by them in its future legislation, the undersigned is thoroughly convinced; but it is with pain and surprise he perceives that the measure recently introduced into the House of Commons, imposing certain import duties in the American colonies, is incompatible with such views, and repugnant to the fair and liberal spirit of the before mentioned arrange

ment.

In fact, it would appear that the bill, in its present form, is calculated, if it be not so intended, virtually to revive, by a scale of discriminating duties, in lieu of positive interdiction, the same system of restricted and indirect trade which each Government, by the arrangement recently concluded, professed to abolish. Viewing it in this light, the undersigned early signified, by letter, to his Majesty's late Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, his disapprobation of the measure, and his intention earnestly to remonstrate against its adoption.

Occurrences having withdrawn that distinguished personage from his Majesty's service before such intention could be executed, the undersigned has been induced to defer all formal communication on the subject until the new organization of his Majesty's Government shall be completely adjusted.

It is not the intention of the undersigned to revive any part of the discussion which led to the arrangement now in execution by both Governments. Nor is it material to inquire into the propriety of any measures of legislation which Great Britain might have medita

ted previously to the arrangement, or whether she might have withheld the privileges now conceded, consistently with a liberal justice towards the United States.

However the case may have stood previously, now that the arrangement has been actually assented to, the known probity of his Majesty's Government may be confidently appealed to for its faithful execution, and for the discouragement of any attempt, by indirect means, to affect its provisions on a point that, in fairness, could not be directly attempted.

It may not be altogether unnecessary to remark, however, that the concession involved in this arrangement, on the part of Great Britain, was not gratuitous. It was, on the contrary, made for those equivalents which she herself asked as beneficial to her colonial and navigating interests, in her great adjustment of these interests in 1825, nor were those privileges conceded to the United States until all those equivalents were fully and actually accorded.

This subject is, therefore, now presented to his Majesty's Government for the fair and just execution of an agreement, not for an inquiry into its practical operation. In this sense alone the undersigned desires, at present, to be understood. However, in practice, this arrangement may affect the trade of the United States, he is satisfied with its conditions. He is content, for the present, to leave speculations of commercial gain to those who may practically engage in the trade, being convinced that ex

perience will show the fallacy of those jealous and interested calculations which have impeded the operations of either Government, and the solid and enduring advantages which must result to both nations from commercial intercourse based on the fair foundation of reciprocal benefit and mutual good will.

The proposition of the undersigned, which led to that arrangement, asked for a participation in the advantages of the direct intercourse as offered by the act of Parliament of the 5th July, 1825, in the hope thereby to reinove all previous restrictions upon that intercourse. Although this proposition was submitted by the undersigned, in writing, as early as the 12th day of December, it was not formally assented to by his Majesty's Government until the 17th of August last. In the interim, the Congress of the United States, at their last session, passed an act authorizing the President of the United States, by his proclamation in the recess, to rescind all the restrictive laws of the United States, so far as that might be necessary to comply with the expectations of Great Britain in the negotiations then pending. They also passed sundry laws reducing the duties upon many important articles of West India produce upon their importation into the United States.

These acts were communicated by the undersigned, to the Earl of Aberdeen, by a note dated the 18th day of July, and, on the 17th day of August, the final determination of his Majesty's Government was announced. In

communicating that determination, the Earl of Aberdeen enumerated several points in which the act of Congress of the United States might be suscepti ble of an interpretation inconsistent with the proposition originally submitted by the undersigned, and suggested the construction which that law ought properly to receive. After reciting the proposition, the Earl of Aberdeen in conclusion, remarked: It only remains, therefore, for the undersigned to assure Mr McLane that if the President of the United States shall determine to give ef fect to the act of Congress, in conformity with the construction put upon its provisions both by Mr McLane and the undersigned, all difficulty on the part of Great Britain, in the way of a renewal of the intercourse between the United States and the West Indies, according to the foregoing proposition made by Mr McLane, will thereby be removed.'

On the receipt of this communication, the President of the United States, viewing it naturally in the light of an engagement by his Majesty's Government, and actuated by a spirit of the highest liberality, determined to give effect to the act of Congress, in complete and unreserved conformity with the construction put upon its provisions by the Earl of Aberdeen, and immediately issu ed his proclamation.

In consequence of that act, the vessels of Great Britain have, since the 5th day of October last, been in the complete enjoyment of the direct intercourse between the United States and the British

West Indies, according to the requisitions of the act of Parliament of the 5th July, 1825.

This prompt proceeding on the part of the President of the United States, being communicated by the undersigned to the Earl of Aberdeen, was immediately responded to by the order in council of the 5th November, intended by his Majesty's Government as the execution of their part of the arrangement. But the proposition of the United States, submitted by the undersigned, did not ask merely for a revocation of the order in couucil of the 27th July, 1826, and the abolition or suspension of all discriminating duties upon American vessels in the British colonial ports: it required, also,' the enjoyment, by the United States, of the advantages of the act of 5th July, 1825; and the Earl of Aberdeen, in his letter to the undersigned, wherein he engaged that, on the issuing of the President's proclamation, the intercourse between the United States and Great Britain should be renewed, according to the proposition necessarily included in that engagement, the enjoyment of those advantages, fully and without reserve.

This act, therefore, was in this manner recognised as the basis, at once, of the policy of Great Britain in the direct intercourse permitted with her colonies, and of the arrangement opening that intercourse to the United States. If this could in any wise have been considered equivocal, it would be made altogether certain by the explanatory statement of the late President of the Board

of Trade when introducing the bill to the notice of the House. On that occasion, with no less force than accuracy, he remarked, the act to take into consideration, of which the House has resolved itself into committee, is that which relates to foreign trade with the British West India Islands, and a system of regulations founded on the principles adopted by the British Government in the year 1825.

