APRIL 3, 1832.] Foreign Intercourse--Colonial Trade. [SENATE. and British vessels," if we allow it to continue, "cannot could we never change it? And if the National Legisla be an object of much importance in any point of view." ture should pass an act to destroy previous inequality, is "It will generally be our interest, as it is that of every the President to refuse to execute it, because it is a new other nation, to allow the exportation of its surplus foreign law? But it is not in accordance with British legislation! produce in the vessels of any other country." Ay! and Indeed! and is an American Chief Magistrate to make to confine such exports to foreign bottoms, in exclusion statute of the American Congress bend and break before of our own? Is this for our interest? And is it not still an act of the Imperial Parliament? These two reasons, more for our interest to send our own produce to a mar- if reasons they can be called, are the same as were assignket, than that of foreigners, and, of course, to consent ed by Mr. McLane to the late Secretary of State. that alien ships alone should transport it? What a con- But the writer of the message has discovered another, ception does this exhibit of the great navigating interest entirely new, that had never even occurred to our negoof the country, and of the spirit and object of our whole tiator. It is, that this enactment, as to the transportation debenture system! Why do we encourage the importa- to the West Indies, is inconsistent with "the provisions tion and exportation of foreign goods for the benefit of of the existing commercial treaty" with England! drawback? Is it not to give employment to our navigators, ship owners, and merchants? But, sir, the gravest, the most solemn ground of complaint against this discrimination in favor of British vessels still remains. It is the VIOLATION OF THE ACT OF CONGRESS OF 1830. By the first section, the President is authorized to issue his proclamation, repealing our acts of 1818, 1820, and 1823, and opening our ports upon certain conditions, and apon those conditions only. One of them is in these words: "That vessels of the United States may import into the said colonial possessions, from the United States, any article or articles, which could be imported in British vessels into the said possessions, from the United States." Now, sir, so far from there being any evidence that an American could import every article which a British vessel might, the proof was plenary, as we all well know, that the whole class of foreign goods are prohibited in the former, and allowed to the latter. Here is the law, and here stands the fact. Ingenuity cannot evade, and I doubt whether effrontery can deny, ther incompatibilty. This modification of the act, this Executive repeal of one of its clear and positive provisions, has been called construction! And let us see the reasons which have been assigned for such a stretch of power. I will examine them all. They are embodied in the President's message of January, 1831, in which he says he does not suppose "that the omission to restrict, in terms, the importations to the productions of the country to which the 1 vessels respectively belong, was intentional," for three reasons. That convention not only does not embrace any part of the colonial trade, but, in express terms, wholly excludes it. But suppose the fact were otherwise. The President is authorized to issue his proclamation when a certain condition shall have been previously performed; he thinks such performance incompatible with a treaty. What is he to do? Issue his proclamation in despite of the condition, as if it never existed? assume an absolute authority which has never been conferred? No; but assign that as a reason for not issuing the proclamation. Mr. Van Buren, also, has assigned a reason or apology for disregarding this enactment. That I may be sure to do him no injustice, I will quote his very words, from the letter of 5th October, 1830, in which he transmits the proclamation, assures Mr. McLane that the "construction" of Lord Aberdeen and himself had been "adopted with out reserve," and adds "The President has derived great satisfaction from the candor and liberality which has characterized the conduct of his Majesty's ministers throughout the negotiation, and particularly in not suffering the inadvertencies of our legislation, attributable to the haste and confusion of the closing scenes of the session, to defeat or delay the adjustment," &c. &c.; and he is subsequently d.rected "to make his Majesty's Government acquainted with these sentiments." "Inadvertencies!" What should we say if the judiciary dared to set aside a law, on the assumption that Congress knew not what they were about when it passed? Inadvertencies! Yet this provision was in the bill of 1827, which passed the House of Representatives, is the same as Mr. Madison's proposition in 1790, and Mr. Clay's construction in 1826, and was contained in this act of 1830, when originally reported by Mr. Cambreleng, and Here, it seems, the President was advised that there which Mr. Van Buren himself, when communicating it to was an omission in the act, and he undertook to supply Mr. McLane, in June, 1830, characterized as a "solemn it by imposing restrictions which confessedly Congress had public movement on our part;" yet, afterwards, lays the not, and assigns his reasons for this assumption of legis- same at the foot of the British throne, thanking his Malative power. First. That this enactment is inconsistent jesty for concurring in a disregard of its enactment, and with "the