other States to an equality of favour: England,
therefore, in the course of last summer, issued an order of
Council, interdicting to North America the privilege so
manifestly abused ; and the point in dispute, as we have
said, is no other than the right or no right of the United
States to complain at their self-wrought exclusion from
this privilege of trading with our colonies. Mr. Gallatin,
ia our opinion, has failed most entirely in his attempt to .
overthrow the long-established distinction between a com-
merce with colonial possessions and that with parent
States. It is, however, very pleasing to remark, that the
whole discussion has been hitherto carried on in a spirit
of perfect amity and good understanding; nor can we col-
h-et from the aspect of this one among the many quiestions
of common interest which occupy the respective Govern-
ments, the least symptom of an unfavourable issue to any
other important negotiation. It is right, however, to state
that Mr. Canning holds out no promise of negotiating at
ail upon the question of Colonial intercourse with Mr.
Gallatin America having herself rejected the boon, which
as gladly received by other Governments, and the wants
of our Colonies being supplied abundantly from more 11...
heral sources than the United States.-41;:;nes.
It is very clear that the answer of M. Salmon, of the
18th December, to Mr. Lamb's Note of the 16th, pub-
lished in our paper of yesterday, does not in the least con-
vey the sentiments or feelings of his Catholic Majesty on
the portrait drawn of him and his Government by the
British Minister in Parliament, or respecting the auxiliary
force it was determined to send to Portugal. It seems
entirely confined to the invention of an excuse for the
. ,
entry of tne Portuguese deserters into the provinces of
Alenteio and Tras-os-Montes, and a diplomatic and so-
phistical exposition of the good wishes of the King of
Spain to coniinue on terms of amity with the Court of
Portugal. The manner in which the Portuguese refu-
gees were originally armed, or the nature of the efficient
means which have since been adopted to disarm them, in
case they should return to Sparo, are studiously kept out
of view. Mr. Lamb's Note of the 16t,13 could not contain
any other instructions than those transmitted to him on the
9th, the day of the Message frorn the Throne. The discus-
sion in Parliament on the Message took place on the 12th,
when the Government was authorised to send troops to
Portugal; but of this actual determination Mr. Lamb
could not have been aware on the 16th, nor M. Salmon
on the 18th, although be seems to have anticipated it,
‘vite;i, in the last paragraph of his Note, he says, that " he
hopes that the frank, loyal, and sincere exposition which
he had tise honour to make of the sentiments which ani-
mated his august Master, will produce the happy result of
dispelling every kind of fear that may have hitherto
existed, as well as the. no less important object, that the
actual military situation of the Peninsula may not vary in
any point of view." This taat phrase is peculiarly diplo-
matic, as it :leaves to Spain Ole tight of subsequently
doubting the good faith of England and Portugal, in so
visibly altering the military state of the Peninsula, either
by increasing the army of Portugal, by the new enlist-
silent decreed by the Cortes, or by the resolution of send-
ing ?tn auxiliary force to her aid from England and Gibral-
tar. The above insinuation, however, denotes the ap-
prehension of the Spanish Government, instead of con-
cealing its secret designs, which certainly all along have
been to act on the present occasion towards Portu-
gal as France acted towards Spain in 1823. It is
therefore apparent that Ferdinand's aim in now re-esta-
blishing his amicable relations with Portugal, broken
oft too abruptly for his interests, is no other than to
gain time, and' with a view to enable him, under the
cover of his Ambassador, to carry on his intrigues more
effectually, as the Envoys of the Holy Alliance did in Ma-
drid, previous to the arrival of the Duke d'Angouleme.
In the meanwhile also, we see that 6,000 Spanish troops
are marching towards the Portuguese frontiers, and it is
now placed beyond doubt that this force is to be increased
to 16,000 men, All this was resolved upon by Ferdinand
previous to the 18th, when he could only have been aware
of the threat that a British force would be sent in aid of
Portugal.
s
On the other hand, his Catholic Majesty roust
have been sensible that France was seconding the views
of England, by publicly disapproving his conduct, although
he at the same time saw his bosom friend, M. de Moustier,
. ho, in Madrid had been so active in his co-operation
with the Portuguese Refugees, take his seat in the French
Chamber,.without the smallest reproach from his Master.

However M. 'Salmon's Note may have been viewed in
Lisbon, we cannot help pronouncing it to be extremely
vague and delusive. It offers no guarantees for the future,
nor does it acknowledge more than that the Portuguese
Refugees abused the asylum in the Spanish territory
granted to them, even studiously avoiding any allusion to
the conduct of the military commanders of the provinces
contiguous to the Portuguese frontier, the loophole out of
which Ferdinand at first seemed disposed to creep. At
all events, we must wait for_ further official information,
before we can judge of the state of our relations with Spain.
—Morning Chronicle.