'In order to explain satisfactorily to the committee my reason for proposing the changes in the schedule to which I have adverted, it is necessary only for me to say that the event so long looked for on this subject, is at length finally concluded between the United States and the British Government. I have the gratification of being able to state that a topic of discussion between the two nations, which has occupied the longest time, and was of the most intricate character of any within my memory, and which has been subject to many variations of pretension on both sides, has now been amicably, and I trust forever terininated, to the satisfaction of both parties. Further I have to inform the committee that the adjustment has taken place on the basis, and without the slightest departure from that basis, of the act of 1825, which laid down definitely the principles on which Great Britain would allow to foreigners, a participation in the trade of her West India possessions. It is scarcely necessary for me to add, that the American Government have withdrawn all their pretensions, and

have rescinded their act of 1822 which declared that the circuitous route should still be adhered to, and that England now stands on that footing which she announced, in 1825, as the one which she would maintain.'

Whether we consider the provision of the act of 1825, thus referred to, or the exposition given of it, at the time, by the late Mr Huskisson, its principles and spirit are intelligible and explicit. It was intended, thereby, to benefit the West India Islands, by extending the market for their productions, and by procuring for them such foreign supplies as their necessities required, through the means of an unrestricted and direct intercourse with foreign ports. It moreover authorized foreign vessels to engage freely in that intercourse, with the simple limitation of subjecting (in the language of the late Mr Huskisson) foreign goods, imported into the colonies, to such moderate duties as might be found sufficient for the fair protection of British productions of a like nature. attainment of these objects, however, depended upon the reciprocity of foreign nations, who were, therefore, invited to a cooperation by the provisions of the law. From this circumstance, as well as from the limitation in the last section of the act, of the right of amending, altering, or repealing, to the then session of Parliament, it might have been reasonably inferred that the considerations held out to those nations, who should accede to the specified terms, would partake more of the character of compact, and

The

be more durable, than in cases of ordinary legislation.

Pursuant to such principles and objects, the act wisely abstained from establishing, or encouraging, any indirect trade that might come in rivalry of the direct intercourse, and thereby weaken its advantages, or deter other nations from embracing its provisions. Certainly, the consideration that dictates this precaution could lose none of its force, when applied to a nation that might subsequently be admitted, by positive arrangement, to the same advantages. Consistently with these views, that act made a discrimination for the protection of British productions, by admitting their importation both into the northern colonies and into the West Indies, and from one to the other, free of duty, while it imposed a duty, of some extent, upon those of the United States; with equal consistency it established a system of warehousing in the ports of Kingston, in the island of Jamaica, Halifax, in Nova Scotia, Quebec, in Canada, St Johns, in New Brunswick, and Bridgetown in the island of Barbadoes. In this way, the act placed the southern and northern, colonies upon an equality in the warehousing system, and did not, thereby, exempt the produce of other countries from duty, if taken through the warehousing ports; but imposed the same degree of discrimination, whether imported in a British vessel indirectly through the warehousing ports, or directly from the ports of the foreign country where it was produced.

It is obvious that this was the only substantial equivalent yielded to foreign countries, but especially to the United States, in return for their abolishing all discriminating duties of British vessels and their cargoes, and for placing those vessels on a footing with their own in the direct intercourse between their ports and those of the northern and southern colonies.

It was, moreover, indispensably necessary, effectually, to preserve to the United States the fair advantages, and an equal share, of such intercourse with the British West Indies. It is equally obvious that the duties prescribed by the 'schedule' attached to the act of Parliament of 1825, was not designed either to counteract or impair the direct trade, or to give any preference to the British navigation; but, in the language of Mr Huskisson, for the protection of British productions in preference to foreign produce of a similar kind.'

To a reasonable scale of duties, calculated, bona fide, to attain that object, the undersigned has neither the right nor the disposition now to object. Neither could he be capable of now opposing the right or propriety of increasing the rate of duties on the schedule attached to the act of 1825, for a similar pur

pose.

The right of imposing the protecting duty in the schedule of 1825, he frankly conceded throughout the late negotiation. Nor was this right merely conceded by him, but the intention of exercising it, to a greater extent at some prop

er time, was fairly reserved in the note of Lord Aberdeen, of the 17th August. In that note, the late Secretary for Foreign Affairs, observed, that his Majesty's Government had already had under their consideration, the expediency of introducing some modifications into the schedule of duties attached to the act of Parliament of 1825, with a view, more effectually, to support the interests of the British northern American colonies.'

nor

While, however, the undersigned would neither oppose avoid this reservation, he would expect that the modifications should be fairly confined to the objects and the original import of that schedule, and reasonably reconcilable with the main stipulation on the part of the United States, agreed to by his Majesty's Government, that the former are to be admitted to the full enjoyment of the advantages of the act of 5th July, 1825. He feels persuaded that neither the late Secretary of State for Foreign Af fairs, nor any succeding minister of his Majesty's Government, would assert, upon the strength of the before mentioned concession and reservation, the right or propriety of modifying a schedule, intended for the protection of the British productions, in such manner as not merely to leave them without protection, but absolutely to check and discourage them by the competition of large supplies of similar productions of foreign growth, forced through the indirect channels of the northern ports, to the destruction of the direct trade.

That such, however, will be