« PrejšnjaNaprej »
great principles of humanity and civilization, which fall little short of necessity of the most rigid kind) to rescue a population in that unfortunate condition from suffering or death. All are at liberty to forego the temporary advantages, that this lamentable state of things offers. But there seems to be some equity, or reason in requiring, that a trade, occasionally of the greatest importance to the islands themselves, should be accompanied with a benefit and security of a less precarious and even capricious character to the people, that can alone conduct it. In a practical view it is the more remarkable, that the Netherlands should hold to a colonial monopoly with so much earnestness, as the commerce of the kingdom is now confined chiefly to a traffic in foreign products and manufactures.
Alexander H. Everett, of Massachusetts, was left a chargé d'affaires at the Hague by Mr. Eustis, who returned in 1821 to this country. The commercial treaty of 1822, was not renewed by the American minister, but an arrangement, equally beneficial, though of a less permanent character, was effected by means of corresponding municipal regulations. In October 1816, the Netherlands adopted the terms offered by the countervailing duty law of March 1815, to which we have already referred, and in all imposts and tonnage charges, placed the trade of this country on a footing of equality and reciprocity. But as the act of March 1815 repealed only the impost on merchandise under certain circumstances, the United States, in order to establish on their part a more perfect equality and reciprocity, in April 1818, removed, also, the tonnage charge in regard to Netherlands ships. Matters remained in this state till the autumn of 1822, when the Netherlands government, either perceiving that the carrying trade from their ports was falling into foreign hands, or not deriving equal advantages with the Unit. ed States from the system of reciprocity, in consequence of the circumstance, that most of their exportations consisted of articles, not the produce or manufacture of their own country, in favour of which only our countervailing duties were rescinded, published a new tariff of duties, which, among other things, provided, that "one tenth of the duties, paid upon the importation or exportation of all goods, shall be returned, when the same are imported, or exported in Dutch vessels." It is unnecessary to say, that this provision was a direct bounty on Dutch navigation, and as direct an encroachment on the system of equality and reciprocity, though the minister, M. de Nagell was not disposed to affix to it that interpretation.
6 By the laws of 121h June 1321 and 10th August last, the duties remain without distinction the same for foreign ships and for national. This restitution of a tenth for merchandise, imported by the ships of the Netherlands, has done no more (as the 11th article of the law of the 12th July 1821, expresses it) than to give encouragement and proper aid to the works of the nation. This restitution, therefore, supplies the place of the premiums of encouragement, which the government might have granted to every ship, built in the Netherlands, a disposition, which certainly never could have given room to the American government to complain of an inequality of treatment in respect to their ships. If the government of the United States had found it good to grant a similar premium to the Anierican ships, surely the King could have found in that no cause of remonstrance. His Majesty would have only seen in il a bounty, intended 10 encourage or favour the manufactures of the nation."
The act of January 7, 1824, in anticipation of the restoration of countervailing duties, on the part of foreign nations, with whom the principle of reciprocity was not secured by treaty, gave full authority to the President to withdraw by proclamation from the navigation of countries, adopting that course, the privileges and advantages, conferred by the acts of March 1815 and April 1818. But as the Netherlands government maintained, in its correspondence on the subject, that the ten per cent. bounty of August 1822 was solely intended to encourage national ship building, and, by no means, to affect the tonnage or impost charges on exportations or importations, and, as the act of January 1814, did not, in precise terms, invest the executive with power to determine what should be considered a revival of countervailing duties on the part of a foreign nation to the disadvantage of the United States, a doubt arose, whether the inequality, created by the Netherlands tariff, could be counteracted by the retaliatory provisions of that law. The matter was, therefore, referred to the consideration of Congress, and a law was passed, which inet the difficulty.
In March 1825, John Hughes was appointed a chargé d'affaires to the Hague, having been transferred from Stockholm,—the only change or incident that has occurred in the relations with the Netherlands to the present hour. That government has been represented in this country since 1826 by the Chevalier C. D. E. I. Bangeman Huygens, an envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary. In the years 1819 and 1824, the Viscount de Quabeck and the Baron Heeckeren were respectively accredited as chargés.