Notwithstanding the extensive severity with which the
Game Laws are at present acted upon, the increase of
poachers is beyond all precedent. In every neighbour-
hood where a large quantity of game is preserved, the
temptation arising out of the high price of the monopolized
article is so great that numbers of the peasantry, who are
even able to procure employment, are seduced from the
course of regular industry, to realize the large gains which
they expect to derive from the dangerous traffic in this for-
bidden commodity. It is remarkable that the Game Laws,
which are a degrading badge, and remnant of the old feu-
dal tyranny, should be so zealously supported as they are
by many. of the principal Whig leaders in England. Even
Sir Francis Burdett, once the idol of the Democracy, has
always kept up a strong establishment of gamekeepers,
who, of course, like all other persons of that class, would
as soon knock a Westminster elector upon the head, who
trespassed on a preserve, as any other person ! The
Duke of Bedford is another of the friends of liberty, who
makes it a point to multiply game in a manner that causes
the neighbourhood of his estate at Woburn to be overrun
with poachers—great is the mischief thereby occasioned to
the rustic population. A traffic as regular as that of
smuggling is carried on between the poachers and the
agents for the London sellers, nor can all the efforts of the
"Magistracy or the local police put down the practice.—
The fact is, that if 'Parliament do not soon adopt the prin-
ciple of legalising the sale of game, the wild and ferocious
habits of poaching are likely to prevail to a most alarming
extent, and to counteract all efforts for the civilization and
improvement of the labouring classes.—Morning Herald.
Sir Peter Laurie, who, as far as we have been able to
observe his conduct, seems to have brought to the office of
Alderman a degree of zeal, activity, and intelligence, not
always to be met with—has pointed out one evil in the
proceedings on trials at the Old Bailey which has not been
generally noticed ; and which may, perhaps, in some mea-
sure, account for the unsatisfactory result of some of the
trials in that Court, to which we recently alluded. In re-
ference to the depositions taken before Magistrates, under
the statutes of Philip and Mary, the worthy Alderman is
stated to have observed, that he was sorry to perceive that
a practice existed of trying prisoners upon such deposi-
sitions, instead of " working through the cases anew."--
That such a practice, if it really exist, is an extremely re-
prehensible one, cannot, we think, be disputed; and that
it does exist, at least to a considerable extent, we have
heard from many quarters. The first of these statutes was
passed to compel Magistrates to take the examination of
witnesses in writing, before admitting prisoners to bail, and
the subsequent Act was passed to make the same practice
obligatory in all cases of felony. For this salutary prac-
tice there were various and very obvious reasons—among
the rest, that no man should be imprisoned or held to bail
without the particulars of the charge against him being
known and recorded, to perpetuate the testimony of wit-
nesses dying or being otherwise incapacitated from attend-
ing the trial, and that the Judge and Jury upon the trial
may be able to know whether any, and What discrepancy,
exists between a witness's first and subsequent statement.
In Ireland an absurd and mischievous practice existed, to
a period even later, we believe, than the Union, of the
Grand Juries finding and rejecting the Bill upon these de-
positions alone. That practice, however, has long since
been done away, and the witnesses now undergo a viva cove
examination before Irish Grand Juries, as they have always
done here. In this country, till lately, the examinations
taken under this Statute have been principally useful to
inform the mind of the Judge previous to his charging the
Grand'Jury, and to enable him to see how far the wit-
nesses agree on the trial as to the statements made before
the Magtstrate. But this is all the use that can or ought
with propriety to be made of them; and to make them a
sort of brief from which the Judge is to elicit the case can
only suit those who, from indolence or haste, are unwil-
ling (to use Sir P. Laurie's intelligent expression) to
"work through the case anew." The witnesses ought to
be examined and induced to tell their story as if they had
never told it before; and, instead of being led step by step
through a course of what are called " leading questions,"
to repeat what he has formerly said, each should be left to
tell his story anew, and the only use that should be made
of his previous statements, should be to detect any vat ia-
tions that can he found from them favourable to the ac-
'cused and to justice. The contrary practice—viz. that
which Sir Peter Laurie points out, tends in itself to per-
vert the first principles of justice, and places the commit-
ting Magistrate almost in the situation of both Judge and
Jury. indeed, if the depositions taken by him are to be
the criterion of a prisoner's guilt, we know not why the
trouble of a trial need be undergone • and we may as well
see the Great Paid and Unpaid deciding at once upon
cases of felony, as they already do upon the Game Laws,
the Excise, the Customs, and various other topics con-
nected with the liberties, and often in their result with the
lives, of the community. Instead of extending the powei s-
of the Magistracy., we trust that both Parliament and the
Judges will unite in seeing them curtailed. At any rate,
we trust that Juries will, wherever they can, interfere to
check the growth of a power which, wholesome and salu-
tary as it is, when confined within its proper sphere,
ought not to be allowed to usurp functions, or to extend
to consequences which it never was intended to reach.—
Ibid.

It is impossible to read the correspondence between Mr.
