The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-11-17
lIDe GnQutrer>
RICHMOND, NOVEMBER II, 1909.
POINTS IN DISPUTE BETWEEN G. bril-
TAIN AND THE U. STATES.

No. l.
1t seems. that many censures have been
cast upon the last administration, for a sup
posed want of :beralitv towards G.. Britain.
AS these reproaches may be shown to be les-
titute of amy foundation, by recurring to the
terms which were proposed to G. Britain as
the basis Of a frsaty-it seems matter
of some moment to exhibit what these propo-
sitions were.---Therc is another advan-
tage in such an Essay-Itis not every man
who is able to sift long diplomatic CORES
pondence-and to trace the terms, which
were successfully offered and rejected. To
show the actual state of this question, the
following calculations are submitted:
The two most important points in dispute
were LIST. the Colonial Trade. Cd. .he I'M
hresSment Of our Seamen
l. rs 10 The Colonial Trade --fhe Sccreta-
ry OF State in his joint letter of instructions to
Messrs. Monroe and Pinkuey, PERMITS them
to take the artic!eof Oct 1901, 8uhhiemen-
fGry to the treaty of June of that year, be
tween G.. Britain and Russia, as the rule of
their conduct-this article obandous the
pint OF carrying, in time of war, Ihe pro
duCe or merchandise of the colonies, S1'c tii.
rect to the mother country, and vicc versa
from the mother country to the encmY's co
ionies.
AS many abuses had crept into the British
trade, from enemy colonies, through neutral
ports, was in fact the direct trade, it became
essential to adopt some r,lke as a precaution
on this ponr. They were, therefore, to CON
cede OH the part of the u. States, that the
landing, securing the duties and change Of
ship, or itreferably the landing alone, or Sc
Curing the duties besides, shnuid be neces-
sary 20 dest.0y the Continuity of the voyage
of which facts, the ordinary documents of
tn he hall
dences enough. Here let il be distinctly re-
marked, that these were held sufficient,
in the celebrated correspondence Of Mr..
hing and Lord Hawkesbury in the year
1901, the .fdvocate General himself hav.
ing formally reported. that "landng the
goods and paying the duties in the neutral
Country 6' eaks the continuity of the voyage
and Is such an imliortation as ieSahzeS the
trade, although the goods be re shipped in
the same vessel, and on account of the same
neutral proprietors, and be forwarded for
sale to the mother country or the colony
In the hryet Of tie treaty. signed by
these gentlemen, however, greater conces.
sons were really made. All articles TO, as
we'll as from the colonies were to be landed
In the ports OF the u. States-on re ship
meut OF those of the growth, produce & ma
nntacturc OF Eurohe, one per cent was to
be GcdHetcd from the draw back-cn re-
my's Colonies 10 Enrotte, tzyo err cent. were
10 be retained from the d,'a7v back-in both
cases, the goods and vessels to be bona tide
INC property OF the citizens and inhabitants
of the United States
Dad the administration, however, reject
tn new faT of one and two Fer cent on
our colonial trade---Did thev refuse to meet
Tins singular re9uistion of the British go
Vernment?-a requisiton which was entire.
n f.4tO lNtft IN..Y,.. \
aUd'ice. Nothing like it. On the contra
ny, the Secretary of State in his cri,igue on
TINS article OF Ihe treaty, is silent as to this
parucuiar-and his silence may be consider
ed AS equivalent to- an acquicscence. Be-
SIDES, into the list of changes, which our
ministers were instructed to procure, this
fotHf did MOI really enter. The only objrc-
non, which he does urge against this article,
is inlts "restrfctsHg To- the market of En-
T0he, the re- expectation of colonial produce,
and OTIS restrictug) to Eurohca1r articles
the supplies to the ceioHiaI MARKET" The
effects OF these restrictions, he shows to be
important. In direct contradiction TO the
ADJUDICATION eUen of British courts, the pro
'auCtiuHs Ut the continental and the insular
ca'nhies OF America were no longer to be
shipped to the Asiatic or African shores of
tne Mediterranean, nOrito any of the ports
beyond the Cape of Good Hope, where a
HdIkEt was ~ be b0d-nor were "the i'm
pnrtations from beyond The Cape of Good
Hope, more csneCially the cotton fabrics Of
China and India, to be sent as heretofore 10
the w. Indies. or the Spanish Main, where
they not only now Weld Il great profit to our
merchants, but being mixed with the pro
fHce OF this country, facilitate AL encou-
rage t'e trade H. the latter" Besides. as
MIR. Madison tru!y observes the greedy
cru'z~rs whoswarm on the ocean might east
IV convert the similarity of the manufactures
81 Europe, and those Of China aud india.
into preieXt for new Interruptions and
FeXations of our trade.
surely then, on this hoint, the last ADM
rl..raticn were disposed to go $ tar in lhe
spirit OF accommodation and peace, as itq
hitterest enemies would desre.-Thev qprHf
Jhrhef than the British government itself
alter solemn report Of the Advocate Gene
raj, thought necessary to require in the year
18Ol.---l here has lately been an indirect
proposition IN me of the republican prints
70 abandon this colonial trade. Bot there is
distinction which ought certainly to 5s ia