Opinions respecting the commercial intercourse between the United States of America, and the dominions of Great-Britain, including observations upon the necessity and importance of an American navigation act. / By a citizen of Massachusetts. ; [One line in Latin]

OPINIONS RESPECTING THE COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE BETWEEN THE Vnited States and Great-Britain.

A GREAT fundamental principle of action, applying to national intercourſe and tranſactions of every kind, whether commercial or not, is, that one nation ſhould not injure another: that national conduct ſhould, upon all occaſions, be frank and ſincere; or that whatever might be the relative power, there ſhould be no aim to over-reach, or to obtain unequal or improper advantages. The writers upon the law of nations agree in this great principle, as ſpringing from the law of nature. From whence they infer, that treaties made, and to be kept, ſhould have equality for their baſis, let what may be the ſtate and condition of the contracting parties; for as ſuperiority of power creates no obligation, or right, "ſo power or weakneſs," ſays Vattel, "does not, in this reſpect, produce any difference." Vattel, book 1. chap. 1. page 18. Equal treaties then, founded on equal rights, and conferring equal benefits, are alone obligatory by the law of nations. "Treaties equal," ſays Vattel, "are thoſe in which the contracting parties promiſe the ſame things, or things that are equivalent; or, in ſhort, that are equitably proportioned, ſo that their condition is equal. Equal treaties may be ſubdivided into as many kinds as the ſovereigns have different tranſactions between them. Thus they treat of the conditions of commerce,"Vattel, book 2. chap. 12. ſect. 172. &c. "Nations not being leſs obliged than individuals, to have regard for equity, they ought, as much as poſſible, to preſerve equality in their treaties; when, therefore, the parties are in ſuch a ſtate, as to obtain the ſame reciprocal advantages, the law of nature requires their treaties ſhould be equal, at leaſt, if there is not ſome particular reaſon to deviate from that equality, ſuch as gratitude for a former benefit,"Vattel, book 11. chap. 1 • . ſect. 17 • . &c. Unequal treaties, ſays the ſame author, are thoſe in which the allies do not promiſe the ſame things, and where the conditions of commerce, or whatever may the objects of the treaty, are unequal.

To apply the foregoing obſervations, drawn from the law of nations, to a particular article of the Britiſh treaty, to determine its meaning and conſtruction, it may not be improper, in the firſt place, to recite the 14th article of the treaty at large, and then to inquire, whether there is not ſufficient latitude, in its conſtruction, to juſtify ſuch additional regulations of commerce, as ſhall give that protection and ſupport to the commerce and navigation of the United States, which reciprocity demands.

14th ARTICLE.

There ſhall be between all the dominions of his Majeſty in Europe and the territories of the United States, a reciprocal and perfect liberty of Commerce and Navigation. The people and inhabitants of the two countries reſpectively ſhall have liberty, freely and ſecurely, and without hindrance and moleſtation, to come, with their ſhips and cargoes, to the lands, countries, cities, ports, places and rivers, within the dominions and territories aforeſaid, to enter into the ſame, to reſort and to remain and to reſide there, without any limitation of time: alſo to hire and poſſeſs houſes, and warehouſes, for the purpoſes of their commerce; and generally the merchants and traders, on each ſide, ſhall enjoy the moſt complete protection and ſecurity for their commerce; but ſubject always, as to what reſpects this article, to the Laws and Statutes of the two countries reſpectively.

If the ſtipulation of a reciprocal and perfect liberty of commerce and navigation herein made, as well as the protection and ſecurity promiſed to the merchants and traders on each ſide, is not ſufficiently explicit, when it is declared, as to what reſpects the article, to be always ſubject to the laws and ſtatutes of the two countries reſpectively; ſhould it be made a queſtion, whether a general ſtipulation, under as general an exception, as to the laws and ſtatutes of the two countries, ſhall be conſtrued to preclude the Legiſlature from making laws and ſtatutes, which are neceſſary to procure the reciprocity guarantied, or ſuch laws and ſtatutes as are founded in reciprocity and equality; and in the policy and practice of one of the contracting parties, the Britiſh? or whether it ought to be ſuppoſed, that the other contracting party (the United States) ſhould be tied down under the general ſtipulation, and not allowed to protect its citizens and commerce againſt foreign interference? or whether a perfect liberty of commerce and navigation ought to be granted on one ſide, againſt a very imperfect one on the other? or, in other words, whether the affected perfect liberty conferred by the treaty, marred by reſtrictions and prohibitions, ought to reciprocate few, or no advantages on the one hand, whilſt the moſt perfect liberty, common to every citizen of the United States, is allowed on the other, with the exception of an extra tonnage duty upon foreign veſſels, and an addition of one tenth to the amount of the impoſt accruing upon their cargoes?

If ſuch a conſtruction is admitted, there is no room left on which legiſlation can exerciſe its powers; all future laws and ſtatutes of the two countries being neceſſarily contravened. And although Britiſh merchants and traders might introduce practices injurious to the rights and intereſts of the merchants and citizens of the United States, they would not be amenable to laws made poſterior to the treaty; and of courſe there might be a ſet of foreigners, under the privileges of a general protection, committing injuries to the commerce of the country beyond the reach of legiſlative remedy.

If this conſtruction was the one deſigned, why was the exception made as to the laws and ſtatutes of the two countries? Was it to ratify and confirm Britiſh navigation acts, and the reſtrictions and prohibitions of Britiſh ſtatutes on the one ſide, and to leave no means to reciprocate ſuch diſadvantages on the other?

If this was intended, why was it not declared; and that no future laws or ſtatutes ſhould be made to limit or reſtrain the liberty therein given; in which caſe, with what view, or to what purpoſe, was the ſucceeding, the 15th article, made?

The 15th article appears to be but an exception or a proviſo to the 14th; or if it is not, it has neither meaning nor ſignification: For if the legiſlative power was to be controled, in future, by the proviſions of the preceding article, of what conſequence was it to ſtipulate, that "no other or higher duties ſhall be paid by the ſhips and merchandizes of the one party, in the ports of the other, than ſuch as are paid, by the like veſſels, on merchandize of all other nations"? or that "no other, or higher duty, ſhould be impoſed in one country, on the importation of any articles of the growth, produce or manufacture of the other, than are, or ſhall be payable (mark this expreſſion) on the importation of the like articles, being of the growth, produce or manufacture of any other foreign nation"? Or of what import are the following words? Nor ſhall any prohibition be impoſed on the exportation or importation of any article, to or from the territories of the two parties reſpectively, which ſhall not equally extend to all other nations. The reply is, that the 15th article muſt become nugatory, and be without meaning or ſignification, if the unnatural conſtruction aforementioned is admitted. The ſtipulation of the 14th article appears to guaranty a reciprocal liberty of commerce, and navigation, with protection and ſecurity to merchants and traders; but ſubject to the laws and ſtatutes of the two countries reſpectively; provided ſuch laws and ſtatutes ſhall conform to the proviſions and limitations of the 15th article. Taking the two articles together, the conſtructions harmonize, and the legiſlatures of the two countries are left only under the reſtraints of reciprocity, as to commerce and navigation; that in caſe either party ſhould think it neceſſary to reciprocate what it ſhould deem unequal, or diſadvantageous, the regulations neceſſary therefor muſt extend to every other nation. This conſtruction gives to the treaty its true meaning, and conforms to the law of nations, which exacts juſtice and equality, as the baſis of commercial and political tranſactions. It is preſumed then, that the United States have a clear, obvious right to paſs ſuch laws and ſtatutes as are neceſſary to equalize commercial advantages, and to give protection and ſecurity to their citizens againſt foreign interference.

Admitting the foregoing reaſoning to be juſt, the next inquiry which ariſes out of our ſubject, is, What regulations does reciprocity require, on our part, to place the commerce of the two countries upon that footing of equality which wiſdom on the one ſide, and a liberal policy on the other, ought to demand?