Canning and Mr. Gallatin, which we published yesterday,
and to compare it with the terms in which the American
President addressed the Congress, with respect to the
negociations on the subject of the trade with our West
Indian Colonies, without seeing that the. President has en-
deavoured to deceive the world, with respect to the state
of the question between America and England, with an au-
dacity, not unworthy of Ferdinand himself. Undoubtedly,
Mr. Adams had a strong inducement to deviate in his Mes-
sage far from truth or candour ; for the pretensions, which
America has set up, are so ridiculous and extravagant, so
inconsistent with the sovereignty of independent nations,
that to have declared them openly and fairly, would have
made even a Republican Assembly blush. In 1822, we
opened partially the trade between the United States and
our West India Colonies; for the 3d Geo. IV., c. 44, per-
mitted certain enumerated articles to be imported, subject to
fixed 4sities, into certain specified ports in the West India
Islands, from any foreign country, in the West Indies, or
America, either in British vessels or the vessels of
such foreign country : and the same Act gave authority to
export to any other colony, or to the United Kingdom,
the articles which should be so imported. This privilege,
though extended in name to all the countries of America,
was, in reality, a boon to the United States alone ' • for
the other states and Provinces of America had nothing
that deserved the name of a Commercial Marine. The
permission thus given to the United States to trade with
our Colonies in their own ships, was an indulgence which
they had no right to demand ; and which, in fact, was
not granted to the subjects of any European Power.—
What return did the United States make to us for this re-
laxation of our laws in their favour ? In the month of
March immediately following, they passed a law, impos-
ing an alien duty of 94. centimes per ton, on British ves-
sels coming from the West Indies, and an additional duty
of 10 per cent. on goods imported in them. This enact-
ment was, in itself, as ungracious and unfair as could have
been devised; but, in order to make it still more objets..
tionable, the law provided, that these alien duties should
continue in force—not until the ships of the United States
were admitted into our colonies on the same terms
as our own ships—not until the commodities of
the United States, were admitted upon as favour-

able terms as those of any foreign country—but, until'
the goods, wares, and merchandise of the United States
-should be admitted upon the same terms with the goods,
wares, and merchandize of Great Britain or Ireland ! !
America, forsooth, was to be on the same footing in some
of the markets of our Empire as we ourselves were! She
forgot her own tariff, with its constantly augmenting im-
posts ; she forgot that, if she expected us to admit her
produce into our markets unburdened by any duties which
our own subjects did not pay, it would be well for her to
set us an example, by repealing the duties on the impor-
tation of cotton and woollen manufactures, and by allow-
ing the cotton of our East Indian possessions, and the
sugars of our Colonies, to find their way, unimpeded, to
the markets of New Orleans and New York. Had we
advanced any such pretension, the President would have
exclaimed against its extravagance; yet, can he assign any
reason, why, if American goods are to be imported into
Jamaica on the same terms as English goods, the sugars
of Jamaica should not be imported into New York pr
Boston on the same terms as the sugars of Louisiana
We met this proceeding on the part of the United
States, not by concession, but by a retaliatory mea-
sure, imposing equivalent duties on American ships
entering the ports of our Colonies. Negociations had
been begun upon the subject; but these were cut short,
by the peremptory declaration of the American Envoy,
that no proposal would be acceded to, unless we should
consent to put American goods and wares on the very
same footing as their own, in the Colonial markets. It
was impossible that we should, under any circumstances,
submit to so extravagant a demand, and matters, there-
fore, remained in that state till 189.5. In 1825, our com-
mercial laws underwent a further change. The indul-
gence which the Act of 1822 had given to American
vessels, was extended to the ships of all friendly States.
Foreign ships were permitted to import into our Colonies,
any commodities, (with the exception of a few prohibited
articles) being the growth or produce of the country to
which the ship belonged, and to export the pro-
duce of the colonies to any country except the United
Kingdom and its dependencies. Thus a still greater scope
was given to the intercourse of America with our Colo-
nies, than had been permitted by the Act of 1822. Her
silly churlishness produced no effect on our policy;
it did not incline us to any concession ; it did not
even put us out of humour with the liberal and
enlarged system on . 'which we were acting. The
Act of 1825 contained a clause (6 Geo. Fourth, c. 73.,
s. 8.) that it should be lawful for his Majesty to
prohibit the intercourse with any country in Eu-
rope, having possessions in America or the West In-
dies, which did not confer on our ships the privileges
which we, by that Art, granted to foreign ships. By a
subsequent Act of the same Session (Gth Geo. IV. c. 114.
s. 4.) it was declared that the privileges of intercourse with
our Colonies should not be enjoyed by the ships of coun-
tries not having colonial possessions, which did not place
our commerce on the footing of the most favoured nation,
unless his Majesty should deem it expedient, by an Order
in Council, to make an exception in their favour. The
Americans have not placed the whole of our commerce on
the footing of the most favoured nation. They, therefore,
come within the prohibition of the Act. But .lonathan
modestly says, " His Majesty should make an exception in
my favour; he ought to grant me a privilege which, no
European power enjoys ; I have placed part of your com-
merce on a footing much below that of the most favoured
nation • therefore, you must place a part of my commerce
on a footing superior to that of other countries." This
is the. short state of the question between us and the
American President. It is a question, in which their
claims are nc4 only unreasonable as to us, but injurious to
our European Allies. Were we not aware; that republi-
can statesmen know little of moderation, we should have
doubted whether it was possible for rulers endowed with
common sense, to advance pretensions so unfounded and
extravagant as those of our transatlantic children are.—
New Times.