Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-04-29

anc forty thousand pounds, or one million,
sixty. FIVE thousand, six hundred dollar !;
and there is nothing, whilst the war in Eu-
rope checks competition there, and whilst
obvious causes must for a long time enfee-
bic 1t here, that can secure US against fur
,her approximations of the tribute.
Even under a regulation placing the u.
States ON the footing of the most favored
nation, It appears that the British govern
ment would draw into its treasury from our
consumption, three-eighths of the revenue
now paid into it by the ". States. Such a
footing, however, would be material, as gil
wing the u. j. the benefit of the check ac.
cruing rom the more manufacturing state
OF the Eui cpean nations. But 10 be depri-
we'd OF that check by the want of an article,
putting US on the footing of the nations most
favored by @. Britain, AMI at the same
time deprived of our own checks by ciau-
ses, putting G.. Britain on the commercial
footing OF the nations most favored by the
u. States, would in effect confirm foreign
authority to tax the people of the United
States, without ,he chance of reciprocity or
redress.
The British duty on exports to the u.
States has another effect, not entirely to
be disregarded. 1t proportionally aug
ments the price of British manufactures,
re-exported from the u States to other
markets, and 50 far promotes a direct sup
ply from g. Britain, by her own merchants
and ships. Should this not be the efsec
at her regulations as now framed, there IS
nothing That would forbid change of the n,
having that for It's object.
On these considerations it is enioined up
on you by the president, to press, III the
strongest terms, such an explanation or a
menament OF this part Of the treaty, as
vii, II possible, restrain G Britain altoge-
ther froni taxing exports TO the u. States,
or AZ least place them on the footing of the
most favored nation or ii neither be a,
tajnable, such change in the instrument
N other respects, as will reserve to the u.
States the right TO discriminate between
@ Britain, and other nations, i'll their hro-
of exports, the only disc riminati..
on in the case of exports, permitted by
the constitutions. The unwillngness OF the
president TO risk an entire failure of the
protected accommodation with G. Britain,
restrairs him from making an amendment
of this p 1T of the treaty, sine qua non !;
but he considers it SO reasonable, and so
much called for by the opinions and fee
ings Of this country, thst ne is eqalIy arx-
ious and confident with respec; to a com.
pliance On the par: of the British govern
ment.
article 6 This article, as taking the
case OF the West India trade out of aDv
general stipulation of privileges granted TO
other nations, may prove convenient. by
Remembering measures, which may be
taken against the British monopoly, from
questions of which that stipul lion might
otherwise be susceDtible
article z. Though to remain if desired.
would be more reasonable, without the last
or with right only to accept
places and periods, at which the trade Of
the other party may not be permitted.
Article 8. This article IS framed with
more accuracy than the 17th, on the same
subject, In the treaty of 1894, and is i'm
proved by the additional paragraph at the
close of 1t. But as such general stipulati
cHs have not been found of much avail in
practice, and as it continues TO be the wish
OF the president to avoid, especially at the
present juncture, unnecessary confirmati
ons OF the principe, that a neutral Ray
does not protect enemies property an O..
mission OF the article is much preferred.
unless it be 20 varied as to be free from this
objection. This may easily be done. bv
general stipulation, "that in
all cases where vessels Shall be cantured
0r detained for any lawful cause, the shall
&c brought 10 the nearest o.. most conye
n'ent port; and such part only OF the ar.
-icles'on board as are confiscable by the
aw OF nations, shall be made prize; aud
The vessel, unless by that law subject al
80 to con1iscation, shall be at liberty to pro.
ICED, &c
There ought to be the less hesitation, CT
he British side, in making his change, as
ne article IN IT'S present form, departs
rom that OF 1874 and there is the more
'easonon our side, for requiring the change.
IS the addition of "for other lawful cause. -
liter specifying the two cases, of enemy's
property and coDraband of war. is proba
bly, valued by Great Britain as supporting
Ter doctrine, and impairing ours, with res
'ect to colonial trade. The only case
her han those specified, to which the RIGHT
II capture is applicable, is that of block
'des, which might have been as easily she
.ihed, as provided for by such a residuary
,hrase; and the PreteKt for appropria,ng
his phrase to the case ofihe colonial trade |
you'd be strengthened by the specific pro.
'Islon, IN subsequent article, for the case
{ blookades.
1t cannot be alledged that the specifca-
ION OF the two cases Of enemy's property
nd contaband Of war, is necessary tol
revent uncertainty and Controversy the
:. States having sufficiently manifested
heir acquiescenCe in these causes of can
IRE. Ii there be a source of uncertainiy
nd controversy, It is in the expressions
other lawful cause" and "otherwise
and this source could not be
by the CHANCE here nrcpoeed