colonies was to be considered as a coasting trade and, therefore, British vessels ought to be allowed to go free from London, or Halifax or Jamaica, (for example,) as American vessels could sail between New York and Philadelphia. This idea being novel, time was taken for its consideration, and the negotiation was suspended. The effect of this word “elsewhere” was to require, that our produce should not be taxed higher in the West India Islands, than the productions of the British northern provinces or other dominions. This was waived by our government in 1826. But the principle that our produce should be taxed no more, when transported in our own vessels, than when in British bottoms was never conceded by us. In this posture, Mr. Adams, when he became President, found the subject.

280. By the admission of this view of a coasting trade, extending round the globe, the principle of reciprocity was not necessarily affected, nor did the admission of British vessels from British ports into British ports, without duty, require, by any reciprocity, the imposition of discriminating duties, upon such vessels in our ports; but the value of the trade would be seriously affected, if British vessels might carry, from Nova Scotia to the West India Islands, free of duty, cargoes similar to such as we should send under the burden of a heavy impost. Against this injury, Mr. Adams sought to provide; and instructions, to that purpose, were given to Mr. King; but before he reached London, the British Government had by act of Parliament changed their whole system of colonial trade.

This act, (July 5, 1825) opened their West India Islands to the commerce of all nations, so far as the carrying trade was concerned, under certain restrictions and with discriminations in favour of British shipping-upon condition, also, in regard to nations having colonies, that they admitted British commerce to their colonies; and in regard to nations without colonies, that they should place the commerce of Great Britain, and all her foreign possessions, in their ports, upon the footing of the most favoured nations. This, and a simultaneous act were voluminous, complex, and so difficult of apprehension, that when Mr. Vaughan, the British minister at Washington, was officially called upon to say, whether, under them, discriminating duties would be levied upon American vessels, he declared he could not tell; nor was our application in England attended with more success. Mr. Canning was ill and, subsequently, Mr. King, our minister,

Here was a

was disabled for service, from the same cause.* new difficulty. We were required, as a preliminary condition for participating in whatever advantages these new acts might give, that we should put Great Britain and all he possessions upon the footing of the most favoured nation; but with several nations, all discriminating duties were reciprocally abolished, and treaties were in progress in which still greater freedom of intercourse was to be mutually allowed. To admit British vessels to such advantages without any mutuality would have been alike unjust and absurd. Mr. Adams' administration did not accept of the offer for the reasons we have stated, and, also, because it was never officially communicated to it; because, only a few months before, a negotiation on the same subject had been suspended, with an understanding that it might be resumed-and because, it was very desirable to arrange the whole matter, by treaty, in order to secure, if we could, the admission of our products into the British islands for consumption, as well as the admission of our vessels.

Mr. Van Buren was perfectly aware of this, and in part of his instructions puts the case in a just light. "If," says he, "it is meant by this condition that the commerce, &c. of Great Britain, shall be gratuitously and generally placed on the same footing with those of the most favoured nations, by granting to them privileges, which we allow to other na-tions for equivalents received, it would be wholly inadmissible."

Soon after, at the session of Congress of 1825-6 it was proposed, but not agreed upon, to repeal our discriminating duties; and Mr. Gallatin, who succeeded Mr. King, was instructed to inquire of the British ministers whether, if we repealed all restrictions, admitted the English idea of coasting trade, and abolished all discriminating duties, they would meet us with corresponding regulations:-In a word, whether the direct trade would be open to the vessels of both nations, without alien duties, on either side: American vessels, departing from the islands, going any where, except to other British ports: British vessels, departing from the United States, going any where, except to American ports: And whatever goods might be carried by British vessels from our ports to the colonial ports might equally be carried in Amer

*

Discriminating duties were however actually levied, on American vessels, in some of the British ports.

ican vessels. This differed from the former proposition; leaving the British to impose what rate of duties they might think proper, on their own vessels, coming into the colonial ports from other colonial ports, or from England. The principle of reciprocity was perfectly guarded, and the utmost freedom of commercial intercourse contemplated by this proposal.

Before the arrival of Mr. Gallatin, however, the British Government had taken new, almost hostile, ground against us; having, under pretence that we had refused to put them on the footing of the most favoured nation, by an order of council, closed their colonial ports, absolutely, against the commerce of the United States, whilst they were kept open to all other nations. But as this position was not defensible, inasmuch, as other nations had also refused to put British commerce on the ground of that of the most favoured nation, the British minister took the old ground; declaring, that reciprocity had nothing to do with the matter;-that all trade with colonies was a mere indulgence and a boon to other nations, to be regulated by the irresponsible will of the mother country alone: and he refused to make this subject one of further negotiation..

