Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-03-16

I'd by fureg u nation IN the expectation OF
is commodities mi. h, not be- ne, by AN equiv
a!ent dn,y here. u was well known, that En-
Il ,nd grants hnunties for the EXPRESS purpose
of forcing mr. gnuds ,ntn GrriSu markets and
If ne nbrcunn I" this s'-,'ion ofthe hill is held
valid, 81" will s;hi lac ,nablrd 10 du so with
respect I, this county.
tfnt. Il /, nn' valid la thu, article of The
treaty which it+ section "f .hr b;ii is said To-
violate. twn objects Mere Intended the first
was "a secure perfect reciprocity b-twecn
the two nalio,s NTH respect 10 iapir rariga-
ton. Preferences had previously been given,
buh by France ald England, - hich threaten
ed nitng, tier Ia d"WiS" America ~ tie carry
ing IRA de which course uf HIM ~ lad tu the
ad,rtinu Of Whist has hem called the American
policy on this subject policy which has
proved cnmn"t"ly ;riunphant. ard has
brought bq'h Eoglsni and France u terms
Rut his s"ctinn of the hill !! avrs this recpro.
city unlruch'd $50 Gar no differences is made IL
nur dntes. " heihcr mrrchandlse is imported
in British ~ in A,nrricnu bottoms
The srcund object aimed at, in the arlicl"
~ ne treaty alluded to- WAS Ia secure 10 Bri.
,isA goods entrance into our country on as
& nod 'rrins rs those nC any other nation :; nor
does tbs SECTION make aay discrimination 10
their prejudice: lis provisions are general, 10
mNre directed against the goods uf cue coun-
Try han another. II adds the amoun, of alt
foreign hpuntcs tn the duty on those Snnds on
whi,'h the hountv i grHu'rd and IT, in con
sequenc" 0tt'is general measure Of self de-
fence, British goods have InoIc tluiv to paw
than French il il not the result of oar legisa
ton, Int nf her oUa, and when two parties
max, contract, no act ri one of them is, of
N,cif 10 constitute a violation. of the contract
ny th- ether marty.
To This it was rrinincd that the increase of
in fi.,f tf,h h..
ng legislation, and not ~ that nf Eugi nd for
il was oar &c; that added the amount of her
taunfy 10 oar dn'y, auCi thereby caused her
goods 10 ray m IRE than those cf her nrighhor.
thing eynresslv promised hv the treaty
mt Ia III. B.itpi1 has right 10 grant what
huurlies she ill. T",at is tier own affair -
part Of her municipal regulations thing
hetwrru her prOr!e and her government. 1t
WAS wr who VOW Interfere and make her
municn'l regulations :, part of our law. and
found du'i.' on thrp. contrary ~ TIC treaty
As 10 the p"'icy of meeting her borntrs
nv coun'erval!lng duties. u is 4 question frna
which We Ere NreclGdtd because we have al
ready bound nurseries not 10 tax her ,.nod-
more than those of Others, who .-rant no
hpuntirs. This may he Inconvenience il NAV
have been imrnlitic: we have done so, and
we must abide by our agreement
case was put. on the one side suppose
article IN which she grants no houDtv, and
we receive that article at certain daiy, the
same is paid by French artirle of IA
same knh here She Is on an equal footing with
France. She afterwards grants bounty
which raises her daily IN our ports. Is thai
Increase In he charged 10 us? is il any thing
Bat her owI act Can her subsequent act
c1nstrue our act inta an odtnce2 Ii was an
sSere6, Yes, because our act anticipated such
and had r,.fAr 4,
and IS therefore as much chargeah!a on US a.,
II It lad been done after aud no: before The
case occurred. 1t was said further that If
this act placed England, with respect 10 any
o1unied article, on less favorable terms than
France, her remedy was either 10 repeal hcr
honniy, ar TO apply To France to lay one
our law had impartial respect To both.
II Was replied that these bount;es were usu-
ally granted tn make up for some disadyan-
'age, real or supposed, between the country
which granted them md other countries. Tie
bounty, therefore, only placed the two cou',-
trfes on level as they came 10 our potts - aud
II we charged one more than the other, we
created an Inequality that we did not fud -
and "e did that very thing which, by the
treaty, we had'engased not to do.
1t was again argued, that, TO forbid these
"onnfrFr"i!ing duties, was against the equity
# tie treaty. Every agreement ought to
bind both parties but granting bouniirs was
40 act at one party Ony, and an act by
which She could, a, pleasure, affect the ~
ierrsi OF the other party, under the treaty. ],
was answered, that the granting of h0unfies
WAS AN independent RI Gt, that existed anterior
t"the reaiy, aud was r' cog aized by The treaty,
II existed IN hoih paTtivs-it was no no, civ
ia England. having been prartisch for q
century, aaG before our manufactures had an
eSlstente II WAS not granted to the manufac-
turtr but - The exporting merclmnt--tn en-
courage the commerce and extcnd the nag-
gainp of England, and not to De ;rny our
manufacturers. 1t was reioined that the quo
ammo with which il might have been done,
was Of no c0nsrquruce--iis actual operation
was TO destroy them. The object of the
tre2tv. it WAS urged, VAS To DO no more Than
put Britain ON an equality with other nations
~ the admission Of her goods To his country
but the striking out of this section would
20 farther than this, and put her on II better
footing than other countries which gave no
bounty.
1t was answered that the advantage was
not derived from u5-bDth foru causes I'M
connected with our system OF duties. That
we coal! not eqnalize nations, except in the
duties they piid ga, and his wr had expressly
b0nn' Ourselves ~ do towards Britain and we
must keep orr word.
The amend,nsnt offered to the section
went to give tia prospective operation bu,
this was opposed, ou the ground first TAKEN,
thar, whether prospective or NOT , IL would be-
equally our act and rqJn,ly violation Of the
treaty The words "f hich expressly rcfI-
red I" acts which should be passed ia future.
ne well AZ those which should then be in TX
istoucr. There were only six b0Dntirs now
lcft 10 England, most If thr others having ak
en- flt. firm AZ tr. 90, h.ck 'Vtb,s, q, mr., r.,,,