propositions previously made by this Govern- offering, in excuse for its "inadvertencies," "the haste ment to that of Great Britain, and which were before and confusion" of the National Legislature. What lanCongress at the time of the passage of the act." The fact guage is this for an American statesman; and what a picof such inconsistency does not exist; but suppose it did. ture is here to be exhibited to the eye of British royalty, Is it to be tolerated, that, if we make a law at variance of the dignity and deliberation of a republican-an Ame with Presidential recommendations, and send it to him to rican Congress! Thank heaven, it has no precedent or be executed, he shall alter, change, and modify, till it parallel in our history. I will do Mr. McLane the justice conforms to his own pre-existing views? Why might he to say that he did not exhibit to the English Government not as well have made the law without our intervention? its most offensive parts; his own feelings must have reWhy send his propositions here, if Congress are not to coiled at being the medium of such a communication. be supposed capable of dissenting from them? Having considered the power which our rival possesses to control the exports in the colonial trade, I will now examine it as to the imports; and, first, of WEST INDIA PRODUCE. The second reason is, that it is at variance with "the give advantages to our own over their rivals! And there See article second of the convention, which is direct and unequi SENATE.] Foreign Intercourse--Colonial Trade. [APRIL 3, 1832. a direction to the transmission of their productions as ex-my hand a most instructive document, which I have preperience of their interest may dictate. They may erect pared, to exhibit the proportion of American, British, and an insuperable barrier of such duties in the direct trade foreign tonnage, in our internal trade, from the years to the United States, in which alone our vessels can par- 1789 to 1830, inclusive; by which may be seen, at a glance, ticipate, and leave it free and unobstructed in British ves- as at a thermometer, the elevation and depression of our sels, by the circuitous route of the Northern provinces; navigation, and the effects of the comparative advantages for it is to be kept in remembrance that an American which it enjoyed. In the most disastrous periods, at the bottom is not permitted to carry their produce from co- commencement of the Government, during the late war, lony to colony. Such export duties have heretofore existed in some of the colonies. This right was formerly refused to Great Britain, by the administration of Mr. Monroe; and the acts of 1820 and 1823 guarded against it, by requiring importations of colonial produce to be direct from the island of which it was the growth. PLASTER OF PARIS. and, subsequently, while the English were enjoying the fruits of the triangular voyage, the proportion of foreign to domestic tonnage never exceeded forty-five and a half of the former to one hundred of the latter-that is, less than forty-six per cent., while, in our prosperity, it was frequently less than ten per cent. In our West India trade, the disproportion has been still greater, for the obvious reasons of our vicinage, the remoteness of parent countries, and the inaptitude of such a population as that of the islands to traversing the ocean. STATEMENT I, showing the American and foreign tonnage engaged in the trade with certain West India islands and the British American colonies, from 1821 to 1830, both inclusive, with the proportion that the foreign bears to the American. COUNTRIES. Swedish West Indies, Danish West Indies,' Average Am. Average fo tonnage per reign tonn.) Proportion the foreign bears to the Ameri can. 12,421 5 42,128 5 462 6 3.72 per cent. 887 4 2.10 50,078 8 4,043 5 8.07 ་ 46 The trade in this article has been of much importance to Maine. It is dug from the earth in the provinces, and from 100,000 to 150,000 tons are annually imported into the United States, giving employment to a large amount of tonnage, which we have heretofore enjoyed almost exclusively, but which, under this arrangement, the British can, at their option, entirely monopolize. The contrivance by which this is to be accomplished, is simple, but effectual. To give a show of reciprocity, our vessels are admitted into the provinces; but then they are restricted to what are called free ports, such as Halifax, St. John's, and St. Andrew's; while British vessels are subject to no such limitation, but are at liberty to go to all others. The places at which the plaster is dug are not at the free ports, and their vessels may take it from the quarries, and transport it to any part of the United States; while, to reach our vessels, it must first be carried to the free ports, at an expense of seventy-five to one hundred dollars the ton, and there unladen and reshipped. Let me illustrate this. We have, at Hallowell, in Maine, near the village where I have the happiness to reside, quarries of the finest building material in the world-beautiful, ever-enduring granite. Suppose, sir--what, fortunately, is not truebut imagine that the provinces were our only market, as the United States is for their plaster; and that, to give the British a color of equality in the transportation, we should say, your vessels may take this granite, but you shall not go to Hallowell; you shall not enter the Kennebec river; you must seek for it at Portsmouth, Portland, or Wiscasset, while we take it direct to any and all your ports: would a British vessel ever transport a single cargo? Yet such is the