Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-04-03

wr-
vsrnment. The real cause Of the delay in rcsum-
ing the negotiations was the failure TO give in
structons TO our Ministers az London; and this |
proceeded not from the causes designated, but from |
this. that cur government could not make up their
minds what answer 20 give. II the wish 10 as |
certain the pcacical Construction and effect of the
acts OF Parliament were any excuse, that did no,
until after the s. of Jan. 1926, when they
took effect. But this excuse i also idle These
acts never had any effect upon rar trade with III.
colonies, as IT was before they passed, until the-
we're enforced agsins, VI by the order Of July
% .lo26; the discriminating ;u'ies cct.nte.v.ilin,
oyrs and laid upon US in July, 1923, hav;nc hc.n
continued by order in counril after the ,ssi,s
OF the acts of Parsmcn, in 1895 How, then is
hs Tninous delay 10 be accounted for? Shall we
inpute 1t 20 negligence! No, our executive who
had. 10y pursuing secret policy. contrary 20 that
OF our laws, which they were charged to execute
faithfully placed themselves in a distressing d.
ismma. and could neither advance nor retreat " h
honour; like all weak men in such crcnul.'ances,
could decide upon nothing, and waited in totpor
the evil day wjJh The poor consolation, that they
w.re thus putting it Oh as long possible
1t has bean said, that his administration should
not be responsible for tn. of the last They
are in fact and ,hc same continued according
20 Nj. Ciay's e" safe precedent Mr.. Adam,
was, In the last, the chef actor, anil, a,n sure
the sole adviser OF this projects of furcn, Grea,
Bflts:n 10 abandon her protecting duias--s aud Mr.
;S1r5oar and Mr.. Rash were his assistants: and
rrvy 70 his views. They could have brirayed
then,-anh this may in some measure accour, for
the tsct, otherwise unacccrntsbi-, that two such
Members of the present Administration.
Oa the 26Ih % Angus 4 $50, Mr.. Gallair open.
el.his corr espontence with Mr. CannD. the British
Ai,nis,er-anl assigning the in!;spos,ion of Mr.
i\'os .assa rsason, way the .s., J'i.'ions had not
been sooa-r 'ssninei o. o." psrt, complained of
the o:tifS Of July ~, closing the coiouial ports
he IDrth rSric.
eain-' "a 90 the ist f December, 1925: which III
'hoI5n' univ endly since AZ the S;i-, ,!iscrni-
mating 1i'is' were continued hs a, or,er In coun-
CT. the trade wa upon inons of pe.fec, equal
i'Y'n British aad American vessels. Mr. Can
Mug in sasu 10 this stated that the British gov
eminent had never beari any thing from our gov
eroment resoet'irg the proposition made by them
IA JGiy, !S2+; snd lat upon The application of
ar, Falthln 10 Mr.. Clay on the Pend of March
1915. the latter hail informed hl'a, that ne should
not be a6.e TO furnish Mr.. King with his in.truc
Mons before The end OF the montn OF May IL.
reminded him nj the claim asserted in our act o.
March, !, 1898, to an exemption Of orr produce
from their ro'ecting duties; and hat by the acts
OF Parliament OF 1875. passed fourteen months
before, our ships were allowed TO carry caryoes
'ro'n the colonies 10 any part of the world while
our act OF 1923, prohibited any British vessel
rom GEARING visa a cargo from port %. the y
. Tor any IN her colonies, unless the .hip had
come direct from a colonial port TO the H. 6
ana declared, that " Great Britain could MOI con .
sen 10 eater INTO any renewed negotiation 80 lons
az the preiension recorde,fin The act of 1928. and
there applied to British colonies alone. renamed
Jtrs OF t"e low OF the United Sia;es.'' (See Doc.
y .. =, page 100 iill Whe'h-r by his =. o,s
tension" ,r. Canning referred e hat ,ssnee,ips
The protecting dulles, or TO that respecting the d.,
rect trade, - uncertain; he might well hare usel
'ne word ~ the plural, for neither OF those pr.
tensions was ever Sc; ~ by us against any nation
but u. q and the first never set up by any ma
Non on earth against any other, excep, by ~ a.
gainst Great Britain. So ended all negotia,;o,
Our act o! 1929 has sill remained in force
II mas been attempted 10 produce an i,npressiop
on the public mind, that Gfel, R,;tain has AWAY.
oblectei to negotia'e about her colonial trade -
Ills Is wholly gnfOunied. She neeotia,ed ,y;,b
MS on this subject in 1894; 1896. 1917, 1919. 1919
a"d ioE7' ana ai"'ys when we proposed it. ex-
Ccpt upon this last OCCASION when ,b. raG,al
was not founded upon any p,,nciules of oe,e,a
policy Shc refused nee oate 20 tong az WE
Ell against her alone rretensoiYe which she sjss
are wholly lnatmissibie, and which we b.v. ,ar
severed In Tor years after sh,io~ Of hone re-.
NAMED, that she woulf yield them 10 rs and mr.,
OF WHICH Is absolutely prep0steTous Ind..d sb
mas frequently invi,ed US TO nego,iate- th,o,' M
:. Canning in Feb l523--th5ousb NJ a ,,;na.
s,on IN September, 1928, and through Mr.. yslgban
ia March 1896 '''
During the session of Congress. of 1925 26. an
effort was made upon the motion of Gen S,ub
senator from Maryland, aud the petition of tb.
PEOPLE OF Baltimore, 20 procure reoeal of our
discriminating duties upon briiI,h ships and their
cargoes, engaged in the trade between The n :
aud The British colonies This was ,bouob, 20 no
all mat was necessary 70 comply on our mar,
with the terms proposed by tie acts of Parliament
OF June and July, 1925; ne provisions of ,hos.
scs' aIo"4hg 10 foreigners indirect trade with
ths coohisss o@ng overlooked Il - ab.outeiv
certain thHt y tins proposition had succeeded G
nritalh would not have enforced The ACES al pa,
!iameht aSainsf ". This would have sLe,,n her
'nat we intended to meet her upon fa;r and eouaI
terms; and she would have been satisfied with tine
explanation, ;ba' we had overlooked the nrovi-
sion OF her acts In respect to the indirect ,rads
Ihe ialihre OF ths attempt was one of the rea.os
assigned by .dr. Canning for ENFORCING the art. NJ
Permanent as soon ss he did-and fhls failure ,.o
owing 10 The infig1ss of the administrative
This has been denied bur the proofs that mi.
was tse fact, are absolutely irr psistibJs Tn. D.
sluen. snd The Secretary o. State induced Geo
Smith 20 believe, that the course he yy.s ,,l,iS'
was agreeable TO them, while through the co,,i
"ee' 70 whom The subject referred, they toni
ehec'"Ai means to defeat his proposiiio her
Instance o. Their 5uflicity and total want of can
C"W a. 'ue committee had reported in favour NJ
We proportion ~ wond inevitably have prevail.
a. iheJ reported against IT, preferfing nerotia
tion TO lesI-laiion. Upon the molten Of Go,
Nn"h the report was TecOmmitled and the mo-
sure would have been carried, and The corn,s,
saved IN spite Of he Administration and ,b.,,
supporters, ort Tia! there was not time fHo,, If 80
mature h'n. 4his want OF lime was produced