To permit commercial intercourſe to take off the ſurplus productions, beyond what are neceſſary for home conſumption, is a duty that nations owe to the welfare and happineſs of each other; and the obligation is no leſs ſtrong, that the exchanges ſhould be founded in juſtice and equity; for the moral principle of nations does not permit unequal regulations of commerce; or, at leaſt, if they are aſſumed, or procured through artifice or intrigue by the one party, it is made the duty of the other, by the law of nations, to reſiſt and to oppoſe them. In order then to examine the ſubject before us with clearneſs and preciſion, it is neceſſary to inquire, 1. What is the relative ſituation, in reſpect to commerce and navigation, ariſing out of the exiſting laws and ſtatutes of the two countries reſpectively? And 2. To ſuggeſt what meaſures are probably neceſſary to place their commerce and navigation upon the footing of reciprocal and mutual advantage.

In treating the important ſubject herein undertaken, it is proper to premiſe, that what is aimed to be eſtabliſhed, reſts as much upon facts, as deductions; upon commercial ſtatements, as political inferences. The facts depended on, are the cuſtom-houſe ſtatements of Great-Britain, and thoſe official documents, and other references, which were thought ſufficient data, on which to ground that ſyſtem of rules and regulations, by which Great-Britain is, and has been guided in her commerce with this country. A recurrence to the ſame facts and authorities, which, it is conceived, are the beſt the ſubject admits, cannot be deemed unfair, to ſhew the inequality and danger of the United States from ſuch regulations, and the neceſſity of reſiſting and oppoſing them by counter regulations.

The firſt object of inquiry herein propoſed, referring to the comparative benefits reſulting from the commercial and maritime regulations of the two countries, ſhall be conſidered under their diſtinct heads, as far as the nature of the ſubject will permit.

In the year 1783, the Britiſh Parliament, not knowing what might be the effect of the independence of the United States, in regard to the Engliſh commerce; the national reſources and credit being reduced to a low ſtate, and a general alarm being ſpread through the nation, for fear that the reſentment of this country might transfer its commerce to other channels, gave a diſcretionary power to the king, by the advice of the privy council, to adopt ſuch temporary regulations, in regard to the United States, as the intereſt of the nation, and the new ſituation of the United States, might require. Accordingly the following order of the king and council paſſed 2d of July, 1783.

At the Court of St. James's, 2d July, 1783. Preſent, the King's Moſt Excellent Majeſty in Council.

Whereas by an act of Parliament paſſed this ſeſſion, intitled, An act for preventing certain inſtruments from being required from ſhips belonging to the United States of America; and to give to his Majeſty, for a limited time, certain powers for the better carrying on trade and commerce between the ſubjects of his Majeſty's dominions, and the inhabitants of the ſaid United States, it is, amongſt other things, enacted, that during the continuance of the ſaid act, it ſhall and may be lawful for his Majeſty in council, by order or orders to be iſſued and publiſhed, from time to time, to give ſuch directions, and to make ſuch regulations, with reſpect to duties, drawbacks, or otherwiſe, for carrying on the trade and commerce between the people and territories belonging to the crown of Great-Britain, and the people and territories of the ſaid United States, as to his Majeſty in council ſhall appear moſt expedient and ſalutary, any law, uſage, or cuſtom, to the contrary notwithſtanding; his Majeſty doth therefore, by and with the advice of his privy council, hereby order and direct, that pitch, tar, turpentine, hemp, flax, maſts, yards and bowſprits, ſtaves, heading, boards, timber, ſhingles, and all other ſpecies of lumber; horſes, neat cattle, ſheep, hogs, poultry, and all other ſpecies of live ſtock and live proviſions; peas, beans, potatoes, wheat, flour, bread, biſcuit, rice, oats, barley, and all other ſpecies of grain, being the growth or production of any of the United States of America, may (until further order) be imported BY BRITISH SUBJECTS IN BRITISH BUILT SHIPS, owned by his Majeſty's ſubjects, and navigated according to law, from any port of the United States of America to any of his Majeſty's Weſt-India iſlands; and that rum, ſugar, molaſſes, coffee, cocoa-nuts, ginger and pimenta, may, until further orders, be exported BY BRITISH SUBJECTS IN BRITISH BUILT SHIPS, owned by his Majeſty's ſubjects, and navigated according to law, from any of his Majeſty's Weſt-India iſlands, to any port or place within the ſaid United States, upon payment of the ſame duties on exportation, and ſubject to the like rules, regulations, ſecurities and reſtrictions as the ſame articles by law are, or may be ſubject, and liable to, if exported to any Britiſh colony or plantation in America. And the Right Honorable the Lords Commiſſioners of his Majeſty's treaſury, and the Lords Commiſſioners of the admiralty, are to give the neceſſary directions herein, as to them may reſpectively appertain.

Signed, STEPHEN COTTRELL.The petty cuſtom of one per cent. upon alien goods was repealed, and the allowance of drawback to aliens, in certain caſes, permitted, 1784.

With reſpect to the regulations above recited, it is to be obſerved, that they were repeated the December following, and have been, from time to time, ſince continued, with little alteration in their principle, by acts which have paſſed, at every ſeſſion of Parliament, authorizing his Majeſty to make them; and they are now confirmed, with the approbation of the United States, in the ratification of the late treaty with Britain, viz. in the 14th article aforementioned, which ſubjects the liberty of commerce, therein given, "to the laws and ſtatutes of the two countries reſpectively." It is but juſtice to the treaty, however, to ſay, that the proviſions of the 12th article, which were refuſed ratification by the United States, were intended as a mitigation to the injuries and inequalities of theſe regulations. The conceſſions therein made, by the Britiſh government, although unequal to the ſacrifices, by the United States, in other parts of the treaty, might have been of ſome commercial advantage; but they were accompanied with ſuch indignities to the freedom and independence of the country, in relation to productions from the dominions of other ſtates, that they could not be accepted.

But before I proceed to obſerve upon the detail, it will be proper to make a few obſervations upon the principle of the foregoing regulations.

They hold up an important diſtinction between the European and the other dominions of Great-Britain, in the allowance of commerce with the United States. If this diſtinction was proper, why did it not go further, and extend the ſame reſtriction to Ireland, which is no more than a Britiſh colony; or to Scotland or Wales, or to all of them; for there would have been equal propriety in extending the reſtrictions further, even to all the Britiſh dominions, whether in Europe or elſewhere, which, it is believed, would have been moſt for the intereſt of the United States, as to have limited the reſtrictions to the Engliſh colonies only? In ſuch caſe, the United States would have ſeen through the equity of the regulations, and governed themſelves accordingly. As well might the United States ſay, that liberty of commerce ſhould be granted to the ſubjects of Great-Britain, except with Virginia, South-Carolina and Georgia, and with them, ſo far as to permit the citizens of the United States to tranſport tobacco, rice, and naval ſtores to Great-Britain, if ſhipped in American bottoms, with liberty to import into thoſe ſtates, in like bottoms, Engliſh manufactures, with the exception of woolen cloths, cottons, and ſome other principal Britiſh merchandizes, which ſhould be totally prohibited.

Whenever a nation ſets up a principle of action, as a rule of commercial or political conduct, which is to operate upon the commerce or policy of other nations, it is becoming, that it ſhould regard juſtice and equity, in relation to ſuch nations with which ſhe has political or commercial tranſactions. It is not ſufficient for a nation to ſay, that ſhe has colonies, which, becauſe ſhe has planted, ſhe will wantonly exclude from other nations, and monopolize to herſelf their commerce and labour: nor is it ſufficient, that this principle be fortified by the uſages and practices of nations; or that Grotius, Puffendorf, Burlamaqui, and Vattel, implicitly or explicitly juſtify it. Two conſiderations, in their nature previous to the adoption of ſuch a rule, enter into its exerciſe, and ought to make its principle; the firſt is, whether it is for the beſt intereſt of the parent ſtate as connected with the leaſt injury to the inhabitants of her colonies: and the ſecond, whether it is for her beſt intereſt as connected with thoſe advantages ſhe derives from the commerce of other ſtates. Admitting the right of monopoly over colonies, in the moſt extenſive ſenſe that protection and power can give it, it does not follow, that the inhabitants of colonies have no claim upon the parent ſtate, from ſituation and humanity, from circumſtances and expedients, in procuring their own welfare, with the objects of their eſtabliſhment: although the parent ſtate is ſovereign, and colonies ſhould be ſubordinate; and ſhould produce, ſay indefeaſible right, on the one ſide; and abſolute ſubmiſſion on the other; yet unneceſſary and cruel deprivations cannot be juſtified under ſuch a claim. Their circumſtances and ſituation, their internal and external relations, muſt produce a choice of means, which muſt deſignate the wiſdom, juſtice and policy of the meaſures purſued. To ſay then, that colonies have no rights, but ſuch as are abſorbed in the mere will of the metropolitan ſtate, is abſurd: nor leſs ſo, would it be to ſay, that it would be always for the intereſt of the metropolitan ſtate to exclude foreigners from a participation in its colonial commerce; for ſuch a regulation ſhould ariſe rather from policy than right, and muſt depend upon the liquidation of advantages and diſadvantages, in its commerce with other ſtates: if the right is aſſumed, the policy may be denied, and the metropolitan ſtate may become the loſer from its aſſumption. In ſuch caſe, it had been better to have adhered to the policy, rather than the right. The concurrence, then, of both the one, and the other, muſt be brought into view, to determine the fitneſs and propriety of ſuch commercial regulations. The right then reſts preciſely upon the ſame footing, which every independent country poſſeſſes, of regulating its own commerce, to extend, to limit, or totally to prohibit it, with foreign nations, leaving the ſame right to the nation affected by ſuch regulations, which muſt, of neceſſity, at length reduce the right to a mere queſtion of policy.

