Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1827-06-13

VIZ, adduce this Baltimore pet,tion, 70 p.os
-, a,be hole parport and bearing Oh t'.e a.
of 1893 was full before the eyes otshe CO.
can Legislature. ..s,be ;m-
saw noihinesof the ipeongrui'y q me &C. sn
,,i;ed SUGGESTION, hat petition rom SON ''
me an, lie houses. though OF the .nig"sss
sr,ectabiliy. was 10 have been rece,sss.
American Government, as sa' aeu.a. ,,,ss ne
s;,;on Of BRUSH law. Bat nan'.i', ' Is
fsc, itself. for which the baltimore ne
cited by you, is damesricaliy o'hefwise '''aA $
YOU state IT, o,s,he al Of / 825
was, as we now understand Isl. a:.:a.or IA
We, hsy;no colonies should, on condition OF PA
a;no the trade of Great Britain on the mos, "a.
rnrsbie footing, be allowed 10 trade to the DIR J,
t;,h colonies, without discriminating dutie :, apo
froro those colonies to all the rest OF the Wo,'a'
THE United Kingdom exec pied, } anl ~. ~ hat5
na,ions. not complying with thts cond.uon,
should be wholly shut outf from the British We ''
India Colonies. 3.
THE second part " Of the whole Purport or
bearing" is particularly 10 he noiicea, peoaesJ
The understanding Of that point, on me pat' "
the American Government, Is disputed ,'s you'
,,,;nst MIR. Gailalin and Mr.. Clay. Now as
ser, thai the Baltimore petitioners, instead ot u,r
ders,and;np the act of 1925 in ms, lis .whoie
purnort and bearing, understood II, ls'. no
psn;no ,se trade N the manner described, to the
vessels of nations which should put British com
80, . on the most favoured footing, and, 81.
AZ snb;.cting othernations S us among them
~ co,n,eryailinp and discriminating duties and
80 rss,r;,,inp them to the direct voyage; Tor
,b;s thew declare in terms they 6eheue to be the
onl, restriction of the act on the commerce OF
nations not complying with its provisions.
I appeal to any fair man, who will read the
ne,i,ion, whether have not fairly stated us
contents.
know. sir. that an individual member OF the
Senate expressed the opinion that the act Of
1925 would shut the colonial ports wholly a
painst US But am speaking OF the document
10 which YOU choose to appeal, the Baltimore
ne,ition. and | maintain that the petitioners
did not so construe The act OF 1928.
Thus then the snperstructare fails, on which
YOU have so confidently built. Thus you lose
the greatest argument whereby you proved, that
"the whole purport and meaning OF this ACT OF
1925 was full before the eyes Of the American
legislature.
The argument was beneath you, sir, had your
statement of facts been sound Its such an ar
pumep,. as j, would be for Mr.. Clay 10 quote
Memorial sen, up by the University OF Oxford
against Catholic emancipation, 10 prove some
particular light, in which the British Govern
ment viewed that subject, and 10 prove this, a.
gainsl the asseyeration OF thar Government
Should he in addition TO the indiscre,ion OF such
course of argument, have totally mistaken the
pur2or, of the memorial; and described II as
averring what it did not aver, his case would
have been yours.
But this is not all The matter, which, IN
the result has proved OF the greatest lmpor,
lance, is this, that whereas, as neA
's6b1tct out OF the province "f an actually exist
ing negotiation, no suspicion Of any such in,en-
ton is evinced on the part Of the Baltimore pc
titioners, as assuredly none existed on the part
Of the American executive This is point,
however, which deserves and shall receive
thorough exposition as far as il is in my pow
er to expound it.-But that must be separate
topic.
low, sir, in all this reasoning, have tacitly
admitted, in your favor, what is not only due to
your side the argument.bn is incontes,ible on
mine, viz: that The condition Of admitting Brit
ish vessels, on the footing OF the most favored
Nation was definite and inteil,gible condition,
which the United States could have complied
with, in any Consisten, explanation Ofthe terms.
Mr. Galla,in, in train Of argument, in which,
following The course Of MrC lay's instructions,)
he shows that you could not have expected
Srom Us TO admi, you to all the pri, ifegrs which
we interchange with certain Nations, has put
this polul in light, which admits no gain-say-
ing You accordingly do. no, notice it, and e.
wade its bearing on The question, whether he
Act Of 1925 was or could have been understood
in this country
The truth is, and this is somewha, curious,
that under the description of 1.-THE priv ieges Of
the most favnured nations" you in reality in
tended not only less than those terms would
give you but less tnan the Baltimore petitions
requested. They asked the repeal Of the dis
eliminating duties and the admission into our
ports ut British vessels bound n the Colonies,
from whatever por. arriving You now appear |
to have demanded only the removal of those
duties, aud the permission oft the circu,.ous voy-
age from England through ports, TO the
colonies IL these which you STATE as the con
ditions, by which America might obtain the |
trade granted by the Ae. 1925. are ell The con-
ditions required, then, sir, was that Act not on.
ly not understood by the American Government
but 1t was not understood by your own Gov.
ernment
have thus shown that YOU have wholly mis-.
taken the character OF the Baltimore Dsti,ion