advantage which we have conceded to them, as to gypsum, an article of which the freight exceeds the It thus appears that, from 1821 to 1830, inclusive, a original value at the quarries, which indeed would be ut-term of ten years next preceding this arrangement, and terly worthless if we did not become the purchasers, and from the 5th of October, 1830, to the 30th of September, which they have, therefore, at former periods, permitted 1831, the year succeeding it, the average proportion of to be transported wholly in American vessels. alien to American tonnage, in the colonial trade, was as Such is the power which this arrangement concedes to COUNTRIES. Britain, in the exportation to her colonies of American and foreign goods, and the importation of West Indian and provincial produce. It is full and complete, to the entire control of the navigation. How far she may carry w. I. generally 2.27 the exercise of it, will depend upon our endurance. She will stretch the cord until there is danger of disruption. What answer has been given to these appalling facts So long as we acquiesce, she will continue to advance; I will tell you: for the Secretary of the Treasury, in comand, therefore, I now raise my voice against it. This very municating this statement for 1831, seeing their force, discussion may arrest her progress, or, at least, cause her has, in order to weaken it, sent us an extract from a let to pause. She has already begun to use the lever which ter of one of the collectors of the customs, in which it is we put into her hands, and we see its effects. stated that, from his port, a large portion of such Ameri In all competition with foreign navigation, upon equal can vessels as clear for the "West Indies generally," proterms, it is known that our republican industry, economy, ceed, in fact, to the English islands. Be it so. Nay, sup skill, and enterprise, have given us decisive superiority. pose that to have been the destination of all such American In the direct trade with Great Britain, we have had more vessels, and not of any of the alien; add all general clearthan four-fifths of the transportation, and a still greater pro-ances for the West Indies, on our part, to those for the portion in our commerce with other nations. I hold in British islands: how much does it vary the result? OF DEBATES IN CONGRESS. 698 APRIL 3, 1832.] Foreign Intercourse--Colonial Trade. [SENATE. The amount of tonnage employed in that year, 1831, reported the law of that year, sternly repelled such a was With British West Indies, 36,440 Am. 16,937 foreign. 14,987 say, 129,164 0 102,853 It would seem suggestion. There can be no divorce of the great inte- But, as this is the only apology or excuse that can be It will then be one hundred and two thousand eight hun-islands, either from the Northern provinces, or any port dred and fifty three British, to one hundred and twentynine thousand one hundred and sixty-four American--we know; this she has avowed. It is her fixed policy. of her dominions, she is resolved to furnish herself. This more than seventy-nine per cent.; when, before the arrangement, the British had less than ten per cent. From us will be admitted only those indispensable necesBut it is said that, although there may have been this almost exclusively, of provisions and lumber. And these saries which cannot be elsewhere obtained, consisting, enormous growth of British tonnage, yet there has been she received before the arrangement, partly through the an increase of ours, also, in this trade. strange, indeed, if, after opening the ports, no more of which our vessels had the exclusive carriage; it being neutral islands, and partly by her Northern ports, to both our vessels should go to them than previously, and during utterly prohibited to the British. the state of general occlusion; especially when such a measure takes away from us the transportation to the neuthey be transmitted under the arrangement? Through In what manner will tral islands, through which the supplies were before carher Northern ports, still burdened by double freights and ried. And yet, for the same period of years, from 1821 than that which it has supplanted? Even Mr. McLane insurance. Is the route, thus substituted, less expensive to 1830, inclusive, during which there was no arrange. knew, and asserted, that it was not; and also declared that ment, and embarrassed, from time to time, by restrictions, the portion of the trade which sought the Northern chancounter legislation, and prohibition, the average amount of nels, instead of the neutral, was diverted there only by American shipping, in the trade with the English colonies, the greater facilities for assorted cargoes; and he added was greater than in the year 1821, and the British much that the burdens of the indirect trade fell upon the planter. less as follows: How, then, is his consumption, or our markets, to be increased by this substitution of the present circuitous route in British vessels, for the former in American? Indeed, so essential are our supplies, that a change from this indirect trade, when the ports were closed to the direct, Amer. Foreign. Amer. Foreign. to have materially affected the result. I hold in my hand by opening them, does not seem, from past experience, 50,078 4,043 36,440 77,492 16,937 two tabular statements, which exhibit this very clearly. 