The intercourse was thus made as nearly reciprocal as the nature of the case would allow. The vessels of both parties were confined to the direct trade, and to meet the average import duty of ten per cent. in favour of the pro. ductions of British North America, and the export duty of four or five per cent., a discriminating tonnage duty of ninety-four cents on British vessels was retained.

The British minister at Washington immediately complained of these measures, to preserve American shipping from the operation of the navigation and colonial sys. tem of his government; and he was distinctly assured, that the United States were ready, as they always had been, to adjust the intercourse with the West Indies upon terms of reciprocity, but that they should continue to meet restriction by restriction.

An order by the king in council was then issued, July, 1823, imposing a tonnage duty of 4s. 3d. on American vessels trading with the colonies, for the purpose of coun

tervailing the American discriminating tonnage duty.

This left the British import and export duties without any countervailing measure on the part of the United States; but as our exports were absolutely necessary to the existence of the West India colonies, all these impositions were finally borne by their inhabitants; and Great Britain became convinced, that all the expenses of this commercial warfare were paid by her own subjects. This, in connexion with the fact, that notwithstanding the burdens imposed upon that trade, the greatest portion of it was carried on in American shipping, determined the British government to adopt a new policy respecting it. This determination was evinced by the act of parliament of July 5th, 1825.

Previous, however, to the passage of that act, a negotiation had been opened at London, between the two governments, for the purpose of settling this long dispute, in a manner satisfactory to both parties.

In this negotiation, their respective views were fully developed. The United States were willing, to remove all discriminating duties upon the vessels of both parties trading between the United States and the colonies, upon condition that no duties should be levied upon the importations into the colonies from the United States, which

were not levied upon the same articles from other places, including the possessions of Great Britain; and reciprocally, that no higher duties should be imposed, upon the importations from the British colo. nies into the United States, than upon similar articles from other places. In all other respects, the navigation acts of both parties were to remain as before. The British commissioners (Messrs. Huskisson and Stratford Canning) were wil ling to accede to the abolition of the discriminating duties; but they decidedly objected to that part of the proposition, which bound them to lay no discriminating duty in favour of importations from their North American colonies.

That is, they were willing to agree to a convention, which should place the intercourse upon the footing established by their own law of June 24th, 1822. They defend ed their objection to the other part of the proposition, on the ground that the trade between their different colonies was part of the coasting trade, and that it was unprecedented, to require a foreign govern. ment to relinquish the power of protecting its own shipping. In making this objection, the British commissioners entirely overlooked the fact, that their own government had invariably asserted, that the colonies were, for all commercial purposes, distinct and separate countries.

The government of the United States had always been willing to consider the possessions of Great Britain in America and Europe as one empire, and to agree to a convention, placing the intercourse between them and the United States on a strictly reciprocal basis, i. e. all articles, the importation of which were not prohibited by the revenue laws of the respective countries, should be admitted into all the ports of each of the parties, upon the same terms on which they were admitted into any port. This did not, however, suit the views of the British cabinet. The bread stuffs, for instance, which were necessary to the West Indies, could not be admitted into her European ports without an alteration of her corn laws.

It therefore demanded, that for some purposes, the colonies should be considered as integral parts of the empire; while for others they should be regarded as distinct and separate. When the government of the United States requested that their vessels should trade with the colonies upon the same terms as with Great Britain, the request was met with the assertion, that they were distinct possessions; and, according to uniform usage, ought not to be comprehended in any convention regulating the commerce between the two countries; but when the United States require that the productions of these dis

tinct and separate possessions, should not be encouraged at the expense of the productions of their own soil, they are told; that the trade between them is a coasting trade, between different parts of the same empire, and must not be burdened with so heavy duties as are laid upon the foreign trade.

By thus varying the character of the colonies, to suit the purposes of the argument, the British government hoped to succeed in establishing, without discriminating duties, an intercourse between all the ports of the United States, and certain enumerated colonial ports, for the purpose of supplying the West India islands, with such articles as must be brought from the United States. The import duty, then existing in favour of similar importations from the North American colonies, would operate as a bounty upon the indirect route, and would pay the expense of the transportation from the United States, and of the reshipment from Cana. da and Nova Scotia. This would secure to British vessels an advantage, which might enable them to monopolize that trade, and thus prevent the growth of a marine, which already excited the uneasi. ness of the self-styled mistress of the ocean.

The government of the United States, which then was not embar. tassed by any domestic opposition, refused to accede to these views of

Great Britain, and after endea vouring to fix upon some method, by which the trade with the British colonies might be made exactly reciprocal, the negotiation was sus pended in August, 1824, with an express understanding, that it was to be resumed at an early period.

The present administration of the federal government found the question in this state, upon its organization in March, 1825. Mr. Rush, who had conducted the negotiation on the part of the United States, was recalled, pursuant to his own request, and Mr. Rufus King, who had taken a leading part in the course of policy adopted by this country in relation to this trade, was appointed his successor.

On his passage to England, Mr. King was attacked by a disease, occasioned by the voyage, which prevented him from renewing the negotiation, and on the 27th June and 5th July, 1825, within four months after the inauguration of the present executive, the British government passed several acts for the regulation of the colonial trade, by which a new policy was adopted, in relation to its commerce in this hemisphere.

The commercial policy of Great Britain, as developed by her celebrated navigation acts, is too well known to call for any particular observations. It aimed at main. taining a great commercial marine, by a monopoly of the carrying

vessels registered in her American and European possessions, amount. ed in 1815, to 2,681,276 tons. The next year it increased to 2,783,943 tons, and from that period there has been a gradual, though small an. nual diminution, until the year 1825, when it amounted only to 2,559,587 tons.

In this progressive diminution of the inequality subsisting between the marine of the two countries, may be found the explanation of the hostile commercial policy, which has always been manifested by Great Britain towards the United States, and especially of the departure from her navigation system by the acts of 1825.

The British government found that our tonnage was fast advanc. ing to au equality with her own; that in the violation of one of her fundamental principles, "it was engrossing too large a portion of the navigation of the world," and it became necessary to interpose some obstacles to its too rapid increase, although at her own expense.

The changes which had taken place in the condition of the American continent, afforded an opportunity to try a new experiment for the supply of the West India islands, which, if successful, would secure to British vessels the monopoly of the colonial trade, undisturbed by the competition of the United States.

By the emancipation of the

South American powers from a state of colonial vassalage, a new and extensive field was thrown open to the enterprise and commerce of civilized nations.

The government of the United States, unrestrained by any considerations of respect for these colonial relations, which so strongly address themselves to European prejudices and interests, hastened to recognise their independence, as soon as they had manifested their capability of maintaining it; and entered into relations of commerce with them, upon principles of reciprocity. This circumstance determined the British cabinet, in its commercial views upon this hemisphere. After some ineffectual efforts to induce Spain to acknowledge the indepen. dence of her former colonies, she followed the example of the United States, and entered into commercial relations with them in the spring of 1825.

The principle which she advanced in the diplomatic correspondence, relative to the recognition by Spain of their independence, is highly characteristic of her syste. matic policy. The British cabinet had no objection to an agreement securing for a limited time, a preference to the navigation of Spain, in the ports of the new republics; and when the existing state of Spanish capital and navigation is taken into view, it is not easy to re