and Colombia have been on that spot since the 11th of December last, and those of Mexico and Gua temala must have joined them by this time. Although fully sensible of the great advantages to be de rived from this confederation, I have not ventured to take upon myself the nomination of the em bassy, reserving the decision of this most important matter to the national representation, now assem bled. The principal motives that have induced the meeting of that congress, the basis of its proceed ings, together with the rest of the documents relative thereto, will be submitted to your consideration by the minister of Foreign Affairs.

The circumstances under which the emperor of Brazil provoked an unjust and scandalous war with the United Provinces of the river Plate, obliged the government of that republic, through the medium of the minister plenipotentiary here, to demand certain explanations, to which, not conceiving I had sufficient authority, I have hitherto, abstained from giving any reply; the more so because it seemed to me expedient to avoid every op portunity of becoming involved in a compromise, which prudence, and the laws of strict neutrality, obliged me to evade. These also shall be submitted for your consideration.

Desiring to strengthen the strengthen the friendship which binds Chili to the United States of North America, and to fulfil the obligation incurred by the generous conduct of that nation, which, disdaining the cold circumspection of European diplomacy, has solemnly acknowledged our independence, and maintained, from that moment, a minister plenipotentiary amongst us, I have named an agent, in

vested with an equal power, to reside at that government. This resolution, founded on a just feeling of reciprocity is, as must be apparent, a testimony of our gratitude to that republic, the cradle of the liberty of the human race, and an object easier of admiration than of imitation to all nations.

The government of the low countries have named a consul in Valparaiso, with the view of cultivating commerce with Chili. This nation, governed by a prince who is a lover of liberal institutions, makes me presage that this is only the first step towards others of a friendly nature.

The like advantages may be expected from the enlightened policy of France, and from the disposition evinced in favour of the independent states of America, whose vessels are already permitted to enter their ports, and partake of the usual protection dispensed to friendly nations.

England, whose circumspect conduct with regard to Chili, has been caused principally by the spirit of detraction shewn by prejudiced foreign writers, or of sinister informers, for the promo“ tion of selfish motives, having at length ascertained the true state of the interior of our country, will, I confidently hope, soon place us on a level with the united states of Mexico, Colombia, and the united provinces of the river Plate, and take such measures as are pointed out by the equity of her principles, and the maxims of sound policy which govern the proceedings of her government.

March 31, 1826.

The Memorialists state,-"That Great Britain, having lately opened the trade of her North American and West India colonies, insomuch that not only are almost all ar ticles admitted, but the trade of those colonies is accessible to all parts of the world, on far more favourable terms than those now enjoyed by the merchants of the United States." "They, therefore, submit the propriety of abolishing the discriminating duties of 94 cents per ton, on British colonial vessels, and of ten per cent additional, on the duties on their cargoes, and of admitting British vessels, from whatever ports, on the same terms as the vessels of the most favoured nation."

In reference to which the committee remark, that, by the existing laws of the United States, a duty of fifty cents per ton as a tonnage duty, and fifty cents per ton as light money, is imposed on all foreign vessels entering the ports of the United States, with an addition of ten per centum on the amount of duties on the cargoes of all such vessels as belong to foreign powers, who do not admit the vessels of the United States into their ports on the same terms as their own vessels; that a convention is now in operation between the United States and Great Britain, whereby the duties on the vessels and cargoes of the respective parties, so far as regards the commerce between the United States and the territories of Great Britain, in Europe, are equalised; but that the provisions of this convention

do not extend to the British colo nial possessions in America; in consequence of which, British ves sels arriving in the United States from those colonies pay the discriminating duties before mentioned, amounting on the vessel to one dollar per ton of its admeasurement; while vessels belonging to the United States pay only six cents per ton, on entering our own ports; but that these vessels, entering British colonial ports, are subject to a countervailing duty of 4s. 3d. sterling per ton, equal to ninety-four cents, being the difference in favour of American over British vessels, from the colonies, entering the ports of the United States.