* In 1815, an arrangement was completed at Vienna, for the establishment of a Germanic Confederation, consisting of sovereign princes and free cities, and including, with some slight exceptions, the whole of the ancient German empire. The emperor of Austria is the first member of the confederation in point of territory, revenues and population. There are four free cities, Frankfort, Lubeck, Bremen and Hamburgh, formerly members of the celebrated Hanseatic League. The diet of this confederation is holden at Frankfort; and the object of it is stated to be the security, both foreign and domestic, of Germany in general and the independence and sovereignty of each individual state. With the free cities, that have navigation, this country has been engaged several years in an occasional negotiation for the purpose of introducing the modern principle of commercial reciprocity. And within the last twelve months an arrangement, to this effect, has been concluded. In June of this year, the ratifications of a treaty with Hamburgh, Bremen and Lubeck, were exchanged at Washington. There is nothing in the negotiation, which requires that a minute account should be given of it, nor in the treaty, that will render any thing more than an abstract, necessary.
“ This treaty provides that all produce, manufactures, or merchandise, of any foreign country, which may lawfully be imported into the territories of either party, in its own vessels, may also be imported in vessels of the other, without payment of any higher duties. The same provision is made with regard to exportation and reexportation.Bounties, duties and drawbacks, as well as port charges, are to be the same on the vessels of both parties.
« Neither party is to impose on the importation or exportation of any article the produce of the other, any higher or other duties than on the like article from or to any other foreign country; nor shall any prohibition be imposed, not extending equally to all other nations.
“ No preference shall be given, by either of the parties, in the purchase of the produce of one, brought into the ports of the other, on account of the character of the vessel in which it was imported.
“ A vessel, owned exclusively by citizens of either of the three Hanseatic cities, the master being a citizen of either, and three-fourths of the crew citizens of any of the said cities, or of the states of the German confederation, shall be considered as belonging to Lubeck, Bremen or Hamburgh.
“ Any such vessel, with her cargo, coming from either of the said ports to the United States, shall be deemed to have cleared from the republic to which she belongs ; and any vessel of the United States, trading to the said ports directly, or in succession, shall be on the footing of a Hanseatic vessel making the same voyage.
All merchants, commanders of ships, and other citizens of either party, shall be free to manage their own business in the ports and places belonging to the other; to be treated as citizens of the republic in which they reside, or at least placed on a footing with the citizens or subjects of the most favoured nation.
“ Citizens of each party, within the jurisdiction of the other, shall have power to dispose of their personal goods, by sale, dovation, testament or otherwise ; and their representatives, citizens of the other party, shall succeed to the same in case of death, paying the same dues only as are required from the inhabitants. The heirs are allowed three years to dispose of real estate, if prevented, as aliens, from holding it.
" Each party engages to protect the persons and property of citizens of the other ; leaving the tribunals of justice free to them on the same terins as to its own people.
“ No particular favour, respecting commerce or navigation, shall be granted to other nations by either party that shall not immediately become common to the other, on the same terins.
“ The convention to be in force for twelve years, avd until twelve months after notice from either party of an intention to terminate it. If one or two only of the Hanseatic republics shall give or receive such notice, the treaty still to remain in force with regard to the others,"
CONVENTION OF 1824 WITH RUSSIA.
Singular controversy-Only point ever in dispute-Ukase of September
1821, claiming the North West-Letter of Russian ministerGrounds of claim— Ainericans on coast in '83—Russian titles ecamined—Discovery-Occupation— Possession --Behring--Tschirikoff - Cook-La Perouse-Dixon—Vancourre--Baranoff-No foundation for claim-Renounced by convention of 1824–Always on best terms with Russia—Very useful as mediator~No treaty of coininerce-Great tradeAnnericun and Russian ministers.
Since the general peace of Europe there has been but a single moment, when the friendly relations of the United States with Russia were interrupted, and that in a manner, so singular and unexpected, as to be attributed rather to accident, or to an ignorance of claims and boundaries, than to a settled design to encroach upon the possessions of this country. The act, also, may, in all probability, be traced to the influence of individuals, concerned in the trade of the Russian north-west. But for the proper understanding of the subject, it is necessary to place before the reader, in an authentic shape, an account of this transaction, which derives almost the whole of its importance, so far as it respects Russia, from the circumstance of its being the only cause of misunderstanding, though of a transient nature, the United States have ever had with the imperial government.
In September 1821, the Emperor Alexander issued a Ukase in the following terms:
“Sect. 1. The pursuits of commerce, whaling and fishery and of all other industry on all islands, ports and gulls, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Bebring's Straits to the 51st degree of northern Jatitude, also, from the