Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-05-18

NncttpJ Etdnte0 W Ntostls IN
the British ports should be eciprocslly granted in
the ports OF ,he u. S. to British vessels OF a SINH
lar DESCRIPTION, engaged in tn. intercourse thereby
permitted And that If, thereafter, any further
facilities should he grau,ed 10 vessels of he u s.
in the COLONIAL ports, British vessels engaged in
the same trade, should eujoy reciprocal advantages
in our ports. But Great Britain reserved to her
self expressly the RICH, OF imposing in her own
ports, higher duties upon all articles impor, ed there
from the u. s. any other foreign country, than
! she should impose upon similar srtclas imported
there from any other OF her own possessions. A
right reciprocal 10 which was no, denied 10 the U
States.
The second article applied altogether to The trade
with Bermuda; and in its provisions was nearly
like the preceding The third article related ex
clusiyely to the trade with Turks Island. And
the fourth provided for the intercourse by the lakes
rivers, and wafer communications, the initdle of
which was the boundary between the Two coun-
tries, aoG to the intercourse by land bstN cen
them.(2)
shall have occa~ion hereafter 10 notice this
proposition more particularly; u is no, necessary
therefore, 10 give more minute account of ho-e
articles Of present They were submitted 10 the
House of Representatives, and the opinion Of them
stated In The report of the Committee of tina,
Oody,to whom the subject was referred, will best
\ be expressed IN the words of that COMMITTEES it,
sell. This Commit,ee, in their repor, Of Feb O.
1910, speaking Uf these articles, say " The offer
contained IN the articles annexed to this report the
most rational and reciprocaly advantageous of any
ever made, may be considered as dictated by
spirit OF accommodation, which. under the p,es-
sufe oil adequate motives, might be losierel into
determination TO grant all that could reasonably
ask, or they be expected to yield The three
hrst articles. with some practical notifications
! would, oy the adaptation OF our commercial laws
10 the supulatIons contained in them, confinine
81.
mer'cans were permitted carry would place he
Trade upon as favourable grounds as could be ex-
pectei. II would, no doubt in short time be
followed Ivy complete abandonment OF the residue
oil the present system OF exclusion. The commit
Zee canDo', however, but approve the prompt re-
lection OF this propositions these articles are
connected with another, altogether insdmissble
, "ihoht departure from what they deem the Set
'led policy OF the country, in relation TO the trade
with the Indians within ils Jurisdiction "(3) Thus
IL appears that the rejection of the ~ opositon
coh'alhed In these four articles was approved al
'hou2n 1t was considered as 80 the most rational
and reciprocally advantageous OF any ever made"
! as " dictated by spirit of accommodation. :"
! which 1t duly tosieTed might lead TO determi-
naton TO grant all that we could reasonably ask"
and might conduce 10 place the trade upon as
! favourable ground could be expected" TIE
{ reason assigned by tie Committee for apurov;re
ihis rejection, u ~ had been correct IN point of
Tact, would be sufficient; aud this Committee had
no cause, PROBABLY, at tina; time, TO doubt its cor
rectness. Bu what will the reader think, hen lie
snail discover that this inference If the Committee
which constituted the only for their apr7oy-
al OF the rejection oil this proposion coniessedlv
the most rational and recprocaly advantageous
{ OF any ever nide''> was erroneous in fact; that
! he Executive knew this; and yet used no means
20 correct the error, which they, themselves had
Induced! Yet such is the case
The sole reason assigned by tie Corsmittee for
| approving OF the rejection of this pEoposi,lou
was las has been seeh) that II would authorize
trade with the Indians within our jurisdiction -
When this report seen by the BRUSH Minis
ter who had made the proposition, he explicitly
! dIsclamed any intention, that mis- proposition
should bear such construction a. had been Dut
upon II; and Indignantly affirmed, that the
| American government knew thi-. II was this
want OF candour, together with the appa-
Feht want oil courtesy on our part, in no,
giving any answer to the proposition, :, hich
" affected the sensbility of the Brrisn Ca
blnet." Mr.. Rush comm iEIcs,ed this fact
I 10 Mr. Adams, III his letter OF the 10Th of June
| 1918, 90 The reply of Mr.. Adams 10 Ibis lei
! ter, 80 Tar as the matter of courtesy was concern
ed has been already stated In noticing the other
| assertion Mn Adams adds. " copy of the four
articles vas furnished 70 the Committee OF the
IL use OF Representatives. chsrged 9TH the d,,v
Z
commercial relations between the u. S. and The
British West Indies. The Committee drew their
1 own conclusions upon the probable operation OF
the articles, aud particularly Of the fourth The,
were communicated 20 them without continent on
( the part OF the Executive. They knew the ar,i
cles had not been accep ed bu, the reasons of IN,
nor acceptance bad not been stated 10 them
! 5C~5"lt Is trne. that the article was the same
wD'ch al The negotiation of the commercial CON
! v-utiOn OF July, 1915, had been off.red he 49,
British plenipnentsres; that the objection 10 !,
now suggested by the Committee, had. a, tbs,
time been avowed by those of The u. S; that the
British plenp ,teotiaries did then dlsclsim The In
| tenuon oil giving ii construction, which youId
import he admission of British traders 10 any in
tercorrse with Indians within the territories of
the L. y. and did offer TO introduce into the arti
ce any words which might be necessary to ,,,ard
1t against the construction, and that the article
vas then finally declined upon another ground -
(5)
Thus then it appears, that these four articles
one OF which IN the opinion Of Mr. Adams himself
(who was one Of the pleniprteniiares who Deoo
tisled the convention OF 1850 was of a el,,tar.
ter to induce erroneous impression offs ,yus
IN emf and meaning, was sent by him to the Houss
nj representatives " without comment''--'Pba,
the COMMITTEE to whom they were referred were
suffered 10 draw their own conclusions uno,
The probable operation OF these articles. and nor
ficulaTiy Of tie fourth" That thi, Coumit,s.
did draw conclusion as to the operation of th,s
louHh article, which conclusion was known nv
Mr. Adams 10 be erroneous in fact, because he |
himself had heard the British pIenioofsn,;s.ta.
=" decIaim it;' and had also heard their ofe, H.
Introduce into this article, any words which miph,
be niece 'sary to guard it against that constrnc,on
AMI yet, although be saw this Committee inno. !
Gently endeavourng by their renorf IN r,;.ta. =