The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-10-27
CITY OF WASHINGTON.
SATURDAY MORNING OCTOBER ~, Is4s.
Commercial Rse,prssisy Larceny.


ton of the official editorial in the National Iatigsnesr
Of the 18Th inst which pretended to explain the Ncaa-
qua and Mosquito questions We presume it will not he
denied that the editorial in question written by Mr..
Clayton or prepared under his direction and advice
Even casual reader cannot fail perceive that the Sec
rotary Of State did have agency in its production
and the shallow article used TO produce the belief that il
prepared by one of the editors Of the National Intel
hgeneer would not deceive schooboy II is not
tomary for editor when writing for his paper. to
sinuate that his article is not from The pen OF another
person. And when he manifesty endeavors 10 produce
The impression that he is the author Of particular editorial
in his paper, iohas he cautiously abstaias from stating the
fact o he insinuaes. it may be taken direct
fession that he is attempting to deceive and mislead.
We SHALL therefore, consider the editorial Of the National
Intiiigencer TO which we allude as having emanated
from the Department OF State And we venture to say that
neither Of the editors of that paper will assert positively
and directly that we have not attributed to its right au-
thor.
The Secretary OF State, some confidential friend,
having been made aware OF the unbecoming attitude
which he assumed by landing his own conduct through
the columns Of the National Iateigeneer. and by con.
fning his concentrations Of the administration espe-
ciay to its foreign policy, 10 the exclusion Of the
other members Of the cabinet now endeavors put forth
claim to public gratitude for the conduct OF the admins
traton with regard TO the commercial reciprocity which
will exist after the first Of January next II may be that
the Secretary of State thought that by claiming for the
administration the credit OF having exerted active
agency in procuring the abolition Of the navigation laws
with respect to British and American commerce. the De-
partment OF State might share that credit in public es
nation with the Treasury Department. Perhaps he
knew that the pcposerous assertion that either the
wing party in times past, the present administration
since it came into power. had rendered day-Me least
aid in establishing commercial reciprocity with England,
would be promptly dsproved and that the Treasury De-
partment would be easily stripped Of its ideserved
compliment; thus leaving the Secretary of State to
all the honors of the administration. II it should
turn out that our surmises not correct still must
believe that sinister purpose Of bringing the Secre
ary of the Treasury into disepute nstgaea the claim
put forth in the National Inseliigenoer No knows
better than Mr. Clayton that neither the wing party nor
this administration, any member of General Tayor's
cabinet, had any agency in producing the commercial
cprocy which will exist after the first OF January, is
entitled to any thanks, because the burdens imposed
American vessels in British ports have been removed
Yet he forth and declares that il has been The wing
policy of every administration from the origin Of the gov
to offer reciprocity in foreign navigation to the
vessels Of Great Britain But that this mpudent preien.
sion may appear in full, quote the words used in the
National Inteiligener.
Another question Of deep interest," especially the
urreisi world has attracted public attention. both in Eng
land and this country, for quite long period In
ocity in tie indirect carrying trade This BILL which
into effect on the LIST day OF January nexf, allows To
ships the privilege, before conferred, of carrying
he produce Of part OF the world TO the in the
United Kingdom, port in any British colony, and from
hat port in airy other colony. Il allows carry
oods produce Of any country on the terms with
English SHIPS The condition Of this grant OF the British
Parliament is reciprocity and the construction pnt upon
act Of the i March, 1917, by President Taylors adj
nuisation, shown bS the late circular Of the Secretary
Il The Treasury, s that British ships will enjoy the
privileges in ports the British shall 20
MO operation. Ia fact IL has been the policy OF every
shig administration Of this government from the origin
the government down to the present period, To
fer reciprocity In foreign navigation Great Brit
Our indirect trade open the LIST day of March,
1917, when, by the Of President Madison
lac passed which closed the indirect carrying
gans all nations until they opened their ports 10 us Bul
While the administration OF General Taylor guided by
wisdom in the management OF commercial policy, has
ezed the occasion TO open ports 70 British vessels
aged la the foreign indirect trade IL has sudiouy avoided
my connoxon with project Of Mr. Polk, open
oasng trade England for the insignificant benefits our
hpping conld derive from partic pation in the very lin
led coastng trade OF the United Kingdom Daring the last
prng the British newspapers containing the debates 10
Parliament the passage Of the navigation act proved
hat Mr. Labouchere had time entered into an ar
angemcnt with Mr. Bancroft open the coasug trade OF
ooh countries disastrous arrangement for us
oud not possibly have been suggested"
We doubt whether the history Of political parties can
show a shameless and unfounded claim than that
set forth in the above extract from the columns OF the
National Inieiigeneer and do not believe that the
senior editor Of that paper II at his post would risk the
oreiture of whatever claims to public confidence his
Journal may have by allowing any one-even his friend
u the State Deparment-to use his columns for such
neretrcous object II is well known 10 all that the Brit
sh navigation laws have been in force for more than
hundred years They were enacted before our govern
nent established and before any division OF parties
ook place in our county. They forbade the YES
'els Of other nations to carry into British ports the
products OF any other country than that 10 which the
'els belonged In 1917 Mr.. Madison, taking into con.
.ideraion the fact that many nations had similar com
nercia regulations with those of Great Britain whose
operation prevented American vessels from engaging in
sress should enact similar etaatory laws to forbid for.
ign vessels engage in indirect trade The law Of
1877 passed, with proviso expressly limiting its
operation TO the vessels Of those nations which had
,assed or might afterwards pass prohibitions upon
American tonnage. We have yet to learn that there
was any division Of parties upon the proprety
IF passing that law. But now the writer in the