Let us examine then, whether right and policy concur, in the preſent caſe, to juſtify Great-Britain in excluding the citizens of the United States from a participation in the commerce and navigation of her Weſt-India iſlands, admitting the right and power of retaliation in the United States, which ſhall hereafter be ſhewn.

Whenever we reflect upon what was the relative ſituation of the United States and the Engliſh Weſt-India colonies, that we were the offspring of the ſame parent, eſtabliſhed and protected by the ſame power, and nouriſhed and cheriſhed for the ſame purpoſe, viz. the aggrandizement of the Britiſh empire; without entering into the diſputes which brought on the American revolution; ſuffice it to ſay, that there was, before the revolution, a cloſe, intimate and beneficial commercial connection, which ſubſiſted between the Engliſh Weſt-India iſlands and the now United States. Mutual wants and conveniences were its foundation, which contributed not leſs to the growth and proſperity of the then reſpective colonies, than to the opulence and grandeur of the mother country.

To ſever and cut off a commercial intercourſe, ſpringing from ſituation, interwoven by habit, and cemented by ſo many ties of intereſt and convenience, ought to be juſtified by arguments of more ſolidity than the independence of the United States, or the mere right of monopoly over the trade and produce of colonies.

It is admitted, that the citizens of the two countries, by the ſovereignty and independence of the United States, became aliens to each other, and that each country poſſeſſed, in a ſenſe, the right of limiting, reſtricting, or prohibiting its commerce, as it might deem beſt; yet, when a narrow, illiberal policy, bottomed upon reſentment and diſappointment, rather than its real intereſt, or the convenience or advantage of its colonies, became adopted into a ſyſtem of commercial regulations, ſuch a conduct, if proved, muſt deſerve reprobation and reproach, and in the end will produce defenſory meaſures, which ſhall requite their injuſtice. Several of the ſtates, in the year 1784, in their individual capacities, as well as the Engliſh Weſt-India merchants and planters, made ineffectual efforts to procure the repeal of theſe offenſive regulations. The latter, that is, the Engliſh merchants and planters, petitioned the Engliſh parliament, pointing out the injurious conſequences of the regulations of commerce to the Weſt-India iſlands; that they were founded in ill policy and reſentment, and would induce a retaliation on the part of the United States. The ſtates of Virginia, New-York, New-Jerſey, and Maryland, paſſed reſolutions upon the ſubject, conſidering them as aggreſſions upon the commerce of the ſtates, and ſtrongly recommending countervailing reſtrictions. The ſtate of Maſſachuſetts paſſed a navigation act, with an expectation it would have been followed by ſimilar acts from the other ſtates, which was to have been in force until Congreſs ſhould have been empowered to regulate trade: but it not being ſeconded by any other ſtate than Rhode-Iſland, it was repealed, for the want of a more general concurrence. Thus ended the prophecies of retaliation by Engliſh writers, and Weſt-India planters; and thus became fruitleſs, the individual attempts of ſeveral of the ſtates to remedy the injuries and cruelties of theſe pernicious regulations of commerce.

Mankind don't adminiſter to the rights of others ſo much from duty as from fear; it is by retaliation, that nations muſt make their rights and intereſts reſpected, when they are infringed. The United States, untaught by experience, and not having provided againſt the evils, which awaited their independence, for ſix years were laid under Britiſh commercial bondage, and patiently ſuffered their navigation, commerce, and manufactures, to be almoſt cut up by the roots, for the want of thoſe defenſory reſtrictions, which were neceſſary to their protection. Theſe injuries, ſenſibly as they were felt, had their attendant benefits; they afforded an inſtructive leſſon to the honeſt unſuſpecting politics of our country. Great-Britain, under the deceitful appearance of tendering to us the liberal hand of friendſhip and reconciliation, at the eſtabliſhment of peace, diſarmed us of our prudence; and, by her commercial arrangements, even put to hazard the very independence for which we had contended, and achieved. The ſeveral ſtates ſaw the evil, which was ſapping their beſt intereſts, jealous of their ſovereignties, and diſtracted by oppoſing ſentiments, from the defect of the old organization of Congreſs; and from the neceſſity of a power to regulate commerce, the great actuating motive for the adoption of a Federal Conſtitution, the now Conſtitution of the United States became accepted, and approved by the people, truſting, that its reſult would produce a conduct from Great-Britain more conſonant to equity, and to thoſe advantages ſhe was daily deriving from the commerce of the United States. But Engliſh miniſters, hitherto knowing the influence of language, habits, manners, faſhions, and credits; knowing the difficulties and embarraſſments attendant on the altering of old channels of commerce; knowing her power to circumſcribe her own markets, whilſt ours were open to her manufactures; knowing the prejudicies and jealouſies ſubſiſting between the ſeveral ſtates, ſhe has even procured a preference in our own ports, through her merchants and factors, for the employment of her ſhips and veſſels, to thoſe of the United States: and the United States, for ſeveral years, exhibited a ſituation as novel as it was abſurd; foreign ſhips and veſſels finding in our ports ample and ready freights, whilſt thoſe of the United States, circumvented by Britiſh reſtrictions, were rotting at our wharves, for want of employ.

It is by the ſettled tendency of meaſures, rather than by profeſſions and declarations, that we muſt judge of the friendſhip or enmity of nations: we need not recur, for inſtance, to the hiſtories of either France or England, to know their enmity and hatred to each other: a recurrence to their laws, and to their rules of commerce, will ſufficiently diſcover their paſſions and reſentments, perhaps more ſtrongly than the hiſtory of their battles. Accident, miſtake, or occurrences, from a thouſand circumſtances, might produce temporary hoſtilities; but in the ſettled rules and regulations of their general and commercial policy, their hatred, their malice, and their rivalries, will be more fully deſignated: in like manner, if we recur to the Engliſh regulations of commerce, adopted towards this country, in the face of the petitions and remonſtrances of the moſt reſpectable Engliſh merchants and Weſt-India planters, to point to their leading motives, we cannot doubt, that extreme ſelfiſhneſs, and a marked reſentment againſt the United States generally, and the New-England ſtates in particular, for their manly conduct in the revolution, were the chief objects and end of their policy. Circumſtanced and ſituated as the New-England States particularly were, at the cloſe of the war, can the narrow, ſelfiſh, bigoted policy of a Britiſh miniſter be juſtified in denouncing their navigation, fiſheries, and commerce, by the moſt ſudden, cruel and oppreſſive regulations? Is it poſſible, that the New-England ſtates can have witneſſed the tendency of ſuch meaſures, and obſerve them continued and perſiſted in, and yet be taught, as ſome amongſt us affect to inſtruct us, that an Engliſh alliance ought to be courted and preferred to all others? if alliances with reſtrictions and prohibitions ought to be courted; if they are marks of friendſhip, a New-Englandman might well aſk, what are indications of enmity, ſhort of open hoſtility? whilſt he will apoſtrophize and ſay, From ſuch friendſhip, and ſuch regulations of commerce, good Lord deliver us!