7,407 77,737 85,916 Tabular statement of the export of domestic produce from the United States to the West Indies and British American colonies, during the years 1823 to 1826, inclusive, when the British ports were open to a direct trade; and, also, during the years 1827 to 1830, inclusive, when the ports were closed. Average American tonnage per annum, years-1821 to 1830. for ten 1831. British West Indies, West Indies generally, 11,510 129,164 102,853 British W. Indies, So that, for the loss of transportation to the neutral islands, we have not even the compensation of any positive increase of tonnage to the British ports. And of that which we have, more than two-thirds, as appears by the above statement, is merely to the Northern provinces on our bor- Swedish ders. We lose the long freight which we before enjoyed, Danish and get a part only of the short, which has been sub- French stituted; and even that portion will, hereafter, be dimiCuba, nishing. That such was the former course of the trade, is universally known. Indeed, I have such authority as will convince even the political advocates of the arrange ment. do. do. do. 120,573 1,391,004 804,218 780,515 937,368 British Amer. col. 3,271,270 3,611,693 3,276,556 904,115 3,749,658 1,818,113 1,773, 107 2,538,665 3,564,165 In March, 1820, Mr. McLane said, the routes through open. which these supplies now pass, comprehend not merely the Northern possessions, which have the solitary advantage of occasionally affording a better assortment of goods, but the islands of St. Thomas and St. Bartholomew, Martininique, Guadaloupe, and the port of St. Jago de Cuba. And Mr. Van Buren, in 1829, declared of this trade, "It is carried on in American vessels, by St. Barts and St. Thomas, and open ports in North American colonies.” And now, since the arrangement, it is prosecuted, to great extent, in British vessels, to whom we have yielded the means of monopolizing it entirely. 1823, 1824, 1825, $8,984,299 9,270,642 9,863,172 1826, 10,808,316 GALES & SEATON'S REGISTER 699 SENATE.] Foreign Intercourse--Colonial Trade. [APRIL 3, 1832. In these four years the British West India ports were until the direct importation in American vessels is effectclosed. 1827, $10,501,076 1828, 9,380,920 1829, 10,128,002 1830, 10,122,194 ually suppressed, and the whole transferred to British bottoms, by a circuitous route. And if she has this power over the transmission of our cotton to England, she has the same as to tobacco, rice, and all our exports to all her dominions; the transportation of which may, and, if unresisted, will, be engrossed by foreign ships; and the imports also. For she may with the same propriety, by $10,033,048 Average when ports were closed. discriminating export duties, impose burdens upon the Returns of the number of barrels of meal and flour, im-direct transmission to the United States in our vessels, ported into the British West Indies; in the years 1825 and 1828, when the ports were open and also closed. 4)40,132,192 1825. United States, directly, British N. Amer. colonies, Foreign West Indies, Foreign Europe, United Kingdom, 1828. 161,568 940-decrease, 160,628 9,884 202,737 206,653-increase, 3,816. 153,536 Here the important question arises, can this be rightfully leaving them free to British bottoms through her colonies. done by Great Britain, or is it incompatible with the comI confess that mercial convention, which regulates the trade between this country and her European dominions? to me it appears to be inconsistent with a fair and just exBut it seems that she does position of that instrument. She claims the power, and it does not not so regard it. appear that this administration has ever denied that she possesses it.* W NOTE BY Mr. SPRAGUE.-Since the above was pronounced, the President has by message communicated to The first is compiled from official documents, and the latter from the authority of our late minister to London. In this connexion, I would notice an error, or decep- the Senate a letter from Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Barbour, tion, which has been industriously propagated. It has dated on the 26th January, 1829, by which it appears that been represented that our inland trade from New York, the latter had protested against such discriminations as inVermont, and Maine, to Canada and New Brunswick, had compatible with the commercial convention, but the forAs to the advantage to its origin, too, in this arrangement; when we all know that mer had insisted that there was no such incompatibility, it existed before, and was prosecuted without restraint. and that the British Government had the right to institute That the restrictive and prohibitory laws were confined and persevere in such measures. It rests entirely with to the commerce "by sea," and reached not to that by be gained by a British ship, he says their laws did not then We further know that it was the confer it, and adds, it "could not be effected without the land, lakes, or rivers. anxious desire of Great Britain to continue and extend it. concurrence of the United States. In-cotton to a British colony in the British ship, which in the Even Mr. Canning, in his bitterest mood, declared that it the United States to allow or prohibit the carriage of their was not her purpose to interrupt it, and she did not. deed, so palpably for her interest, and in accordance with case supposed is to carry it to England," and that, by Mr. her policy is it, that it has been sometimes insisted that the Adams's proclamation of March, 1827, it was prohibited. United States ought to suppress it, as a means of coercing All this must have been known to the American minister Great Britain. The opening of this market by internal and Secretary of State, when, by the arrangement of 1830, communication with Quebec and New Brunswick, has the prohibition