Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1828-03-29
s TENNESSEAN.
From the National Intelliecncer.


Colonial Question. a. We have recently had =, o,,
tnnity o. peiustug part of late number of bgLIv
respectable periodical! work, pu hshed in England an
hu""y' ehuleu the parliamentary Review - contain
ing an article on the Colonial Question in ph;ch
there is defence ofthe conduct of the f,oyerpro, -,
we o"ted states, as just as ii is severe in the annl
ca"oh we make oil 1t, 10 the Opposition writers in his
oo"""y' anu especially upon those of tue commercial
cies VINO seem to have been disposed TO prosr.ta ,
commercial interest of the country n, tho foo, rs 81
pr''' ihstF5. Inc editors Of this Review ayallno
e,seNes OF 'ie opportunity afforded, bv the cores
pondence between the late Mr. CANINE .nJ M
"aatin oeing LAID on the table of the House of Com
mons, commence, by giving very clear and fair ono
Y!s OF tha' correspondence. After properly imnu,,po
10 WIZ. canning continual eDdeaTor to give A charac
ter 10 the discussion foreign to that whieb bpom a.
e hd'u,e OF me subject, by arguing the oues;,on nj
riSht, which was not cOmbattei TO TeonIat. ,b, 80,
herca' intercourse, the reviewers remark that i,
"%' e'Coise as IN transactions of the same nature
'het"een man and man, the only consderao,s nio
'd.' l" 'he SUBJECT are those o. mutual niey,sk ac
cording to Mr.. Canning,s view of ,Le nrinc;r y,
N"'e' 'eTe Is no room Tor doubt hes:ta ION Tho
permitting nfeiSh vessels under any circumstances
10 carry goods TO any part our possessons bo ,
'sidcrs as an advantage 10 the foreirner mt oi ,
tended with any benefit 10 ourselves Int i,nnI,ino
| sac'bce on orr part, and, therefore, not io he On
unless an equal advantage either Of the same
o' some other KIND, be granted TO rs i'm ,eturu r.
this su ely, is very partial view Of the ,.as, d -;
P"eS an ehtIre mIsconcepiion Of the nature and OH
! 'JGcts OF commerce. ~ ia ~"
, "'t measure IS injurious to Great Britain he
cause IL oiInIpistes The employment for Efrtish s,
piDg; that it a loss to the cop,,rr -"
causes The loss or The decay some particular bra
" """uiic'hFes or some particular branch of trade.
t "ouu nave been consistent language from ,le Ios
"i "erchaht OF the days OF Sir 10 siah Child I'm, -
scarcely what might expect from = n,;n;e. t -
"Sci"e Fec trade upon their banners and lain tho
merit OF being guided, in their cornperc,aI Jo;ai
"0 on oy me principles of Smith and Ricardo.n
'1ter arguing 10 prove that the interest of e co,
sumcr The West India plsncrl as wen 49, tta, ~ ,
snip owner, deserves to be taken into the estimate liz
Reviewers observe: ~ ''"'A's' tue
o conclude that the opening our ports to fore,,r
Vessels is not 6o09 10 foreigners but a b.neft o.. -
selves and much greater benefit Tn onrsoI, 80 W..
Ure'shers; that our interest is more promo,ed bv o,,
foreigners to bring goods 10 u.s. than even nv
ing permission to vessels to carry o,ooJ
" "e"'' 'hose who cannot perceive that con,oor
yields any benefit to the nation o,ber ,t %
yieoS 10 ITS own instruments and srants oyoronI,;
Sedt oouy OF consumers, for whose sake il ra,II
GAstS, lne ABOVE thesis may seem paradox: bni -
them alone vii! II appear sou ~
The Reviewers continue:
FeFeci reciprocity is here the declared obiec, If
oo'h "ations and neither party objected n tho
proposed oy 'hs other, on any ground excep,ipo n Al
ney were 'oe fecProca each country professinp co,n
piete readiness to take off It's restrictions nrovidd
the other country would do the Same IT,, 80 80 '''d
tions meeting one another with these ayowed ds,oi
TONS should so far misunders,and one onothor o
uie'' negotiations without removing snor,c
hat tba
attempt o! both Paties render the trade fre t',i
ena oy 'h1erdcns altogether, argues either strange
'o''qu'y o' ,p'e"ec' or al least complete msunder
standing OF the principle of Reciprocity ON ono sJ
IN ooiI II shall ne our endeavor in the remainder Of
his dissertation TO shew by which of the t,yo oy
neOts the principle winch both profess has beon r
stood and at whose door The failure of the al
emp's AT an amIcaoie arrangement ought To he laid
"in order that the commercial iufercSrrse bo,,r
wo countries should be ON footing of exact recipro
NY, II rs necessary, thai either there sbouId he mo dc
rIhjnatiDg dnies IN either country upon tine sb,,
ne Other; or that those duties if any exist, shonld be
qua On The hfst OF these suPPosous, there is free
ade on beth sides, and consequently, reciprocity: in
ls second case there is reciprocity Of restriction.
nlcn though never desirable, may be allowable as a
'eanS OF arriving at reciprocity Of free trader
III was IN conformity with these principles thai the
aue between the United States and the KINGDOM oil
'lea' br'IaIn and ireland was regulated by Ire Con
noa. o. Up That treaty provides that no dis.
; o"oi Sn'I oe maze by either nation, between the
po " "'e other country. coming directly from tha 4,
.u"'}' ana ITS own. Thus far there is recorocitv os
maoe 10 "bat follows there is reciprocity of
,,..c"on neither country cnjovs the privilcre
''"eg INTO The Other TIRE produce &. ,hi,J r,,,,.