Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-03-22

ess Of commercial competition Tobacco would be
| Ike tea. pepper, cinnamon, indigo. SC. The Ame
riean planter would hnd in the French market nu.
merous competitors opposing his prices and eondi-
ions, instead Of the present constant and regular
issue offered TO him by the enlightened preference
gwen TO him by the Administrator. Moreover,
me extinction of the monopoly would enable the
French planters TO produce indigenous tobacco, di'
minishng, 50 much. the consumption OF the foreign
product. In all conscience, can the American plan
| ter wish Tor such n changed
| "Finally, n last complaint is made by the Gov
eminent OF the u. 5. relating TO the navigation be-.
tween the two countries. Its substance may be ex-
pressed in the following words:
AS regards the navigation, the tonnage duty OF
. Traces, viz: "a cents, established by the Con-
'venton Of 1922 upon U. s. vessels in France, and
upon French vessels in the u. States, throws in
the hands of third nations all the benefit of the
transportation between the two countries, because
the flags OF those nations paying but francs ~
Confines consequently derive a profit Of s. CEN
times, and enjoy in the United States the adyan-
tage Of free entry
'To this complaint, il will be sufficient TO
designate tho consequences OF the Convention OF the
gath June, 1884, the stipuations of which regulate
the relations OF navigation between France and the
United States Bot, .or n better appreciation of
the effects OF the convention on navigation, may
be useful to glance the effects produced in this
respect by the different regulations at previous
times.
"Three distinct periods have preceded the one
regulated by the Convention OF 1922.
"The first period, during which the French flag
paid an over tax IN America, while the flag OF the
U. 5. paid none in France, that which preceded
the law otthe 2Sh April, 1916 II, during that pc
rod the u. States enjoyed alone the profit OF the
transportation between the two countries 1t was ow-
ing not only to the regulations then established on
both sides, but especially TO the state OF war and he
laws OF blockade. Therefore, no comparison can be
based upon the period OF the French empire, and the
Americans were wrong to consider, then, as an &C
quired rghi, the exclusive advantage oftrausporta
ton, when they possessed II only IN fact, and a
neutra lpower. As for the two years, lSli and
lstS, the French navy was not yet organized
they cannot then, be taken as a term ofcompariSon.
"rhe second perod-that W hch Immediately fol- |
lowed the law Of the 9Slh April, lSl6-is the only /
one that can be taken as a starting point for with /
u began a more regular order Of things. II estab-
shsd, in principle, difference Of duties in favor of
he French flag for the importation OF foreign pro-
iucts, not including, however in this system the
French exports proper. Under that "regimer Of
discriminating duties, the share OF France in the
increased yearly. This share, which
vas nothing previous TO that period, amounted, at
ne end of 1917 TO one sixth of the whole transpor
alton; in ISIS, it was one.fouTih; and in 1919, Il
leafly one-third.
The third period was that of the reprisas, by
which France was obliged to answer the expressions
4 the United States-the last five months of 1920,
he year 1871, and the first nine months Of 1922
The year 1871 is the only ono that offers complete
esults- During that year, the share OF France was
little more than one-seventh-that of the United {
iates little less than two-seyenths-the remnant 5
the other flags.
During the period regulated by the Convention
1872, France obtained the first year tlS23) but a
tile less than one-twentieth but the event of war
18th Spain must have had an influence on this re-
llt the year 1924, free from 1t, shows a slight in
ease.
"The following table shows the relative shares OF
9th countries, and that of the other flags, in ton
age, between France and the United States, from
s25 10 lS3S: