Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1827-06-19

intention. That proposition was only tor re-
peal of the discriminating duties, and, II adopt
ed, would have been unavailing, since, not en-
bracing repeal ofthe restrictions on the clreu
itous intercourse it is now understood that IL
would not have been accepted by the British
Government, as compliance with the conti-
ton required by the act of the 5th OF July,
1925"
,ot satisfied with Mr.. Gallatin's assurance
(Which he made, as he told you, by express in
struction) nor the reasons given by him in FUR
tberance Of it, to prove that the intent OF the
acts of June and July, 1925, could not have been
understood nAmerica, you return to the charge
in your letter OF January, 1897, and maintain bv
sundry ingenious arguments (most OF which
have examined) that those acls must have been
and were understood by us, and that we know
ingy and deliberately rejected their provisions.
In more particular reply 10 thee paragraph
just cited from Mr. Galla,in's letter, you say,
(alluding 10 The Baltimore petition) that II
"Prayed 'for the removal Of the several re-
strictions imposed by the American act OF s23
not Of "the discriminating duties" only, but OF
the prohibitions OF what is called by Mr.. Gal
lain 'circuitous intercourse in British ships
You then add, that sit was against the prayer
OF this petition that the decision OF the Amerl-
can egislature, al the close Of the session, was
taken"
This, sir, is an important point, and you
must pardon my freedom in putting you right.
Notwithstanding urperemptory contradlc-
ton of Mr.. Goliath, and the seeming minute
ness of your information 10 the proceedings
of the American Legislature, Gas you call the
Senate of the U, Sta,es) Mr.. Galatin was right
and you are wrong. The bill is short, and
shall quote it entire.
81 hH supplementary 10 an act 10 regulate the
commercial Intercourse bei,Deen the United States
and certain British Colonial Ports BE it enacted
by the Sena.e and House of Representa- of
the United States Of America in Congress as
sembled, that no other or higher duties OF I'M
pos, or tonnage and no other or higher duty or
charge of any kind upon any goods, wares, or
merchandise, imported from the following tree
ports of The British Colonies, viz: Kingston in
jamaica, sc. in British vessels, shall be levied
or ex ;. ted, in any Of the ports of the Z. States,
excepting in the port OF Florida than upon the
vessels Of the United States, an1 upon the like
goods, wares. or merchandise imported into the
ports Of the United States in The same; any thing
in the third section of the act 10 which this is
supplem, ntary, dated LIST Of March, 1923, 10 The
contrary Notwithstanding
SEC g And be il further enacted that this
act shall he in force from and after the 3oth day
of June next. Provided, nevertheless, that, upon
satisfactory evidence being given 10 the PresI-
dent OF the United States, that any discriminate
ing dutie Of tonnage or impost are imposed or
levied in either Of the ports aforesaid, upon ves-
sells wholly belonging TO the citizens OF the u
States, or upon mere handze the produce or
manufacture thereof, imported in the same,
the President is hereby authorized to issue his
proclamation declaring the fact; whereupon this
act shall thereafter he suspended and dsconti-
nued SO far as il respects the ports mr. places in
which such discriminating duties are imposed
or levied"
This is the whole Of the aot, with the excep-
ton Of the names of the ports, omitted for bre-
vity. 1, follows, therefore.
LIST. That Mr.. Gallatin was right in assert
ing, and you wrong in contradict ng his asser-
ton, thar the proposition in the Senate was
for the repeal of the discriminating duties on
ly, and
I'd 1t is now clear as day, that the provi
sio"s of the acts of Pertinent of June and July
1925 were not understood here, inasmuch as
this bill Of &, n. Smith, avowedly drawn by him
to meet those provisi "sby Gen. Smith, who
took credit to himself then and sioce for n
Outstanding those provisions, although others
did not bill to which you confidently refer,
TO prove that these provisions were submitted
to the American Legislature and rejected, in
This bM | say, nothing was propos' d but re-
peal of the discriminating duties he prohi
bition of the "circuitous voyoge" remained un'
touched by the BILL
You will please to REMEMBER, that Gen
Smith is Of Baltimore, that he p esented the
Baltimore petition, of which you make SO
much u,e, and that he took the lead in his
whole business, the instigaton Of the citi-
zeas of taat place; SO at least, he observed last
winter.
His bill therefore may be taken as an au-
thentic indication of the manner N which your
acts we're understood by him and his co"stitu-
ehts. Consequently, all you have alledged on
that head falls to the ground.
have thus proved that you have totally
mistaken the haracter of thi, bill.
With regard to its fate, you say, its final re-
jectionN only two votes, shows that it was not
for theIt ant of sufficient understanding of the
intent OF he act Of Pertinent, that the condi-
tons of it were not accepted by the United
States"