was removed. The same message also been ascribed to Mr. McLane's negotiation, with about transmitted extracts of two letters from Mr. McLane to April, 1831; by which it appears that the Chancellor of the the same propriety as were the effects of the hurricane in Mr. Van Buren, under dates of 14th March and 14th Barbadoes. Exchequer had expressed an intention to prevent the cir that it might not defeat his own purposes of revenue. cuitous transmission, by requiring a certificate of origin, Since the British have been permitted to take clear- But no promise, no stipulation, was obtained. On the ances from our ports for their Northern provinces, under contrary, our right under the convention seems to be abanthe recent agreement, that Government has manifested a doned in the conclusion of the letter. The language is: disposition to put in operation the same machinery of va- "I have no great confidence in our pretensions under the rying imposts, in order to monopolize the whole navigation convention, so long as the vessels of both countries shall between the United States and her European dominions. be placed on the same footing in the direct trade with Bri Since the arrangement, the duty upon cotton imported tish European ports, and, therefore, I thought the surest from the United States into England, has been changed means of attaining our object would be to address myself from an ad valorem of 6 per cent., to a specific of 5-8ths immediately to the interests of Great Britain herself. It is of a penny per lb.; while from the provinces the duty is apparent that the financial object of this Government but 1-25th of a penny. The consequence is, that a Bri- would be effectually frustrated by keeping up the discri tish ship may load in the United States with our cotton, mination between the direct and indirect importation, and, by touching at Bermuda, Halifax, or any other colo and there is little danger that the English finances will ever nial port, save in duties the difference between 5-8ths be in a situation to enable her to disregard so important a The power is in effect conceded, and our security against and 1-25th of a penny per lb., which is equal to a fair branch of her revenue." freight from Charleston to Liverpool. British ship ownShe cannot dispense, it is said, with the revenue, ers have actually begun to take advantage of this discri- its exercise is merely and solely the interest of Great Bri mination. A letter from a respectable gentleman of tain. Lubec, in Maine, under date of the 13th of March last, which would be lost under the low duty of one-twenty. informs me that a merchant from New Brunswick had re-fifth of a penny by way of the colonies. What security is cently gone to Savannah, for the avowed purpose of so this? How easy for the next Parliament to add five-eighths employing his ship, and declaring that he would thereby of a penny to both imposts, the direct and circuitous, pre have an advantage over the Americans of 5s. 6d. sterl ng serving the difference, and securing the revenue. May per cwt. in the imposts; and that it would amount to 1,200 if our right is abandoned, she may increase the discrimi pounds upon a single cargo. This business must be ar- nation; and when for revenue she adds to the duty from rested. If Great Britain has the right to make this dis- the colonies five-eighths of a penny, she may increase it in crimination, she may vary and increase it without limitation, the direct voyage to ten or a hundred times that amount. APRIL 3, 1832.] Foreign Intercourse--Colonial Trade. [SENATE. Mr. McLane must have known that such were her pre-voyage. Both of which essential points are unconditiontens.ons, that she asserted the right to make these d scri- ally surrendered in the final adjustment; Lord Aberdeen minations: and yet, in this important arrangement, allow- having, in the most express and reiterated language, asing her vessels to clear from the United States for the sented to by our minister, reserved to his Government colonies, he provides no security, enters no protest, sug- the right to increase, diminish, alter, and vary, the schedule gests no caveat, against its exercise; but, on the contrary, of duties ad libitum. acquiesces in a general reservation, by Lord Aberdeen, That Mr. McLane understood that his original proposiof a right in his Government thereafter to change the tions would secure the benefit of those restricted and equal condition of the commercial intercourse between the imposts, is certain. In his letter of March 16, he says that United States and Great Britain, so as to render it less fa- they embrace the scale of duties prescribed by the act vorable to this country. of 1825." And in a subsequent communication, that the This part of the arrangement merits deliberate atten- negotiation will result in one of three modes--the two last tion. The law of 1830 peremptorily required of the Ex- of which are the revocation of the British order, either ecutive that no agreement respecting the colonies should" upon the terms of my proposition, or," "with some inbe assented to, except one "leaving the commercial inter-crease of the duties imposed by the act of Parliament of course of the United States with all other parts of the 1825, to favor their Northern provinces." And the recent British dominions or provinces on a footing not less favor-correspondence laid before the Senate yesterday, contains able to the United States than it now is." But, says the plenary and conclusive evidence that such were his origiEnglish minister, we will make no stipulation to connal views. tinue