This distinction it has long been the earnest desire of the government of the United States to annul, on the principle of a just reciprocity; but although much discussion has been had on the subject, and many laws have been enacted in reference to it, by both parties, the desired result has not yet been accomplished.

By an act of Congress, of March 3, 1815, the discriminating duties on vessels and merchandize were proffered to be repealed in favour of any foreign nation which should, on its part, reciprocate the same provisions of law towards the United States.

By the convention of 1815 and 1818, this was done between the United States and the territories of Great Britain in Europe: and a reciprocal liberty of commerce was established between them, for the period of ten years, from the

last-mentioned date. This, however, produced no adequate relaxation of the British system in relation to her colonies, from which vessels of the United States continued to be excluded; in consequence a due degree of self-respect, on the part of the United States, gave rise to the passing of an act, in April 1818, by which the ports of the United States were closed to British vessels arriving from any port or place in any British territory, to which vessels owned by citizens of the United States were not admitted.

In May 1820, the act of April 1818 was extended, so as to embrace, and exclude from the ports of the United States, British vessels arriving in ports from Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, and all ports under the dominion of Great Britain, in the West Indies, and on the continent of America, which, from having been occasionally opened, were not considered as included in the act of April 1815.

But to enable the government of the United States, consistent in its principles, and always ready to verify its professions, to meet the overtures of any foreign nations on equal terms, in May 1822, an act was passed, authorising the president, on satisfactory evidence being given to him that the British colonial ports were opened to the vessels of the United States, to issue his proclamation, declaring the ports of the United States, opened to British vessels employed in that trade.

And in consequence of an act of parliament, of June 24th, 1822, admitting vessels of the United States into certain enumerated ports in the British colonies, still another law of Congress was

passed, March 1st, 1823, by which the ports of the United States were opened for vessels arriving therein from the said enumerated British ports, and from all others which were, or might be, opened thereafter, to the vessels of the United States; and the president was authorized to equalize the duties on such British vessels and their cargoes, on proof being given to him that no other, or higher rate of tonnage, or impost, and no other charges of any kind, were levied and exacted in the said British ports, on United States' vessels, than were paid by British vessels and merchandise imported into the said colonial ports, from elsewhere than the United States.

Since which time, several acts of parliament have been passed, having especial or incidental reference to the trade with the English American colonies, and under which, and the laws of the United States before recited, a commercial intercourse was opened, and has been prosecuted between the United States and certain British colonial ports; but to an extent not equal to the expectations that had been formed respecting it, nor, as it is contended, on terms of equality; the want of which, having given rise to discussions, if not dissatisfaction, between the parties engaged in it, it may be useful briefly to advert to.

On the part of the American government, it is alleged that a just reciprocity does not exist, inasmuch as the duties on American vessels and their cargoes, arriving at British colonial ports, are required to be discharged by an immediate prompt payment, and frequently at a great sacrifice, to acquire the means of doing it, while a credit is given for the

*

duties payable on British vessels and their cargoes arriving in the United States, from the colonies, of six and nine months; that bonds, with sureties, are required for the landing of the return cargo in a specified port in the United States, which are occasionally obtained with great difficulty by the owners or masters of the smaller American vessels engaged in the trade; that an export duty of 2 per cent is imposed on the return cargo, which cannot be countervailed in the United States; that vessels, arriving at a bad market, have, at times, not been allowed to seek a better, unless by a double payment of duties; while British vessels from the West Indies, seeking a favourable sale for their cargoes, may run along the whole coast of the United States, from New Orleans to Eastport; that onerous and heavy duties, and colonial fees, are exacted, amounting, as it is stated, in some instances, on small lumber-loaded vessels, to the value of the cargo-the latter of which is corroborated, in a degree, by Mr. Huskisson, in his speech in parliament, in March of the last year, in which he mentions the liability to abuse, and vexation, of the practices in this particular; and states that, in many instances, the fees alone, which are exacted upon a ship and cargo, amount to much more than all the public duties; and that important discriminating duty is imposed in the West-India market, on the flour, the bread, the stuffs, and the lumber of the United States, over that which is paid on the same articles when received from Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick; and which amounting, in many instances, to a full freight, VOL. LXVIII.

gives a decisive advantage to importations from the latter.

