Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-05-11

ult. by MIR. Galla,in, &c.; in replying to which,
the undersigned will, as far as possible, conform
himself TO the example of Mr.. Gallstin, in putting
aside those points of the question in agitation be-
tween them, which have been already exhau., ell
IN argument, and the further discussion of which
would not tend to any practical advantage.
The parts of Mr.. Galla,in's last cote, which
appear to the undersigned to require an observa-
ton, relate matters rather Of fact than of res
soning.
Mr.. Gslla,in complains that the act Of Parlia-
ment OF 1925, was officially communicated %
the government of the u States.
Ii is perfectly true that it was not: nor has it
been the habit OF the two governments TO com
municate Ieciprocsly TO each other Acts of heir
respective Legislatures.
The letter of Mr.. Galla,in recapitulates very
distinctly, the principal points In the history Of
the case, states the reasons which the government
had for suprosing that that of Great Britain would
be still willing settle he points in dispute by
/ negotiation, notwithstanding the act of Parliament
of July, 1925, and dwells at considerable length
the difficulties in the way of adjusting the con-
ditions on which the trade should be continued, by
independent acts of legislation. arising from the
difficulty Of interpreting annually the of 1926.
and OF complying with all the conditions OF 1t.
The letter concludes with expressions of desire
on the part OF the government of the u States,
TO cultivate a cordial and lasting friendship with
| Great Britain, and TO settle every controvefted
question between them principles Of JUS
tce and reciprocity. 1t announces the nen-
ton OF The President to lay the correspondence on
the subject before Congress; which body would
decide, whether the colonial intercourse should be
altogether closed, the conditions to which they
would assent for retaining il. Mr.. Gallstin, as
well as the British government, will probably
learn with some SURPRISE that no measure was
adopted by Congress on the SUSPECT, and that the
intercourse would cease in consequence of iisa-
greement Of the two houses on an inciden al
question.
The Act of Congress of 1929 an Act, the
provisions of which specially affected Great Bri-
tain was not officially communicated either a.
the Kings Minister at Washington, or to his Ma
!Jeaty's Government by the American Minister
resident at this Court. So far from any such COM
munication being made, or any voluntary expla
nation Of the bearing of that act beng offered, i,
was not tall after repeated and press g inquiries
that his Majesty's Minister at Washington sue
ceeded in ob,sining from The American Secretary
OF State, the true construction of the most impor-
tant clause OF that act, the clause in which The Z
> a:es claimed that their trade TO The British West
India colonies should be put on the same footing
with The trade 10 the same colonies from else.
where;" and learnt, to his great astonishment
that under that word, " elsewhere' was intend
ed 10 be signfed, not only the other depepdence.
self.''
The Undersigned at the same time begs that j,
may not be supposed that the British Government
withheld from the Government of the IT =. com
municalion oi the act of Parliament of 1926 from
any no'ion of retaliation for the omission of the
Government of the United States to communicate
TO that OF bis Majesty the act Of Congress oil
1928.
He refers 10 that instance of omission on the
M rt Of Anna
First, that the ordinary aad natural cnur-c be-
tween States, Is not To uske diplomatic commu
muncations OF the acts of the respective lesisla.
torres; and secondlv, that no inference could lie
drawn from such omission on The one side, any
more than on the other, of (what the undersgne ed
disclaims for his Goyarnment) an Intentional want
OF courtesy respect
But the act OF 1925 dill not relate specially 10
the u. States i held out 10 all ust,aEs of HE
worIi certain benefits Cor what were believed bg
the British Government to be SOY on certain con-
ditions
If communication of the &C, bad been made 10
one nation, It must have been made alike to all
| Such communication would la e been liable 10
different Interpretations: some governments
might have considered Il a solicitation 10 which
| they ere bound In courtesy 70 give some answer.
explaining their reason for declining Of they did
decline) TO avail themselves OF the provisions OF
the act; others might perhaps have taken IN,
bragg at II, authoritative rreten.ion 10 I'M
pose the legislation OF this country upon other pa-
! tons.
| Tie simp!es, was to allow the provl
sions Of the act to End their way to general know
| ledge through the usual channels OF commercial
! information.
| The undersigned has no reason 10 sppreben. 4,
ths' this course has proved less edectual on the
present. than on former occasions:
The conditions OF the act If I825 bava bas,
accepted and carried into effect by some Govern
ments that OF the United States has not rbousht
it ezpedient TO AXE I'd sEtage of them. But the
undei rigned cannot but be still Of opinion that the
Resolution proposed in the House OF Representa-
tiyes, at Washington, At The beginning of The las,
session OF Congress, for the express purpose If
urg ne the Executive Government of the TInj,.
ed States 10 come INFO the terms OF the act Of
1925, the debates which took place upon ihlt pro
position, and The final rejection of 1t by nsoritr
OF only two votes, show that il was not for want
of sufficient understanding of the intent Of the
act of Parliament, that the conditions OF il were
no accepted by the U. States
To piece of evidence, which proves the
perfect understanding liz America, not only of the
purport and provisions OF the Act of Parliament
of 1925, but ~ the conditions which il would be
requisite for the Americas Legislature TO psrfo,m
in order 10 entitie The United States to the bentfi,
of thai act, the undersigned might have scrubbed
20 refer (as not heing OF the nature of Diploma.
tic Docnmeot,) if MIR. Galla;in had MOI encou-
ragged him TO bring forward any documen; tending
TO throw light the matter in dispute by ri,
ing, in support Of bis own view Of that matter.
private letter from Mr.. Clay to a Member Of Con-
gfess.
Early in the Session Of Congress Of 1925 90.
petition from Baltimore was presented IN botb
Houses of the American legislature, in which pc
tition it distinctly pointed or, The, he Bri-