The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-12-26 00:00:00

extraordinary,

Alter a rambling history, or pretended history, of
the commercial and political relations between this
country and the United States for the- last eighty
years, our contemporary thus describes our policy
during the past few years :

At the crisis which is to decide whether America is

hole weight of our influence and
example on the side of protection. We exclude the
staple produce of America by our corn laws, as if on pur-
pose to force them into excluding our manufactures.
Our legislation appears to be directed to the sole object
of limiting, as much as possible, the market for British
commodities. Sir Robert Peel, in 1843, turns a deaf ear
to the free-trade party, whether in England or in Ame-
rica, as Lord North did in 1776 to the overtures of
Franklin. The result in the one case was most disas-
trous to the best interests of the British empire,—will it
be less so in the other ? Certainly not, if Sir Robert Peel
continues in power for three years longer."

K e throw ti

The " crisis" above referred to is, we presume,
that readjustment of the tariff of the United States
which took place at the time (in the session of Con-

gress, 1841-2) when the decreasing duties payable
under Mr. Clay's bill (the tariff of 1533) were about

to reach their minimum point. Now what was the
relative position of the two countries at that period ?
By Mr. Clay's bill, the highest duty payable upon
imported commodities was to remain at 20 per cent.
ad valorem, after having graduated down to that
point by a scale previously fixed upon. Great Bri-
tain herself had then commenced that reduction in
her tariff, which has since been more fully carried
out by the large measure of Sir Robert Peel's go-
vernment. We had admitted America to important
privileges in her commerce with our own transatlan-
tic possessions, and had announced subsequent liberal
measures towards her. And what was the tours
pursued by her statesmen?
reciprocate evinced ? The reverse was the case

Was any disposition to

America met our proposed concessions by a more
stringent tariff, shutting out from her markets a large
portion of our most important commodities.
Nor was it at all apparent that she did this in any
feeling of pique or retalirtion. The declared objects
of her revised tariff were, protection—that odious

principle in the eyes of liberalism !—protection to
her own manufacturers, and the increasing of her
revenue, which was diminishing year by year under
the graduating duties of Mr. Clay's act, and, it was
stated, must become unequal to provide for the
wants of the government, if settled at the 20 per
cent. maximum. Protection was the demand of the
great mass of the American people; increased reve-
nue was the necessity which pressed upon American
statesmen. There was never held out to us, during
the discussion of this measure, nor has there ever
been held out to us since, a well-grounded or autho-
ritative hope that any concession of otcs could lead

to material concessions on their part. We never,
therefore, wilfully " excluded our manufactures"
from the American markets. We never acted as if

so absurd an object was in our contemplation as
that of " limiting the market for British commo-

We are assured, however, by our contemporary,
that the repeal of the Corn-laws would have the
effect of inducing a more liberal policy on the part
of the United States. Our reply to this is brief.
Our past concessions have had no such operation;
and until we have some better assurance, as to the
effect to be produced by further concessions, than is
to be found in the raving and random promises of
such political sages as our Mercury, and his free-
trade coadjutors, we shall not be willing to proceed,
or warranted in proceeding, further in the path of