But as it would be unwarrantable, and it is not my intention, to miſrepreſent, either the deſigns or the policy of the Britiſh government, it is fitting that the facts and ſtatements, on which the foregoing ſuggeſtions are grounded, ſhould be laid before the public.

1. The citizens of the United States and their veſſels were excluded commercial intercourſe with the Britiſh Weſt-India iſlands, whereby the employment of above thirty thouſand tons of American ſhipping was totally interdicted, beſides the diſadvantage of a great diminution, both in the vent of American productions, and in the ſupply of thoſe of the Weſt-Indies, which aroſe from confining the carrying trade, in both directions, to Engliſh veſſels.

2. The following important articles of the produce of the United States, particularly thoſe of the New-England ſtates, were totally prohibited to be imported into the Engliſh Weſt-India colonies, either in Britiſh or American bottoms, viz. beef, pork, ſalted fiſh, whale oil, ſpermaceti candles, &c. whereby the New-England ſtates ſuſtained an annual loſs of vent or market for upwards of fifteen thouſand barrels of beef and pork, two hundred and thirty thouſand quintals of fiſh, about five hundred tons of whale oil, which, with the other articles of the growth and produce of the United States annually ſhipped to the Engliſh Weſt-Indies, amounted, by the Britiſh accounts, to not leſs than a million ſterling, which not only ſupplied them with the produce of the Engliſh iſlands, viz. with three million ſix hundred thouſand gallons of Weſt-India rum, three thouſand hogſheads, fifteen hundred tierces and four thouſand barrels of ſugar, one hundred and fifty thouſand gallons of molaſſes, with coffee to the amount of £50,000 ſterling; cocoa, mahogany plank, pimenta, ginger, cotton wool, fuſtick, logwood, and lignum-vitae, to the amount of £. 60,000 ſterling, beſides a balance in caſh of £.240,000 ſterling.See Brian Edwards's pamphlet, reſpecting the trade of the Weſt-India iſlands with the United States.

It was natural for the unſuſpecting politics of the United States to ſuppoſe that Great-Britain had ſo much to gain, by permitting their commerce to take its old channels, and in the end, ſo much to loſe, if they would not permit it, that the general balance of the whole trade was ſo much to the advantage of Great-Britain, by receiving an annual balance from the United States of above ſix hundred thouſand pounds ſterling, beſides the immenſe advantage ariſing from the freightage of the produce of the United States, that ſhe would not, under ſuch circumſtances, aim to proſcribe her markets to American veſſels; nor to carry into effect againſt them, her illiberal ſyſtem of reſtrictions and prohibitions upon foreigners, and foreign veſſels, to the diſadvantage of any particular part of the commerce of the United States, eſpecially of the New-England ſtates: but in this, the United States have found themſelves deceived, and Great-Britain has hitherto been able to ſupport her narrow, ſelfiſh ſyſtem of commercial regulations, unretaliated by the United States, through her machinations and intrigues, in the government of the United States.

But the neceſſity of reviſing the commercial ſyſtem of the United States does not reſt, merely, upon the Engliſh colonial arrangements, but muſt be conſidered in connection with her European ſyſtem of commercial policy; and in relation to the diſtinctions and diſabilities, which the laws of England impoſe, between foreigners and Britiſh ſubjects.

Although merchant ſtrangers enjoy important privileges in England, compared with thoſe of ſome other countries of Europe, except Holland; that when friends, they have a conſtitutional right of reſidence, and a legal protection to their perſons and properties, extending even to the right of holding real eſtate, when not to their own uſe, they are ſtill under numerous diſabilities, and ſubject to peculiar impoſitions, which, although leſſening, ſays Judge Blackſtone, "from the commercial intereſt and policy of the nation," yet they create important diſtinctions between natives and foreigners, to the benefit of the one, and to the prejudice of the other. To theſe impoſitions, numerous as they are, ſay Britiſh miniſters, the citizens of the United States became ſubject from their independence! and what rendered them the more injurious, was, that they had been the ground, and reaſon, on which the commerce of the United States had, in many caſes, been predicated. A conſpicuous example of the fact herein ſtated, well known to the people of New-England, is the alien duty of £.18-3 ſterling per ton on foreign train oil, originally intended, as it now continues to be, a prohibition upon its importation into England; whereby the employment of one hundred and thirty ſail of our veſſels, or thirteen thouſand tons of ſhipping, in our whale fiſhery, was laid under ſuch embarraſſments, that it became nearly ruined before other channels of vent could be found To preſerve the whale fiſhery of Maſſachuſetts from total ruin, the ſtate of Maſſachuſetts, in the year 1785, was obliged to grant the following bounties upon whale oil, viz. on white ſpermaceti oil, five pounds per ton; yellow ditto, three pounds; and common whale oil, 40 ſhillings per ton; which were continued until the 1ſt of December, 1787: and on which were paid £. 10,293-3-10 Maſſachuſetts currency.; and it has not, even at this period, arrived at its uſual ſtate of proſperity; not now employing more than forty ſhips of two hundred tons, or eight thouſand tons of ſhipping; in conſequence of which, a remittance of one hundred and fifty thouſand pounds ſterling in train oil, to pay for Britiſh manufactures, allowed free entry, was at once interdicted, and the country reduced to the neceſſity of finding therefor other means of payment.

Upon the ſame principle, American built ſhips were prohibited ſale in Britiſh ports; or, what was the ſame thing, the prohibitions and reſtrictions of the Engliſh navigation act deſtroyed the Engliſh market for the ſale of American built veſſels, which, before the revolution, Great-Britain had been in the habit of purchaſing, deriving, at leaſt, two fifths of her ſhips and veſſels from the built of America, amounting to about two hundred and ten thouſand tons, which, if renewed every ſeven years, the time allowed, by Britiſh accounts, for the duration of American built veſſels, an annual vent for thirty thouſand tons of ſhipping became loſt to the United States; which, if calculated at ſix pounds ſterling per ton, including their ſails and rigging, without reckoning their freight to England, amounted to one hundred and eighty thouſand pounds ſterling. If we add to theſe injurious diſtinctions, the numerous reſtraints upon aliens, who may reſide in England, for the purpoſe of carrying on commerce, (the particulars of which may be ſeen by recurring to the Engliſh rate books), we ſhall find, that the privileges granted, by the 14th article of the Britiſh treaty, to the citizens of the United States, unleſs counter reſtrictions and prohibitions are adopted, can bear no compariſon with the privileges conferred upon Britiſh ſubjects, reſiding in this country, independent of the reſtraints of the Engliſh navigation act, of which I ſhall take more particular notice hereafter.

1. Engliſh merchants are allowed to import into England, many articles of merchandize, which are not permitted to merchant ſtrangers.

2. Numerous articles of merchandize are not permitted to be uttered or ſold, either by foreigners or Britiſh ſubjects.

3. The excluſive privileges given to particular trading companies, ſuch as the Eaſt-India Company, the Turkey Company, the Hudſon-Bay Company, &c. are further reſtraints upon the liberty of commerce.

4. The prohibitions upon the exportation of raw materials, ſuch as gold, ſilver, iron, braſs, copper, lattin, bell metal, pan metal, gun metal, ſhruff metal, tallow and raw hides, unwrought horns, wool, woolfelts, mortlings, fuller's clay, pipe clay, and many other articles, the baſes of manufactures, are among the reſtraints upon commerce.

5. The qualified prohibition upon the following articles, which are only allowed to be exported when under a given price, or value, at the place of exportation, viz. gun-powder, wheat, rye, barley, malt, oats, beef, pork, butter, &c. under the expreſs exception, that when allowed, are only permitted to be exported in Britiſh bottoms.

6. The abſolute prohibition, upon the importation of moſt articles of manufactures from foreign countries, and of courſe, upon thoſe of the United States, ſuch as woolen cloths, ſhoes, goloſhoes, hats, wool cards, &c. ſome of which might be very advantageouſly exported from this country to England.

7. The importation into England of beef, pork, cattle, ſheep, fiſh, &c. important articles of export from the New-England ſtates, are deemed a public nuiſance, and are forfeited if offered for ſale.

