Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-04-13

yer nave eeen interdicted "a treaty would have
been formed ni.ie years ago-and GU, commerce
would have gone on uninteIruptedly, annually &C
cumulating. But the views Of Mr.. Adaus were at
variance with those of Mr.. Madison, not only ON
THIS. but on another material point. In 1905, I'M
der MIR. Jefferson's administration, MIR. MaG.Son.
then Secretary of State, in his ns,rusti ans We
hiessrs Monroe and Pinckney, proposes a matuaN
abolition Of alien duties, as such measure would
be, in his opinion, &c favorable the navigation
| OF the United Safes" This was not the opinion
OF MIR. Adams. at least in October 1916; for in his
letter to MIR. Monroe, referring to the treaty of
July, 1915, which abolished discriminating duties
IN the trade with Great Britain, he says, :" It is
and uniformly has been my OPINION, that the result
OF the equalization Of dulles vii! be to the advan-
tase OF Great Britain, and to our disadvantage"
such were the views and opinions OF Mr.. Adams,
when he returned to this country, and entered
upon the duties OF ihe Department of State. 1t :
was then, Al we shall see, that the policy of Mr..
Madison was abandoned, and that our negotiations
with Greet Britain, were conducted upon o,hsr
| and new principles
In March lSl7, Great Britain proposed the free
port acts vi 1906 and 1903. If negotiation ha,E,-
followed, the fourth article proposed which wae
In reality lie only to which there was much
objection, could have been dispensed with; as il
related to the trade with the Indiass, and had no
necessary conneXinn with the West India question
But even that article had been satisfactorily
planned by British Minister'S in a previous neso-
tiaf'on. Under these free port acts enjoyed in
former times, trade highly advantageous: equal
TO or millions, and contributing two millions
annually to revenue But restrictions wese
preferred 10 negotiations The question was refer
red to Congress--,he fourth article and aii--wif-
out explanation. Ii 10 tina, planned prlicl
relating to the Indian trade, thai the comrnitts
particularly objected, aud hey reported ON I'll
restrictive act OF 1878.
Although this measure wns entirely unex nee
hV L. ont .tfaf h. I'll
winch she considered lavosshle; she renewed
negotiation IN the same year. when our CONNIE
ciai treaty u 1915, was, in Or 1918, extend
Ioi term OF zen years, and offered US vet NOR
favorable proposals. On the day previous to sisa-\
ing our treaty, of the 2oih o,. ISIS, the British
handed TO he Ameri' an Commissioners proposai
embracing the West India uaie.
On i'.e 10th October, 1873. aiessrs Gaiyaiin AMI
Hush In giving Mr. Adams esH of the --su-
'iaiions say of the West India rrade We m
ders'ood This basis to embrace the following 90.
ec,s
lst' u iish vessels 10 be permitted 10 impor.
i'om the British West Indies into the IL stare.
aud to export from the United States 10 the Br.-
t'sh Wes' Indies, only such articles of the p,o.
ouce OF he said West Indies, and OF the u Staes
respectively, az American vessels should be pef.
West Indies
%. The dates on the vessels. and on the car,
vessels were American British.
81 i ne duties on the importation of American
produce, INTO the British West ladies' not To te
higher when he produce imported directly
ifom the United ) ates, Than when imported in n
circnfous manner; with reciprocal condition
Tor The importation of West iadia produce in the
u. States.
An. The intercourse in British vessels TO b. al
| lowed only win such West India por,s, an 81 uI5
be open 10 he American vessels.
oth. The B-iish vessels allowed 10 carry on that
trade 10 be only of the same description with ira
American vessels admitted in The Britt n West
Indies.
"TO TINT basis as IA rs stated The Bril- h Mes.
pofentiGr Is accedcd.''
Were not these teens ibfrs}, lust, and eouaIf
Gould we ever expect--do we noy propose In
make uea On more or favorable terms
with Great Britain: Well, sir. and why did not
Messr-. Go'latn AID Ru.h make the trea,y5 Thev
20 on To tell ns in the same letie TO Mr. Adan,-.
that hen Tie details were considered. several i'm.
portahi points occurred which had not been con
feinrlGted in theiy Instructions. Ru, what we've
| the other obstacles? Mr.. Adsma had abandoned
the ground taken in 1916 by Mr.. Madison, who
did not ak Great BSit"in " TO renounce her rfp,t
! TO prohibit The importation into her Colonies of
| any article she pleased" hiesss GaIlatin s. hush
wee IN 1878 Instructed TO insist on this renuncis-
ion and The difficulty was as TO The articles Great
Britain might, ar might NOT prohibit.
Thus, without sufficient Instructions and en-
baTrassed with this new principle, Messrs Gala.
tin and HUH tell u, they though, it safe TO err
on our side OF the question, ard 10 ask for more
perhaps, than under all circumstances they exnect
To obtain" Thus, sr,dd we in 1873 lose an o,-
porunfy 10 ylace our West India commerce on a
permanent and favorable basis. Thus was the in
'eteh OF our navigation, oil orr navy, and Of orr
country, wsutoUly sacrificed Ia contending for
principles, which we now are most anxious 10 4.
bandoD, aud unwilling even 10 acknon ledge
The proposaI OF Great Britain of October. 1919
was received by or Commissioners &c al reEe-
readuD." In May, 1919, MIR. Adams Ienews
h- instructions % Mr. Rush. end persists in re-
curing Great Britain 10 renounce her right Of
prohibition. In 1920 our SECOND restrictive sc,
InterdIctipg the commerce with the Northern
ports, war passed. In 1922 Great Britain by ac,
OF Parliament opened her colonial ports 10 our
vessels, abolished Der discriminating duties, ana
placed the trade basis eub-tsniialy sin liar 10
that proposed IN 1873. How las this act met on
OUT part! Jn November, 1922, Mr. S. Canning
commenced a correspondence with Mr.. Adams,
10 ascertain our res-ons Eos ntnuiDg tire DIS
eliminating duty on Bfitisb vessels and their car.
goes, while ours were admitted into the colonial
ports without alien duties. This correspondence
Adams raises In succession, various objections
which have been 30 often reiu'ed, a. to render
them nwofthy of our attcniiOn. mir. Adams
seems to have conducted The correspondence ysnh
determination not 10 be salisied-aa soon az Mr.