Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-03-30

British West Indies, in the articles the produce of
our lands
Upon the RECENT Of this act Of Parliament, the
president, on the 9th of August 1922, in pursu-
ance OF the act of May 6, 1929, issued his pro-
ciama'ion, opening the ports of the u. States 10
British vessels coming from the colonial ports spe
cihed In the act of Parliamen.; but imposing the
restriction upon them, that no vessel coming from
any OF the Yves, India ports should import any
ucies not the produce manufacture of the Britsh
W est India colonies. and that vessels coming from
the North American colonies should import no
articles not the produce OF the North American
colonies; and directing the discriminating duties,
Imposed by the acts of 1916 and 1877, to be levied
upon the British ships and their cargoes, coming
II ON the colonial ports.
% the 25ih OF October, 1922. Mr.. Canning,
the British Minister resident al Washington, adj
dressed letter TO Mr.. Adams, demonstrating
against the discriminating dufies, and The other
restriction on the trade, imposed by this proclama-
non, az inconsistent with the terms and spirit of
our laws. under which il issued, and as rot re-
clpTOcoI with any thing in the act OF Parliament
OF June 2l. 1892. MIR Adams in HE answer of
the Iltb of November, 1922 TO Mr.. Canning's
Letter, admits thst the conditions imposed by the
proclamation are not strictly reciprocal; but in
ssts that they are substantially 80, and necessary
to counteract the provisions of the act of Parlia-
ment, which we could not counteract by the same
provisions IN kind, aud which operated unegualIy
TO our prejudice These Objectionable provisions
are mlnuieiy enumerated by Mr.. Adams. OF these
objections some were utterly unfounded in fact,
and Others in principle; and all of them were alb
sointely abandoned il framing the act OF March Z,
1873, except t;lst as TO the possibility, not the
Jdct, It the existence, not Of discriminating
dnfies, but o. hedrier port charges YES
sells. 'h4n on the British, in the colonial ports
The specific objections were these:
LIST objection. That the admission of our yes
sells Is only 10 certain enumerated ports.
The ansirer. given by the British Ministers,
(see Doc No 2, page ~ was, that The enume-
ration OF the ports in he act of Parliament en-
bfaced all, in which there were custom houses
And surely no nsion under any Circumstance
ever permitted foreign ships enter their ports
where there were not cusiom-hnUses Under he
ues'y OF 1915 our >hip- could not enter such nor;s
In Grea' B:isin. The net Of March !, 1923,
Abandoned this o. lection
2nd objection. That they permitted to i'm
port only certain enumerated articles
The 0ils,csT is, That these are all the articles
pr duced In our cou"'ry, except sal ell provisions,
either fi-h or fiesb. These virtually and effsc-
tuaiiy prohibited TO be imported into own
country by the amount of duties imposed upon
them And under HE treaty of 1915, G., eat BRIAN
may prohibit any OF Or products, and she has pro-
hibi.ed our bread stuff, from being imported into
L,
objection too.
Bird objection Tha, they are admitted only 10
the direct trade both 10 and from The colonial
ports.
The nnstUer Is, That we set them the example,
as 10 the direct trade from the colonies by our act
OF 1871, and the provision the same as that
by which we had agreed 10 be bound in respecI to
our trade with the Bri sh East Indies by the
~ OF 1875. The act Of March l, 1923, coun-
tefvaiied this by corresponding provision.
An objection. That they are subjected to the
payment OF duti., without credit, and before adj
mission. i" nsny equivalent TO prohibition.
The a''S;c"r IS, That so are they subjected to
pay duiie> ia Great Bri'ain under the treaty of
1915, and they pay only such duiier the British
ships likewise pay The amount CT duties, ac-
cor'liug 20 sir. Adams own estimate, Ia only an
average of 10 per cent while our duties on the
commodities # the British colonies are from 50 10
eco per cent The act of iIayeh /, 1929, aban-
doncd This objection sl.o.
9th objection. That they are subject to a very
heavy export duty. besides the duties imposed by
the act OF Parliament.
The onsIoey il, That these export duties are he
private revenue of the King, all of them, except
that of the Virgin Isles, gram ed in 1868, and
that of the Virgin Isles granted in l774; and
they are paid by the British as well as foreign
vessels. This is The answer of the British minis
'o''' User LUG. NO. =, page I|J anu these
expor, duties had become To great extent the
property of private individuals by the Kings
grants. as appears by The reports of decisions in
the British courts. The act Of March l, 1923,
abandoned this objection also.
9th objection. That the restriction as to The ini-
portaiion into the u. 5. from the West India
ports OF the West India produce only, and from
the North American colonies r the produce of
those colonies only, justified by The consIde-
al. 81 4
Tican colonies were separated by wide sea, aud
their products were entirely different as that
they ought 10 be considered different countries.
The GrsUsr is, That this equally true rs
10 Louisiana and Maine, which much
separated from each other in location, produc-
tons, and government, the West India and
North American colonies. The act of Parlia-
ment made no such discrimination between the
different states sections Of the y. s.; and the
restriction of the proclamation was in this RESPECT
clearly no, reciprocal IN form or substance.--
The act Of March / 1928, abandoned this OBJ
lection also.
The I'm and last objection was this, in the
words Of Mr. Adams; g Nor does il appear that
with regardto the important article OF port charges
they can claim admission upon the footing OF
British vessels'
This is the first suggestion, that we have in
the history of these transactions, OF the possibility
OF difference to our prejudice in respect OF the
port charges. And the President this posi-
biliiy, and not upon tie ssceI;sinei Tact, adopted
measure, which has c;,ded in threatening Us win
the probable toss OF this valuable, and TO Us indis-
penssble trade. This was the tUb to the whsle,
thrown out to the people Of the u. g.. TO divert
their attention from the real poiat IN controversy
between the two governments, and TO induce
them 10 believe that this government, was sirug
Cling TO remove this inequality 81 port charges
far fbc f me r0ritrofiyg i,ffcrfef