8. Double light money and trinity duties of 1ſ9 ſterling per ton on foreign veſſels, except to the port of London.

9. The alien duties of ſcavage, package, and porterage, paid to the corporation of London, and to other cities in England, on goods exported therefrom.

There are no leſs than nine diſtinct tables of prohibited articles in the Engliſh rate books, each containing a long liſt thereof, under the diſtinct heads of, 1. Goods prohibited to be imported into, or exported from Great-Britain. 2. Goods prohibited to be imported for ſale. 3. Goods prohibited to be imported without licenſe from his Majeſty. 4. Goods prohibited to be imported for ſale, unleſs made and wrought in Ireland. 5. Goods prohibited for ſale by ſtrangers, or aliens. 6. Goods prohibited, appertaining to particular crafts. 7. Ditto, except in particular weights, packages, or under other reſtrictions. 8. Goods prohibited to be exported. 9. Qualified prohibitions upon wheat, &c. as before ſtated.

In ſhort, to enumerate the invidious diſtinctions between Engliſh ſubjects and foreigners, in relation to commercial advantages in Great-Britain, would be to tranſcribe ſome pages, at leaſt, from their Engliſh rate books; and to take up more time and attention than is neceſſary for the preſent purpoſe: ſufficient is it to ſay, that the acts and ſtatutes of the Engliſh Parliament are well calculated to procure to the Engliſh merchants, the factorage upon foreign merchandizes, to exclude foreigners from participation in any of the advantages of her internal commerce, and to ſecure her markets, excluſively, to her own citizens, againſt foreign interference, by prohibiting ſuch articles of foreign growth or manufacture, which interferes with her own. It is by recurring to the principles of theſe laws, and by carrying them into practice, that the United States will be able to obtain, promote, and ſecure their own proſperity, and at the ſame time, to retaliate the diſadvantages they experience, from the ſelfiſh, commercial policy of Great-Britain.

If what has been already ſuggeſted, does not fully ſtate the principles of the Engliſh regulations of commerce; if the details produced, do not corroborate thoſe principles, nor ſatisfactorily evince their injuſtice, and inequality, the annual balance of trade, in favour of Great-Britain, will give force to their tendency, and muſt convince every unprejudiced mind, that means more effectual, than thoſe already deviſed, are neceſſary to place the commerce of the two countries upon a more equal footing than the one on which it now ſtands.

If there is a principle of commercial intercourſe, which can neither be controverted by argument, nor denied with reaſon; if there is a predominating maxim, diſtinguiſhed as a juſt rule of commercial tranſaction; it is, that a commerce is beneficial, or pernicious, in proportion to the balances paid and received by the reſpective countries carrying it on. The commercial intercourſe between England and Ruſſia, for example, has been the theme of much Engliſh Parliamentary diſcuſſion, if not of political lamentation and grief, in conſequence of the annual balance of half a million ſterling, paid in favour of Ruſſia,

Balance of trade in favour of Ruſſia, againſt Great-Britain, in the year 1749, was 1,012,209 rubles, at 4ſ2 each, £.256,950-16-8 ſterling. In the year 1773, the balance was 653,983-17-2 do. — 1785, ditto, 1,372,689-16-0 do.

See Anderſon on Commerce, vol. 3. p. 275; vol. 4. p. 604. by the imports therefrom exceeding the exports thereto, by that ſum. The annual balance of two hundred and forty thouſand pounds ſterling,See Brian Edwards's pamphlet on the commerce of the United States with the Engliſh Weſt-India iſlands. in favour of the United States, in their commercial intercourſe with the Engliſh Weſt-Indies, was taken SINGLY, by the Engliſh miniſter, to determine the policy, of prohibiting and reſtricting the commerce of the United States to thoſe iſlands; although, if taken collectively, into one comprehenſive and liberal view, the conceſſion of the Weſt-India trade, and many others, in the European, would have been proper, on the part of Great-Britain; and even then, would not have been equivalent to the immenſe advantages ſhe derives from the commerce of the United States. Commerce is the interchange of the products of one country, for thoſe of another; the advantages are reciprocal, when the one receives as much of the other, as it gives of its own products in exchange; but if the exchanges are unequal, in proportion to their exceſs, they become beneficial to the one, and injurious to the other. From hence ariſe the advantages or diſadvantages of the balance of trade, which, if inſidiouſly or artfully procured on the one ſide, ought to be retaliated and counteracted on the other.

Among the ſeveral means which have been ſuggeſted, to aſcertain the balance of trade, between countries having commercial intercourſe, two ways ſeem to have a preference; although theſe are not without their objections; the one is, by cuſtom-houſe dockets; the other, by the price and value of bills of exchange. It appears, by the Engliſh ſtatement of imports and exports for the year 1773, that there was paid, by the United States to Great-Britain, a balance of £.610,184-12-5 ſterling; viz.

1773. Imports. Exports. New-England, £. 124,624-19-6 £. 527,055-15-10 New-York, 76,246-12-0 289,214-19-07 Pennſylvania, 36,652-08-9 426,448-17-03 Virginia & Maryland, 589,803-14-5 328,904-15-08 Carolina, 456,513-08-4 344,859-09-01 Georgia, 85,391-01-8 62,932-19-08 1,369,232-04-8 1,979,416-17-01 Deduct 1,369,232-04-08 Balance £. 610,184-12-05

See Anderſon on commerce, vol. 4, p. 170.

The cuſtom-houſe dockets of the United States, allowing no frauds to have been committed upon the revenue, by evading the duties upon importation, (a circumſtance almoſt impoſſible to ſuppoſe), the balance of trade in favour of Great-Britain, the year preceding the 30th of Sept. 1790, was 5,922,012 dollars; the whole amount of the exports to the Britiſh dominions, having been 9,363,416 dollars; and the imports therefrom, 15,285,428 dollars

With reſpect to the rates of exchange between the two countries, they have been corroborative of the balance of trade being againſt the country, which have varied from two to nine per cent. above par; as will appear by the ſchedule, herewith annexed, which has been taken from the books of perſons, who have been in regular habits of purchaſing, and remitting bills of exchange, ſince the year 1783, for the purpoſe of paying for Britiſh manufactures.

SCHEDULE of the Rates and Value of Bills of Exchange, at ſixty Days' Sight, drawn upon London, ſince the American Revolution, viz. 1783. November, 2 per cent. above par. 1784. May, 2 do. do. November, 4½ do. do. 1785. May, 2 do. do. November, 6 do. do. 1786. May, 3 do. do. November, 4 do. do. 1787. May, 4½ do. do. November, 4½ do. do. 1788. May, 4½ do. do. November, 4½ do. do. 1789. May, 4½ do. do. November, 4½ do. do. 1790. May, 3½ do. do. November, 3½ do. do. 1791. May, 4½ do. do. November, 3½ do. do. 1792. May and November, at par. 1793. May, do. November, do. 1794. May, 4 per cent. above par. November, 6 do. do. 1795. May, 9 do. do. November, 4 do. do. 1796. May, 2 do. do. November, 3½ do. do.