And although it is to be admitted, that some of these regulations are of a character so municipal as not to be legitimate objects of complaint, in reference to an international intercourse: yet they nevertheless do, in fact, contravene that just reciprocity on which it was to be presumed it would be the desire of both parties to place the trade between them.

While the British government, on this part, contends, as it is understood, that it is justified in requiring an abrogation of the discriminating duties, in consequence of its having partially opened its colonial ports for the importation of a limited number of articles from the United States; and that it has a right to make any municipal or local regulations it pleases. And, among others, that of admitting, free of duty, the produce of its colonies, however remotely situated, while it imposes an impost on articles of the same description from other countries; but allowing some plausibility to this reasoning, it is to be recollected, that the question at issue, between the two countries, is not so much one of abstract right, as of equality and reciprocity in entering into a commercial arrangement intended to promote the mutual advantage of both parties.

The foregoing present a brief synopsis of the measures which have been adopted since the year 1815, by the United States and Great Britain, relative to trade with the British colonies, and of the present state of it.

The recommendation of the memorialists now is that the discriminating duties still imposed on I*

British vessels and merchandize from those colonies should be immediately abolished; and that British vessels, coming from whencesoever they may, and with whatsoever loaded, should be admitted into the ports of the United States, on the same terms as the vessels and cargoes of the most favoured nations.

The effect of which the committee believe would be summarily to yield to Great Britain all she could ask, without any equivalent accommodation being granted on her part. For, to admit British vessels indiscriminately into the ports of the United States, with their cargoes, from whencesoever arriving, or of whatsoever composed, on the same terms as our own vessels or those of the most favoured nations, which would be the same thing, while she allows the admission of American vessels into her ports only partially, for certain prescribed articles, and those limited to the growth, produce or manufacture of the United States, and to a manifest disadvantage, when compared with the like and the principal articles which she wants, when from elsewhere imported into the colonial ports, would operate as a surrender of the principle of equality, and a withdrawal from the control of the government of the United States, of the means it possesses of leading to a better and more desirable, because more equal, state of intercourse between the two countries.

From this view of the subject, and a cursory reference to the numerous acts which have been passed in relation to it, during the last ten years, both by the United States, and by Great Britain, evidence will at once be furnished of the complexity of the interests

connected with it, of the difficulty satisfactorily to arrange them, and especially of the inefficacy of isolated legislation for the attainment of this international object; and also affording, as the committee cannot but believe, a strong ground of preference for an arrangement being effected, if practicable, by á convention between the two governments, on a just and liberal basis, which, when agreed to, would be permanent and unalterable for the term of its duration, rather than to rely on detached, independent substantive acts of legislation, which, however well intended, are sometimes ambiguous, and liable to misconstruction by those who are called to administer them; and at all times, subject to revocation by the parties enacting them.

Of the inconvenience and inexpediency of substituting which the memorialists themselves furnish a strong proof in point, by the statement they make in their memorial, of the British ports of Halifax in Nova Scotia, and St. John's in New Brunswick, which were opened for the admission of vessels of the United States, by an act of parliament, of June 24, 1822, having, in January last, suddenly, and without notice, been closed against vessels of the United States in midwinter and on an extremely hazardous and inclement coast, under the construction of an act of parliament, of July, 1825, and which construction is now admitted, even by the British authorities themselves, to have been erroneous.

From all these views, which might be extended, and, from the committee having reason to believe that an adjustment of the commercial intercourse between the United States and the British colonial possessions, forms one of the special