Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-01-11

intercourse, there Were generally COupri-
sed two subjects. one, winch respected
commercial regulations, applicable 70
state of peace as well as ofwar the 9TH
er. which respects the rights aud duties
OF the parties one beiag At war, and
the other remaining at peace. Accor
dinghy, our government had instruct
cd US TO bring forward both those sub
jects.
As to the commercial iutercou = without
at this time going into details, or minor
points, which il might lIe necessary in the
progress of the negotiation, to ADJUST, VIC
would contens ourselves il. this unofficial
convS rsation, with touching on the most
important topics, which it seemed to us
desirable TO discuss and arrange. These
were, that the two countries should res
pectiveIy be placed On the footing Of the
nation The most favored that in the trade
between America s. the British European
domnIOns, all discriminating duties, on ton
mage and on merch andiZe, either imported
| or eXported, should be abolished that the
trade between America and the British
West-Iadies, should be regulated and pa
ced or some more permane 1t bas s than the
| occasional acts of the colonial authorizes
| that the nature ard iind OF interc curse BE-
| tween America and TIE adjoining british
provinces, should be fined aui provi led
FOR and that the trade with the BRUSH
| India possessions, should be opened to A
mer ca on liberal principles.
In regard to the discriminating duties,
we remarked that proposition to abolish
! them, first came from Great Britain, and
, a provision to that eject, was inserted in
the unratiied treaty Of 1906. Congress
hsd taken up the matter at their lest SEES
sion, and passed an act, which we explain
| ed. We thought it desirable that they
| should be abolished, in order to prevent
! those collisions, aud that system OF COM
| merclal warfare, In which which the two
| countries would prob bly, be involved b.
| an adherence to them. AS an example,
we mentioned the great extra duty, to
which, as we understood, the article or cot
ton was liable, by the British laws, when
imported in foreign vessels, and which, II
persisted in,would certainly be met by some
| countcryailng regulations.
| Slth respect to the trade 10 British In
dia, we observed, thai we had no equ!va-
| lent to offer for it that il was for Great
| Britain 70 consider, whether commerce,
Consisting as. it did, almos, entirely in the
| exchange OF our specie for India produce,
! was not 81 Il nature TO deserve the most il
| berai encouragement but, that we had
ir-t!icr enter into no stipulation on the sub
! Ject, than be restricted to a direct inte.a
| course, as had been proposed by the unre-
| tined treaty, both on the Outward and l. =
| turn voyage.
On the other subject, the rights and du-
ties oil the parties, one bSing at war, ann-
the other III condition Of peace, we ornr
ceeded TO re lark. that Whist the prospcc -
Of long European peace appeared to
! exist, as was the case when the treaty Of
Chem was concluded, it was less impor
tantto provide for questions arising under
this head. But it was impossible to shut
our eyes to the demonstrations every
where making of a new war, which, if it
should assume a maritime character.
| might again menace the harmony and good
understanding between the two Countries.
! 1t was desirable, therefore, to anticipate x
provide for the evil. The first and most
important point was that OF impressment.
Great Britain had always protested a viii
| !lngness to receive and consider any pro.
pos ton winch America should be DISPOSED
! 70 make on that subject. 1t would, per-
! maps, be Improbable at this time TO 90
into discussion Of the right, as to which
| we would merely remark, that it was i'm
| possible that there could be stronger
| conviction on the part of Great Britain.
| that 1t was " Ga her, than there yason the
part If America, that It was on her side
| 1t was better to look to some pra ,t;cal ar
| rangcment, by which, without Concession
| OF right by either party, the m.schiefs com
planned of on both sides might be prevent
ted. To this end the attention OF our 20
vernment has been turned. We believed
| that Great Britain had never heretofore
| contended that the American government
was bound to prohibit the merchants of
the United States from employing fore On
seamen, any more tn N i. was bound 10
! forJid their shipping contrabaad art cIss.-
America was, however, now .wniin, 70
| take upon hersclFsuCn an obligation. and
/ TO exclude British sesmen on her mer
| chant service, and we believed such ex
| cidsiou might be as eliectually executed as
our revenue laws. Here we called their Al
| tention to the act which congress had pas-
sed on That subject, aud to the tnessai.e OF
| the President to that body towards the
| close OF Its last session, npoa the supposi
ton, that II the exclusion # British sci
men should be absolute and entire, there
would no longer exist any ground for the
claim OF lWPrcssmsit, and Ok curse no OH
JectiOn 70 is abandonment. We stated
( that besides the motive winch existed
with cur government OF guarding against
collision "ita Great Britain, another now
/ ci1Ul one operated, that OF encouragn :. o,,t
! native seauen, and of not being OBLIGED an
rely o. the uncertain supply OF foreigners.
o this system as substitute for that of
inprcssucnt, it dii noJ appear TO us tina,
Great Britain could object, unless il was