It is obſerved, that much is to be inferred from the ſtate and condition of the people, in relation to the general balance of trade; See Anderſon on commerce. if the people are generally employed, and their affairs proſperous; if the ſeveral profeſſions and callings find ready vent for their labour, that ſuch circumſtances are a ſtrong ſymptom of a favourable balance: but this is a ſuggeſtion very little to be depended on, as it has applied to the United States, ſince the adoption of the Federal Conſtitution; for the renovation of public credit, by funding the debts of the United, and of the individual ſtates, produced ſuch an effect, by the introduction of near eighty millions of dollars into circulation, that the relation of perſonal to real property became ſuddenly altered, and thereby the means of induſtry extended, and the value of lands and other property greatly enlarged; but theſe circumſtances were no evidence of a more favourable commercial relation to foreign nations; for the increaſe of wealth did not ſpring from induſtry, nor from new improvements in arts, manufactures, or commerce, but from the eſtabliſhment of public credit, of banks, and from the creating of artificial capitals, on which were predicated ſome uſeful ſchemes, but many pernicious ſpeculations, injurious to commerce, manufactures and agriculture; and has hitherto added little or nothing to the advantage, or independence of the country, in relation to foreign nations. But when we have had ſo unfavourable a balance, ſo immenſe in its amount, when applied to Great-Britain, that the demand for Britiſh manufactures, inſtead of relaxing, has acquired force, from our commercial policy: that the manufactures, which had grown up under the reſtrictions and prohibitions of the ſeveral ſtates, had been gradually expiring; whereby the intermediate relations between huſbandmen and merchants have almoſt wholly ſubſided: that what had been called protecting duties, whether ariſing from inſufficiency in their execution, or inadequacy in their proviſion, had afforded neither ſecurity nor protection; or from whatever cauſe, a plain, obvious fact is manifeſt; that the manufactures of the United States are now reduced to a lower ſtate, than they have been at any former period. No doubt, ſome of thoſe inconveniences are to be attributed to the war in Europe; but it muſt be remembered, that the inconvenience, attendant on the paper ſyſtem of the United States, from the nature of it, was to reduce the value of ſpecie, by cauſing an artificial repletion; the effect of which, was to raiſe the price of labour, and of the neceſſaries of life, and of courſe to diſcourage our own manufactures, by rendering their competition more favourable to foreigners.

The fitneſs and propriety of commercial intercourſe depends on calculation, and minute inveſtigation of advantages and diſadvantages: To ſuppoſe that an object of ſuch importance ought to reſt merely on the caſual, tranſient information of the members of a Legiſlature, would ſeem improper; or, at leaſt, it has been deemed ſo, by the Britiſh nation, as long ago as Cromwell's time, (1665), when a board of commiſſioners of trade and plantations was eſtabliſhed; which, although afterwards laid down for a time, was revived in the year 1696, under the adminiſtration of King William. To this board, the Britiſh nation owes its principal commercial proſperity: its buſineſs has been, from time to time, to recommend alterations in the trade laws; to ſtate "favourable, or unfavourable balances of trade, with foreign nations; and to receive propoſals for the caſe and improvement of navigation, manufactures, and commerce." By the conſtitution of the board, it was to conſiſt of members, having a "thorough knowledge of the general ſtate, hiſtory, and intereſts of commerce. How far an eſtabliſhment of this ſort, would be worth the conſideration of our government, is not the preſent inquiry, any further than to ſhew, that the navigation, manufactures, and commerce of a country, and the placing them in a juſt relation to each other, and to foreign nations, are objects of the higheſt importance, demanding the attention of government, particularly in relation to the policy of ſuch nations, with which we have unfavourable balances.

There are writers, among whom is Mr. Hume,See 5th eſſay, vol. 2. who have ſuppoſed, that the received, if not eſtabliſhed opinions, in reſpect to balances of trade, were erroneous, and without foundation; and that ſuch balances would find their own level: that the precious metals were no other than merchandize, which would have a value with regard to commodities, or other property, in proportion to their plenty or ſcarcity: that if money was more plenty than other property, it would be of a leſs comparative value; and that if commodities, or other property, were plentier than money, that it would be of a comparative greater: that if a country had accidentally loft the greater part of its circulating medium, that the remaining quantity would ſtill be a mean of transferring property, at a proportionably leſs price: and that, therefore, a nation had nothing to do, but to attend to its induſtry, and that trade would balance itſelf. However plauſible and ſolacing this theory is, and however well intended it may have been, for the people and times in which it was ſuggeſted, the government of England never thought the principle worthy of their attention, but aims at preſerving a general balance in its favour; and conſiders every trade pernicious, which carries a balance againſt her; and the more ſo, in proportion to the increaſe of ſuch balance. Profeſſor Smith concurs, in ſome points, with Mr. Hume, in regard to balances of trade; but confeſſes, that there is a balance of produce, and conſumption, which, as it happens to be either favourable or unfavourable, neceſſarily occaſions the proſperity or decay of a nation;" "if the exchangeable value of the annual produce," ſays this excellent writer, "falls ſhort of the annual conſumption, the capital of the ſociety muſt annually decay in proportion to this deficiency. Smith on the wealth of nations, vol. 2. chap. 3d. part 2d. page 208.

But admitting Mr. Hume's poſition to be true, in an abſtract view, it does not follow, that trade ought to be left to itſelf, and to the commercial impoſitions, that other nations may put upon it; for a commercial law extends beyond the juriſdiction of the government making it: it may go to the denying, curtailing, or extending the privileges of other nations; even to the giving a preference of one nation to another. In proportion as ſuch a law limits, reſtricts, or denies commercial intercourſe to other nations, the aſſumed juriſdiction, if unretaliated, becomes pernicious and injurious. In this caſe, a commercial, may have the effect of a political law, operating either upon other nations generally, or to extend the power of one ſtate, whilſt it may be a mean of depreſſing that of another: it may give advantages, with or without receiving equivalents; it may deny benefits, when more than equivalents are beſtowed, if the nation receiving the diſadvantages, will permit them: but if the reſtrictive operation of the law ſhould be retaliated, as it ought to be, the commercial intercourſe might diminiſh, or be ſuſpended for a time, until both parties ſhould find it convenient to make mutual conceſſions. Since, by regulating trade then, it may be ſo contrived, as to produce favourable or unfavourable balances, ſo a nation, for the moſt part, paying an unfavourable balance, may moſt commonly conclude, that in caſe of its taking place, it ariſes from unjuſt and ſelfiſh trade laws in other nations, which require, and ought to be retaliated. For one of three things muſt neceſſarily reſult from an unfavourable balance of trade, when the commodities imported are conſumed, and are not re-exported. 1. The ſpecie muſt either be exported, to pay the unfavourable balance:—or, 2. it muſt be made up from the exceſs, in the commerce with other ſtates;—or, 3. it muſt remain a debt againſt the country.

With reſpect to the firſt, whatever may have been ſaid by Mr. Hume, that a circulating medium will regulate itſelf, and that no country need be apprehenſive from its exports, whilſt it has population, and the means of induſtry; yet every ſtate muſt feel apprehenſive for its ſafety and welfare, from depreciating the value of property, in relation to the precious metals, when ſuch changes are known to lay the foundations of injuſtice, and to produce diſtruſt, diſorder, and confuſion in every country. For example, we need but to retrace events a few years back, in our own country, to know the cauſe and effect of the loſs of our circulating medium. The heavy balances due to Great-Britain, from cutting off our uſual remittances, by her commercial regulations, produced the uneaſineſſes, diſtruſts, and confuſions of the year 1786. The people, who had contracted debts, and made promiſes of ſpecie at one rate of value, found themſelves utterly unable, from its undue exportation, to fulfil them at another, i. e. an enhanced one, ariſing out of its ſcarcity;—for inſtance, he who had bought a hundred buſhels of grain, and gave his note for it, at a given price, payable at an advanced period, ſay twelve months, found that it would require more than double the quantity of grain to diſcharge his note. In ſhort, ſuch were the diſorders introduced into the money tranſactions of the country, through this fertile ſource of public calamity, that public and private credit were for a long time ſuſpended, and confuſion and diſaffection to government, in ſome inſtances, grew out of the unfavourable balances of trade, grounded on Britiſh regulations of commerce.

With reſpect to the liquidating an unfavourable balance of trade with one country by a favourable one with another, it muſt be conſidered as a mean too precarious and uncertain to be calculated upon, in a ſyſtem of commercial regulations; for it cannot be expected to continue longer than until the nations, with which we have favourable balances, ſhall become apprized of their ſituation and intereſt. For inſtance; Can it rationally be expected, that France, with which we have had, before the preſent European war, a more favourable balance of trade than with any other nation, amounting to 2,068,348 dollars, will not put further reſtrictions upon our commerce, or demand an equivalent, in ſome form or other; eſpecially when ſhe finds, that the balance ſhe pays to the United States, goes to feed and to nouriſh the commerce and power of her enemy? Every nation ought, then, to expect an unequal commerce will be retaliated, and that it will be reſtricted and retrenched, as times and opportunity preſent.

