The Litchfield County post., 1826-12-26

ple) could not, without such an equality m the terms of admission, maintain any thing like an equal competition with similar pro- duce from Canada, and other British A merican possessions. The British Gov ernment on the contrary, concluded that they had right to lay protecting duties in
 behalf of the woduce of any part of their
 dominionS.
 On that point, and on that only, of diff
 ference, the negotiations separated with a
 mutual understanding that it should be re-
 ferred to their respective Governments,
 and that the negotiations should be resum-
 cd at some future convenient period. Meanwhile, before the renewal of the ne-
 gotiation, the British Government passed
 an act, on July 5, 1925, in which it is en- acted that, as to nations not possessing col onies, the British Colonial ports should be
 closed, if they do not place the commerce
 of both Great Britian and all her posses
 sions abroad, on the footing of the most
 favoured nation. This act was supposed
 here not to have been intended to be ap- piled to the United States. It was never officially communicated to our Govern
 ment: the British Minister received no in- structions enabling him to respond to questions of interpretation arising upon it, of the most obvious necessity; and the British local authorities appear to have pla- ced on it different and opposite construc- tions.
 Notwithstanding this act, it was formally notified, so late as the last of March of the present year, by MT. Vaughan to our Gov &h %ko hT;,..,Arx, preparing to renew the suspended negotia- tions, without any communication whatev- CT that they had resolved to except the Colonial question from the subjects treated of in the former negotiation. T he Amer ican Government, as soon as after circum- stances would admit, sent out Mir. Gallatin to resume the negotiation and before his credentials were delivered, he was met by the order of Council, closing the Colonial ports against our vessels, from the 1st off December, 1926. He was subsequently, informed by Mir. Canning, in note, off which the scornful and snpercilous char&c- CT must strike the most cursory reader, hat the British Government would not reat at all on the Colouial question; in- which contradicted the notifca- ions of MT. Vaughan,a ,and the previous acts If that Government.
 The instructions of MT. Clay to Mr. Gal atine appear to have authorized the latter o yield the point which had prevented an in the previous negtiation. Whatever doubt may be entertained as to he propriety of the American Government 'onsenting to discrimination in behalf off he British produce, disadvantagious to the produce of our own country, all must a. ,ree, that in conceding that point,the Pres dent evinced the strongest desire to effect m amicable arrangement with Great Brit in and if it has not heen made, none villbe at loss where to fix the responsi- 'ility for its failure.
 It now appears.
 1st. That the British Government has Ill along levied the alien duties in the Colonial ports, to .counteract those which Ire levied in our ports; and that in this re- pect, Gen. Smith and others, who, at the ast Session of Congress, believed them to 'e repealed, laboured under mistake
 Ely. That if we had then repealed those luties, the repeal would not have satisfied he British Government.
 3dly. That if Congress had legislated at he last season, it must have legislated in he dark, and Intellectually. |
 Athly.atha the British Government re- uires that we should place the trade of Great Britain and all her possessions a. road, on the footing of the most favored alton, to entitle us to admission into the British Colonial ports demanding cen- essions of privileges which she refused to lake to us in turn.
 Whatever solicitude may be felt that ,e should be on good terms with Great sritain, and we think the Executive has nanifested quite enough; we believe that 70 American can be prepared to subscribe Q such conditions as are required of us nd the firm and dignified tone prevailing he correspondence on the part of our gov rnment must, we think command the undi- ided appreciation of the country. It will elong now to Congress to determine whether, on subject common to both ountries, oue party alone shall be allowed o legislate for each. On this subject, we can- lot disguise our fears However earnestly Ve may otherwise, hope) that the recent conduct ofthe govefnment of Great Britain traced to jealousy existing in that coun- ry' of the growing power of the U. States. ! In July 1926, MT. Huskisson, in speech delivered in the house of commons, said, 'ln commerce,in navigation, in naval pow Al