that intercourse as favorable as it now is; on the There is yet a third difference. Mr. Clay's offer emcontrary, expressly reserve to my Government the braced the benefits of the acts of Parliament according liberty of introducing changes at pleasure, however un- to his understanding of its provisions--as communicated propitious to the United States. And to this Mr. McLane to our minister-which was, that our vessels might imassented. port from the United States into the colonies every thing Now, sir, suppose the British Government have already, which the British could; and if Mr. Gallatin had assented or shall hereafter avail themselves of this restriction, and to any compact, it must have embraced this construction. place the other intercourse upon a footing less favorable Indeed, it was never suggested during the last administrato the United States. The question arises--is the arrange- tion, that any disparity, in this respect, could be tolerated ment still in force? Does it continue obligatory? If so, for a moment. Yet, now, the whole class of foreign prothen it subsists in violation of another positive enactment ductions are free to British, and prohibited to American of the statute. If not, if the exercise of the right thus vessels. reserved by Great Britain dissolves the contract, then this There is yet another distinction worthy of remark. In boasted agreement is rendered a nullity, by placing its ex- authorizing Mr. Gallatin to waive the restriction to the istence at the mere will of our opponent. direct trade, Mr. Clay says that it is to be only as an expeThe statute of 1830 vested in the Executive large dis-riment, and revocable at the pleasure of our Government. cretionary powers, with the design that they should be prudently husbanded, and employed only for the advancement of the interest of our country. Instead of which, he seems to have exhausted the whole at once, and, not contented with that, transcended their limits, in accordance with the views of our rival. Lord Aberdeen is indulged in all his constructions, as he is pleased to denominate them; permitted to mould at pleasure, not only the English statute, but our own act of Congress. His every requisition is submitted to without reserve-not even a limitation, a caution, counter suggestion, of any sort, is interposed in our behalf. But Mr. McLane made no such reservation; and if his compact has any permanency or duration, we are precluded from renewing this restriction of our act of 1823, however injurious may be its omission. HUMILIATION. Having examined this negotiation with much attention, I feel myself constrained, as an American citizen, alive to the honor of my country, as a Senator, bound to vindicate its dignity and assert its equality among the nations of the earth, to animadvert upon the tone and manner in which it has been conducted. There is one defence set up by this administration of Anterior to the year 1829, there has not been in our nathe terms of this contract, which deserves a passing no-tional history a more brilliant or unsullied page than that tice; it is, that they are the same which were proposed by of our foreign diplomacy, and especially with England. their immediate predecessors. Yes, after having loaded In the presence of that nation and its monarch, all our them with abuse, prostrated them by calumnies, driven former national representatives, from the first unbending them by clamor from their stations, their opinions are now son of Massachusetts, to the last high-minded Virginian, quoted; their example is relied upon; refuge and defence have stood firmly erect in conscious republican self-reare now sought under the broad and ample shield of their spect. They demanded rights, but never solicited favors: integrity and ability. This, then, is the high-blown merit proffering equal friendships, but never bending the knee of this boasted achievement, that it is the adoption of a as suppliants. They met not arrogance by humility; enwork prepared by others, who have been made the vic-croachment by submission; and war upon our interests by tims of political denunciation. But even this defence is sol.citations and entreaties. Our fathers grappled with without foundation. It is true that Mr. McLane's original the British lion, but never fawned or crouched before him. propositions were substantially the same as those autho- How it has been recently, the negotiations of this arrangerized by Mr. Adams; but it is also true that they were ment will exhibit. never accepted, and that the final agreement is essentially They commenced in the autumn of 1829, by verbal convariant. To put this matter at rest, I will point out in ferences, in which Mr. McLane made his proposition, What particulars. accompanied by his solicitation that it might be taken into The offer of Mr. Adams, renewed by his successor, early and candid consideration, and "expressing the anxwas, that upon certain conditions we should have the fullious desire of the President of the United States." benefit of the act of Parliament of the 5th July, 1825, ceiving no response, he, on the 12th of December, adwhich established, among other things, these two most dressed a long letter to the British minister, reciting "the important points: 1st. A limitation and specification of the duties upon our produce. 24. An equalization of them in the direct and circuitous Re anxious desire of the President, repeating the proposition, renewing his solicitation," making an "appeal to the candor and liberality of his Majesty's Government." On the 14th, Lord Aberdeen replies by a barren note of |