Although there was a balance of trade of 235,975 dollars, in the year 1790, againſt the United States, yet it has been ſaid, that it has been ſometimes in their favour; but a little reflection upon what took place, prior to the preſent European war, will not only ſhew the ſuggeſtion unfounded; but will ſufficiently prove, that unleſs additional protection had been given to the commerce of the United States, what with the old debts due to Great-Britain, and thoſe which were daily accruing, there was much reaſon to fear, that the Engliſh commerce would, in a few years, have abſorbed the greater part, or all, of the perſonal property of the country; as the inſufficiency of the exports was made up, for ſeveral years, out of the public ſecurities, bank ſtocks, and an extenſive ſale of our wild lands in England; and although theſe operated as remittances to a vaſt amount, comprehending, as it has been ſuppoſed, one half of the national bank ſtocks, and one third, at leaſt, of the public debt of the United States; yet the concurrence of theſe circumſtances was not ſufficient to reduce the price of bills of exchange. If theſe then are facts, and that they are, a reference to people in trade, and to the rates of exchange, until the beginning of the preſent European war, will fully evince;—muſt it not, then, be a ſerious cauſe of alarm, to ſee the ſame pernicious commercial ſyſtem perſiſted in, almoſt without a ſuggeſtion, or an attempt, to retaliate the commercial policy of England? Well might the Britiſh miniſter exult, as he did, in the year 1790, that the independence of the United States had coſt nothing to Great-Britain; that ſo far from its proving an injury, it had ſaved the heavy expenſe of their protection; whilſt Great-Britain had derived greater commercial benefits, from the United States, than when they were colonies: or, in other words, that the American independence had been, and would continue, but a name, whilſt a phyſical dependence could be retained by commerce.

If the power of regulating commerce, given to the United States, implies an obligation, it muſt have been intended, that the commerce ſhould be ſo managed, that the annual imports ſhould not exceed the exports; or that the productions of foreign countries ſhould not be conſumed out of proportion to the means of paying for them, by the productions of the United States; for any thing ſhort of this, is not the regulation, but the miſmanagement of commerce; for the term regulation carries with it, the idea of a juſt and proper method of management, which cannot be the caſe, if this principle is unattended to.

Baron Monteſquieu obſerves,Monteſquieu, book 20, chap. 12 and 13. that the liberty of commerce depends upon its reſtraints; that it does not conſiſt, on the one hand, in an unbridled freedom to traders; nor yet in unjuſt impoſitions for the ſake of revenue, on the other: that government ſhould ſtand neuter between its commerce and revenues, and not ſuffer the intereſts of the latter to encroach upon the rights of the former. In ſhort, Blackſtone, book 3. ch. 13. vol. 3. p. • 17. the law maxim of ſic utere tuo, ut alienum non laedas, ſeems ſtrongly to apply, both as to the individual liberty of commerce, and to the rules and regulations neceſſary to produce it; on the extenſion of which, muſt principally depend the public economy:—Public economy exacts, that the public income ſhould not exceed the public expenditure:—In this caſe, the annual exports are the income, and the annual imports the expenditure; which, if the regulations of commerce do not control, ſo that the latter ſhould not exceed the former, it is a ſure mark, that the commerce is not ſufficiently reſtrained. The impoſt laws of the United States allow the importation of every thing from abroad, whether wanted or not, on payment of the ſtipulated duties; but to allow the importation of ſuch articles, which we do not want, or can procure amongſt ourſelves, muſt leſſen the capacity to obtain what we actually ſtand in need of. If we expend equally in what we do, and do not want, we muſt have a reduced quantity of what we do want, by the amount of the expenditure in what we do not want. To leſſen foreign importations, then, it is neceſſary to prohibit entry to ſuch articles as we can raiſe or manufacture amongſt ourſelves in ſufficient quantities, to ſupply the demand. High duties, by ſome called protecting duties, are ſeldom collected, or very imperfectly ſo, in countries even leſs ſuited to conceal ſmuggling than the United States; from whence it may be inferred, that prohibitions will afford greater ſecurity to American manufactures, than what are called protecting duties, which offer temptation to ſmuggling, produce little or no revenue, and juſtify the ſale, uſe, and conſumption of ſuch manufactures, which merit an excluſion. Sure it is, that means more effectual, than thoſe which have been hitherto deviſed, are neceſſary to reduce the ruinous and growing balance of trade, againſt the United States, in favour of Great-Britain. The ſtate of Maſſachuſetts prohibited the importation from abroad, of many articles of home produce, and manufacture, in the year 1786, which had a beneficial effect, as to ſeveral of the articles; for whilſt the prohibition ſhut out foreign importation, ſuch was the competition produced in their manufacture, that many of the articles were ſupplied at a leſs price than before their importation was prohibited. The article of nails, particularly, fell from ſeven and ſix pence, Maſſachuſetts currency, to five and four pence per thouſand; and the other articles of iron ware in a like proportion; whilſt the general prices of all were not enhanced by the prohibition. The articles prohibited by Maſſachuſetts were as follows, viz. See Maſſachuſetts impoſt act, paſſed in the year 1786.

"Loaf ſugar, hats made of fur, hair, and wool, or any or either of them; boots and ſhoes of every denomination, coaches, and all other riding carriages, or any part thereof, and harneſs of all ſorts; ſcyths, iron ſhovels, hoes, broad and narrow axes, flat irons for ironing clothes, anchors, iron and braſs ſtoves, mill ſaws, ſaddles and bridles, wool cards, cotton cards, ready-made millinery, articles of dreſs of all kinds, plumes and artificial flowers of all kinds, white and blond lace of all ſorts, fans charged at more than five ſhillings ſterling a piece in the invoice exhibited, embroidered patterns for waiſtcoats, or for any other parts of dreſs, gold and ſilver lace, and trimmings, women's and children's ſtays, leather gloves and mitts of all ſorts, meſſage cards, playing cards, hair powder of all kinds, pomatum, and all kinds of perfumery, paper hangings and children's toys, ſpelling books and primers, novels, romances and plays, whips, walking canes, horn and tortoiſe-ſhell combs, porter, beer and ale, butter, cheeſe and muſtard, coffin furniture of all kinds, linſeed oil, candles, ſnuff of all kinds of manufactured tobacco, all kinds of wearing apparel, and wooden houſehold furniture, except the furniture brought by perſons who ſhall come to reſide in this country."

The following articles, with the quantities annexed, were imported, and paid duties to the United States, which, it is conceived, might be moſtly prohibited, with ſafety and advantage.

[See the return of impoſts for the year 1790, publiſhed in Tench Coxe's view of the United States.]

Beer, ale, or porter, in caſks, 70,564 gallons. Loaf ſugar, 132,837 pounds. Tallow candles, 15,157 pounds. Wax and ſpermaceti ditto, 4,224 do. Cheeſe, 88,771 do. Soap, 24,120 do. Nails and ſpikes, 1,579,947 do. Snuff, 2,198 do. Tobacco manufactured, 3,182 do. Tarred cordage, 5257 cwt. 2 qr. 5 lb. Untarred do. and yarn, 900 3 14 Twine and pack-thread, 609 2 8 Beer, ale, porter, or cider in bottles, 17,746 dozen. Wool and cotton cards, 780 do. Coal, 181,885 buſhels- Shoes, ſlippers, &c. of leather, 49,003 pair. Do. do. of ſilk and ſtuff, 20,701 do. Boots, 746 do.