In the session of 1826-7, the course of the American Executive was fully sustained by both Houses of Congress. General Smith, who had led a previous effort to repeal the discriminating duties, disavowed any intention to censure the administration, and declared, distinctly, that the omission to act on the British proposal, contained in the Act of Parliament, 5th July, 1825, had been the omission of Congress, entirely. The British Government pertinaciously adhering totheir determination not to treat upon this subject, the interdict, upon our part, upon British vessels from interdicted ports, followed of course, under the provisions of the act of 1823, which it was the duty of the Executive to carry into effect.

281. The direct trade, therefore, between the United States and the British colonies continued to be suspended. The consequences, however, were much more injurious to the British commerce than to ours. The effect with us was, only, to substitute different channels for an exchange of commodities indispensable to the colonies, and profitable to a numerous class of our fellow citizens. Neither the exports, navigation nor revenue, of the United States suffered diminution. The colonies paid more dearly for the necessaries of life, which their Government burdened with charges of double voyages, freight

and other charges; and the profits of our exports were somewhat impaired, and more injuriously transferred from one portion of our citizens to another. The evil effects of the trade upon English commerce became known to the ministers, who declared their conviction, that the interdict had been injurious to the colonies, without being useful to the rest of the empire.

282. In this state of the case, the administration of Mr. Adams closed, and General Jackson came into office. During the presidential canvass, the condition of our commerce with the British colonial ports, became a favourite theme of electioneering rhetoric, and Mr. Adams and his administration were charged, (how falsely we have seen) with having lost the West India trade; as if Mr. Adams had found the United States in the quiet unrestricted enjoyment of commerce, the advantages of which he had contrived or suffered, to be lost, through sheer malignity or folly; and as the case was somewhat complex, and understood by few, there was little difficulty in keeping up the delusion and fostering the ill will it had contributed to excite.

283. It was a point of policy, in the new administration, to make the most of such an opportunity. Hence, the instructions, by Mr. Van Buren, were prepared, manifestly, for effect, on the mind of the President, and on the Jackson party, throughout the country. To gain this point, even the most humiliating means were acceptable. The measures of the preceding administrations were condemned, though approved and sustained by the assembled councils of the nation. The country was declared to be in the wrong, and our representative instructed to solicit, as an inferior and a suppliant, that, as a boon, which the nation had rejected.

The Government of the United States was declared by Mr. Van Buren to have been in the wrong; "1st. In too long and too tenaciously resisting the right of Great Britain to impose protecting duties in her own colonies; 2dly, in not relieving her vessels from the restriction of returning direct from the United States to the colonies, after permission had been given, by Great Britain, to our vessels, to clear out from the colonies to any other than a British port; and 3dly, in omitting to accept the terms offered by the Act of Parliament of July, 1825. It is without doubt," continues the Secretary of State, "to the combined operation of these causes that we are to attribute the British interdict. You will, therefore, see the propriety of possessing yourself fully of all the explanatory

and mitigating circumstances connected with them, that you may be enabled to obviate, as far as practicable, the unfavourable impression which they have produced."

After stating the condition of the trade, and exaggerating, greatly, the disadvantages of its operation on the interests of the United States, Mr. Van Buren proceeds, "It is the anxious wish of the President to put an end to a state of things so injurious to all parties. He is willing to regulate the trade in question upon terms of reciprocal advantage, and to adopt for that purpose, those which Great Britain hus herself elected, and which are prescribed by Act of Parliament, of 5th July, 1825." Among the arguments, to induce the British Government to grant this favour, is the following, in which, our party dissentions are exhibited to them, and the conduct of the Government of the United States represented, as the act of a party which the nation had judged and condemned, and the present administration as another party, favourable to Great Britain.

"If," says the patriotic Secretary, "the omission of this Government to accept of the terms proposed, when, heretofore, offered, be urged as an objection to their adoption now, it will be your duty to make the British Government sensible of the injustice and inexpediency of such a course.

"The opportunities which you have derived from-a participation in our councils, as well as other sources of information, will enable you to speak with confidence (as far as you may deem it proper and useful so to do) of the respective parts taken by those to whom the administration of this Government is now committed, in relation to the course heretofore pursued upon the subject of the colonial trade. Their views of the point have been submitted to the people of the United States; and the councils by which your conduct is now directed, are the result of the judgment expressed by the only earthly tribunal to which the late administration was amenable for its acts. It should be sufficient, that the claims set up by them, and which caused the interruption of the trade in question, have been explicitly abandoned by those who first asserted them, and are not revived by their successors.* If Great Britain deems it adverse to her interests to allow us to participate in the trade with her colonies, and finds nothing in the extension of it to others to induce her to apply the same rule to us, she will, we hope, be sensible of the propriety of placing her

*This was wholly untrue.