Слике страница
PDF
ePub

just previous to the arrival of the United States commissioners at a council held with the Sioux, Foxes, Chippewas, Winnebagoes, &c., to fulfil the treaty of pacification concluded between those tribes during the last year, (See vol. I. p. 47,) a portion of the Winnebagoes indicated hostile dispositions towards the whites, and finally attacked and murdered some American citi

zens.

As these movements were regarded as proofs of a powerful combination among those tribes, great promptitude was evinced in suppressing the evil.

Gov. Cass at once applied to Gen. Atkinson for assistance, and that officer ordered out 600 of the army under him, and with a portion of the Illinois militia, moved to the scene of hostilities, when the Indians submitted and delivered up the murderers, eight in number, to take their trial according to the laws of the United States.

With the exception of this disturbance, the domestic quiet of the country was uninterrupted, and the prosperity of the people evinced the excellence of their institutions, and the wisdom and prudence with which they were administered.

CHAPTER III.

Colonial regulations of Great Britain-Condition of States after the Revolution-Acts of first Congress-Sheffield's Pamphlet-Convention of 1815-Acts of Congress of 1818-Act of Parliament of 1818Negotiation-Law of U. S. of 1820-British act of 1822-Proclamation of President in 1822-Negotiation continued-Act of U. S. of 1823-Order in Council of 1823-Acts of Parliament of 1825-Principles of the two parties-British Colonial ports shutNegotiation-Proceedings in Senate-In House-Conclusion of Session-Proclamation of President-Ports of U. S. closed.

THE controversy between the United States and Great Britain, relative to the trade with the American colonies of the latter power, was alluded to in the last Register, and a hasty sketch was given of its origin. By the course of events, that dispute resulted in the prohibition of all intercourse between them and this country. This termination of the negotiation imparts a deeper interest to this subject, than any connected with our foreign history which transpired during the last year, and entitles it to a prominent place in the present volume. As the stand taken by the American government is intimately connected with the system of policy adopt ed by those who framed the federal constitution; and as that policy had in view the emancipation of the

trade of the United States from the burdens and restrictions which grew out of the colonial systems of the European powers: it will be necessary to bear in mind, the condition of this country immediately after its separation from Great Britain, and the relative position of the two powers at that important era.

The operation of the navigation acts, and colonial regulations of the British government, previous to the revolution, upon the provinces, had proved extremely injurious to their permanent interests. Their navigating and manufacturing interests had been designedly repressed, in order to promote those of the mother country.

The revolutionary war had occasioned a still greater depression of these important interests. Peace

found them almost extinct, and with a national government just on the point of dissolution, and unable to protect them against the hostile legislation of foreign powers, they were compelled to enter into competition with the skill and capital of Europe. The shipping interest of the country, experienced the first effects of this state of things.Thirteen governments, actuated by jealous feelings, and clashing in policy, were unable to afford it adequate protection against the discriminating duties and colonial regulations of European nations.

Great Britain especially, the nation with which we had the most intercourse, and whose productions were best adapted to the American market, availed herself of this imhecility of the federal government, and sought to monopolize, not only the supply of our wants, but the carrying trade between her ports and those of the United States by commercial regulations, adapted to the circumstances of that period. The colonies, which she still retained in the West Indies, and on the North American continent, gave her great advantages in any commercial contest, which might be caused by her attempt to monopolize the carrying trade; and the distracted condition of the states, under the old articles of confedera. tion, prevented any effectual resist. ance to this selfish policy.

At one time, indeed, it was hoped,

that our commercial intercourse would be placed upon a more liberal footing. William Pitt, whose early commercial views were of a more enlarged character, than those usually entertained by the premiers of England, and who then thought it necessary to attract American trade into British channels, introduced into parliament, a bill for the purpose of placing the intercourse between the United States and Great Britain, and her American colonies, upon terms of exact reciprocity. Unfortunately, this bill did not pass; and it is to be regretted, that the means of its defeat were furnished by a citizen of the United States, once high in the public favour. Silas Deane, who was at that time in England, made known to John Lord Sheffield, a member of the board of trade, the distracted condition of the states; the imbecility of the federal government; its inability to adopt measures counteracting any commer-/ cial policy which the British go vernment should pursue towards her late provinces; their almost total want of capital; the adaptation of British manufactures to the American market; and the great advantages which might be gained in the carrying trade, by shutting the colonial ports to American vessels. The goods destined for the American market could then be transported in British vessels, which, after landing their cargoes,

would return homewards by a circuitous route through the West Indies, carrying supplies to the islands, and bringing the produce of the West India colonies to the ports of the mother country. By thus combining three voyages in one, an advantage would be gained by the British merchant, which could not be easily counterbalanced.

These views, illustrated by a vast number of details furnished by Mr. Deane, were promulgated by Lord Sheffield, in a pamphlet, which produced a decisive effect upon the public mind in England. The hope of a temporary gain prevailed. Mr. Pitt's law was rclinquished; and, instead of settling the terms of intercourse with the United States upon a reciprocal basis, the colonial ports were closed; an order in council issued, (which, in 1788, became a permanent law) regulating the trade; and all advances towards a commercial treaty scornfully repelled. In this manner, the British cabinet sought to secure an undue share of the carrying trade between the two countries. The views inculcated by Lord Sheffield, occasionally modified by circumstances, were adopted as leading maxims of its policy towards the United States, and continue at this day to govern the councils of England. At first they were completely successful. The trade fell into the hands of the foreign merchants, and the lan

guishing state of American commerce, and the acknowledged ina. bility on the part of the general government, to afford adequate protection to the great interests of the country, gave an impulse to the public mind, which resulted in the adoption of the federal constitution.

Upon the assembling of the first congress, the leading members in that body, after much consultation, and in accordance with the views of Washington, and of Hamilton and Jefferson, the governing minds of his cabinet, agreed upon a system of policy, counteractive of the hostile commercial policy of European nations, and more especially of Great Britain.

Discriminating tonnage duties were imposed on foreign shipping; and Mr. Madison, then a representative from Virginia, strenuously urged the propriety of making a distinction disadvantageous to those powers with whom we had no commercial treaty. Impost duties were laid on importations, for the purposes of revenue; and on such articles as were then manu. factured in the United States, heavier duties were laid, in order to encourage domestic manufactures.

These retaliatory measures induced the British cabinet to descend from its lofty stand, and to commence a negotiation with the government of the United States, which resulted in the treaty of 1794.

« ПретходнаНастави »