Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1828-03-29

oiog they thought proper to be themselves the iudg.
es OF what they would withhold
"1ho error of OR Ministry consisted in not rehec.
,"s NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. having been imposed by Anne
tca only because restrictions existed in our Colon
ies-to impose Interior restrictions would not be TO
re'a'ste upon the United States, but to create new
side. ~ ~
line following was the comparati state OF
the restrictive regulations both sides: Their d.
uee on our shPp'ng were equivalent TO our duties on
'e"s' a"o' SO tar, there reciprocity but, on our
'oe' many productions of the United States were
proh'oited while all nose of our colonies were nd
united INTO tue American ports. Tie prtecoIe of
reciprocity would have justified them in imposing
Hesh restrictions; but from this they with great rood
sense and moderation, abstained: while we villa coud
neither plead the principle OF reciprocity nor any
oer raohaI principle for restricting sill further an
intercourse in which eady the excess of res,,ic,;on
was on our sidc-"e chose rather that there should
DE no trade, than this equal trade-.oua IA rcsn.c,s
I"a'isa'ion' unequal IN other respects, 10y our OWL
act' auu, as we imagined our own favor We
'ptefdicted the trade American vessels. knowing
All the lime, that, when ports sbould he ,losed
10 their ships, their inter dict ours would o.
mat not even our ship pers and our cherished
gatioh would gain one jot by this ebuilion OF naona
jealousy and pqnen
| Alter disappearing demand to have American
produce admitted into the West Indies on The same
terms as Canadian produce, allow ing however Thai
The u States were soi indeed, without plausible and
even, 10 certain extent sound reasons for nsst;ps
| sour min listers were destined IN Ioso o,. >, E.
BILE apology which this infringement or ,erin,oc;,r ~
e part OF the u States might by very partial ,u5
es, nave been supposed 10 afford them The Depuci
'"s OF '0z4 regarding inter attn the Colonial trade
nad oeeH suspended, with the unders ,dnp that the
were to be renewed at early period The II s,atc
naa never been Informed that the act of 1895 nasse,
III Tue interval was intended To preclude the resunp
' VI "eSe discussions. This our minister's knew
and they Knew, moreover, that Mr. Galatin was nc.
naiy on 'is way 10 Europe, especially commissions
10 renew tbs very negotiation What might be hi,
ihs' uc'ons they knew not and therefore, probably
nus. pe'sohS IN heir situation, knowing that they had
not lie ui'imaum otthe u. States would have houph,
II eNPedieh TO wait for his arrival before they ocIed
nFon he presumption that netting bcvcnd iat hal
oeeh offered previously would be granted now I'm
fortunately Tor their foresight two DAYS after the nub
Ncanon OF the Order in Council, MIR. Gallan arr
eo with instructions to give up the claim TO an cana
IVY o uuues between the produce of the British DOS
sessions and that of the U. States.* The principa
point or difference and the only one in which the II
States were not thoroughly in the r;sb, he;ne ,h.
removed, Mr. Canning chose rather to take rence in
inc Pre'ehce OF an 'ncurable difference of opinion
IMAM 70 retract me uncalled for inferdct or hy resu
ming me negociaon, 10 draw for IN norma ton which
would have shown bis conduct as petaLo,t and ,,e;
P'fdfe as ff 'ods: and, up this day. it has never
ueen STARED, and 1T Is not generally known TO the
n' uo!c' 'hat Hir Gailatin had authority waive
'he pretension characterized in Mr.. Canninp,s cor
resPondence % the ground of the nterdict and the
one insuperabie bar TO all further negotiations
Inc her'ewers then proceed to Justify the 9Deri
can restriction, whilst the trade was open ef Rr;tisl
10 the direct voyage, 10y showing that the rea
son or was because similar restrict ion exusd ~,
oar side" They add "
INF. Cann'ngs attempt TO show that no restriction
ad moi justify the other, because the colonial trade ia
ny the consent OF nations exclusive trade s fonnd.d
on incorrect reasoning "If we have a right 10 pre.
ecrihe Tie conditions which we will admit the II
States TO our colonial trade they have an euu al r,at
oe'ef'nine Tor themselves what conditions they i'll
accept of it," "
at is indeed made matter of additional con, ,,,,,
oy Mt Canning, that, although the prohibition Of ,bo
inuect intercourse bad been removed IN the side n,
ofl.an' by the act of 1926, steps had been
."nen ny congress 10 remove theirs Ia answer 10
'h's' W.T.. Naa'in could only say, that he and as ne
conceived his government, likewise had been ma.
ware that the act OF 1926 had the effect nov ascrih
10 It, his appears from documenta nv ey dence 10 he
perfectly true. Mr.. Galatians Instructions ,bich
may De perused, as we have already observed in
HIies's Register, proceeded upon the supnoso, II, =,
ne Testrction imposed by the act of 822 still CONT
ue"' ana any one who will take the trouble TO read
ueS3a'ch from Mr. aatiu to Mr. Clay printed in ths
number for 9th January 1927 of 10 sap,. ;i;,
Work, will not wonder that an enactment en- cont,
sehiy and unskilfnlly drawn up as our act of 1903
S"ou'u not have been understood by those who had
U any commentary, and TO whom official
explanation was afforded. After all this art evsn
as interpreted bv Mr.. Canning, TAX s off onIv one
van o' Tue nterdict on the indirect Intercourse Fo-
le's" vessels trading 10 our Colonies, may now ex
"a
may not import mo colonies the produce Of any
o'her country than that TO which the vessels belong
| hese' and al other misapprehensions Womb a,
once nave been cleared up, if the negotiations which
;ne u. states have protested throughout, to wait for,
~ order that they might be guided by the result tad
oeeh renewed But ministers had determined other
plse; and when Mr.. tialatin arrived, on the implied
u"ne's'anding That the discussions to commence
| Immediately, and bearing Instructions in which al
most the only disputed claim which was not given no
was mat which, according to MIR. Canning we have
ye!ded-a participation in the trade betweenu or CO
iohcs and foreign countries he is told tba, not only
now bns hereafter, even if the u States should orpn
10 lis every thing which pretended reciprocity sys
TEN demands, we will not pledge ourselves to suffer
any trade in American vessels, between our COLONIES
| and america! Could we hope that Mr.. Csnninp's n
merican policy had died with him. il would be M in
considerable advantage 10 off against the evils of
loss, Otherwise go deeply to be Iamened. We are per
suaded that no impartial person. who takes for his
standard OF approval, any kind Of reciprocity except
mat which IS Jocularly said to be all on one side viii
consider that any on has devated from the priscpe o
reciprocity except our government or that any thing
would be necessary TO bring America TO reason except