There is little doubt but moſt, if not all the foregoing articles, as well as many others, might be ſupplied, in ſufficient quantities, to anſwer the demands of the citizens of the United States, without foreign importation. Admitting this to be the caſe, ought not ſuch articles to be prohibited? ought not the citizens of the United States, who are taxed by, and ſubmit to the federal and ſtate governments, to be protected in their profeſſions and callings, againſt foreign interference? is it not bad economy for a government, acting in its perſonal capacity, to purchaſe what it does not want, or what its citizens do, or may procure of themſelves? is it not as reprehenſible to permit ſuch importations, as it would be for a farmer to allow himſelf to purchaſe wheat or corn, when he had the moſt ample means to procure a ſufficiency of both? Abſolute prohibitions, therefore, upon all articles of foreign importation, interfering with our own manufactures, when their demand can be ſupplied; increaſing duties upon articles imported, which are of our own manufacture, until extinguiſhed by prohibitions; heavy duties upon ſuch articles as we ought, and do not manufacture, as an encouragement to their being undertaken, are the meaſures purſued by Great-Britain; and the means the moſt likely to promote manufactures, and to procure a more favourable balance of trade. But ſhould the preſent pernicious ſyſtem of commercial regulations be unalterably adhered to, and the produce and manufactures of the United States meet no farther protection againſt foreign interference, would not the ſeparate ſtates be juſtified in levying an exciſe upon ſuch imported articles, which produce an injurious effect upon their reſpective manufactures? for example, why ſhould not the farmers of the United States be entitled to the excluſive ſale of their productions, eſpecially when they already ſuffer ſo many inconveniencies for the want of eſtabliſhed markets? why then ſhould not the articles of beef, cheeſe, porter, beer, and other articles, which appertain to the produce of the ſoil, be prohibited? do the protecting duties, as they are termed, exclude their conſumption? on the contrary, are not large ſums annually expended upon ſuch imported articles? do they not produce a much greater injury from their importation, than the revenue, derived from them, is a benefit? may it not be aſked, why theſe articles are not permitted entry into England? and whether the policy of protecting the intereſts of agriculture and manufactures, in its principle, does not apply as ſtrongly to the United States, as to Great-Britain? The beſt vent for the productions of every country, is that of its richeſt citizens, who, if ſupplied with what they uſe, through foreign nations, muſt proſtrate all efforts to improvement, and leave to the native farmers and artiſans, the ſupply of the poorer citizens only, who are unable to purchaſe, but of the inferior kinds. It is by prohibitions, and in the expenditures of the richer citizens, that the poorer are to be maintained, and the requiſite improvements in arts and manufactures are to be expected: and ſhall government, for the ſake of retaining duties, imperfectly collected, indulge luxury, pride, and vanity, at the expenſe of the public welfare? Are the ſums collected in this way, to be put in competition with the intereſts of the great body of huſbandmen and artiſans of the United States? Are they to be put in oppoſition to the habits, manners, and independence of the country? If laws are intended to prevent public evils; if the impoſt laws, particularly, can be ſo conſtructed, as to leſſen luxury, to influence manners, and to induce habits of induſtry, economy, and moderation, ought not conſiderations of this ſort to have weight in a republican government? Nations, like individuals, ſuffer more from example, than by the natural progreſs of corruption. Every one, therefore, muſt wiſh, that if the American character ſhall be contaminated, it ſhould reſult from the ſlow progreſs of luxury, through its own improvements, rather than from the corrupt ſources of the tinſeled ſineries of Europe.

The importer of foreign luxuries and fineries finds it greatly for his own profit to encourage a ſpirit of diſſipation and extravagance amongſt all ranks of people; for he not only reaps profit on them, but, in the mean time, he knows that what were accounted mere ſuperfluities at firſt, ſoon become neceſſaries of life, ſo that this trade will increaſe with the increaſing demand for them: It is his intereſt, therefore, and will be his ſtudy, to promote, as far as he can, that general ſpirit of extravagance and diſſipation, which is the moſt effectual bar to ſober induſtry, and the moſt certain means of deſtroying the internal felicity of every individual of the ſtate. In conſequence of this ſyſtem, the people ſoon become poor, and the profits of the dealer increaſe with their poverty; how abſurd then is it in mankind, to eſtimate the degree of improvement of a country by the richneſs of its merchants!

See Anderſon on national induſtry.

Luxury and prodigality, ſays Sir Joſiah Childs, are as well prejudicial to kingdoms as to private families; and that the expenſe of foreign commodities, eſpecially foreign manufactures, is the worſt expenſe a nation can be inclinable to, and ought to be prevented as much as poſſible.

See Sir Joſiah Childs's preface to his new diſcourſe upon trade.

Another object, perhaps of no leſs importance than what has been before intimated, to reduce an unfavourable balance of trade, may not be improper here to ſuggeſt: it is a meaſure of no leſs conſequence than to ſecure the commiſſions, or factorage, upon the ſupply of our own markets with the productions and merchandizes of foreign countries: and it is conceived, that no better ſuggeſtion, for the purpoſe, can be readily offered, than an alien duty upon goods, wares, or productions of foreign countries, ſhipped for, or conſigned to any other, than an American citizen; and that no drawback ſhould be allowed upon the exportation of articles, otherwiſe ſhipped or conſigned, which had previouſly paid duty upon importation: By a meaſure of this ſort, the United States might calculate a ſaving, at leaſt, of two millions of dollars annually, which the commiſſions upon importation and exportation, calculated at 5 per cent. with incidental charges, would at leaſt amount to.

American merchants, conſidered as ſuch, in relation to their country, ſtand in an important point of view; they are to be regarded as the inſtruments of communication with foreign countries, of exciting domeſtic induſtry, of diffuſing proſperity and wealth, and of holding the capitals of the country, to be recurred to, in caſes of exigence or neceſſity. To ſuppoſe that perſons, of this reſpectable claſs, ought not to find protection, in preference to thoſe of foreign nations, is to conſider that foreign merchants are not bound by ties and connections, which attach them to their native country; and that their opinions and ſentiments are diveſted of thoſe partialities, which commonly actuate the human heart. So fully do the Engliſh laws recognize this principle of attachment to their native country, that they ſuppoſe, if a merchant ſhall even aſſume a foreign allegiance, that it is only "local and temporary," and that his natural allegiance is a perpetual, actuating principle, from which he cannot be withdrawn without the "concurrent act of the government to which it was firſt due." See Blackſtone, book 1. chap. 10. p. 370. This principle of the Engliſh law is likewiſe concurrent to another, quite as generally received, and better underſtood, which is, that the profits obtained in commerce, if carried on by foreigners, will be expended out of the country, in which they were procured.

When we reflect upon the numerous evils, ariſing from the profits of labour, (which moſt commonly center in commerce), being expended out of the country, to which they properly belong; that a gradual poverty, and an accumulating miſery, are its never failing conſequence, as may be exemplified in the people of Scotland and Ireland, particularly the latter, where their wealth, being principally expended in England, inſtead of nouriſhing the ſources, from whence it is derived, has reduced the inhabitants to the loweſt ſtate of beggary and wretchedneſs. In proportion, therefore, as a country ſuffers its commerce to be carried on by foreigners, will its citizens become depreſſed and impoveriſhed. Virginia, the two Carolinas, and Georgia, afford an additional example in point, where Engliſh and Scotch merchants and factors carry on the commerce, and retire to their native country, with the wealth which they thereby acquire, to the injury of thoſe ſtates. To ſuppoſe, then, that a diſtinction ought not to be made, between American merchants and thoſe of other countries; and that the diſabilities of foreign merchants ought not to be increaſed in the United States, when ſo many inconveniencies muſt ariſe from the eſtabliſhing of a foreign influence, from the transferring the profits of commerce to a foreign country, and from withdrawing the credits and capitals from the country, at a time of exigence, or of war, when they may be moſt needed, is, in every point of view, a proſtration, both of national and commercial policy. For this purpoſe, additional and ſpecial impediments ſhould be thrown in the way of naturalizing merchant ſtrangers, in order to procure the preferences and advantages herein contemplated. When we conſider the numerous diſabilities of foreigners, carrying on trade in Great-Britain, the commercial impoſitions to which they are ſubject, and the reſtraints which meet them in every direction:—that reſidence procures no remiſſion to thoſe reſtraints, except in the Britiſh plantations

The colonial aſſemblies were authorized to naturalize foreigners of good character, after a reſidence of ſeven years.

13 Geo. 2. ch. 7.20 Geo. 2. ch. 24. and 2 Geo. 3. ch. 25. :—and even ſhould they procure letters of enfranchiſement, the commercial diſabilities ſtill follow them, until they can find influence ſufficient to obtain, at a great expenſe, a ſpecial act of naturalization in their favour,See Blackſtone, vol. 1. p. 371 to • 74. which cannot be ſuſtained, in either houſe of parliament, without a diſabling clauſe, declaratory, that they can neither be themſelves members of the privy council, nor of either houſe of parliament, nor hold any office of truſt, civil or military, nor capable of any grant from the crown:—when we compare theſe diſabilities with the liberties and privileges of Engliſh merchants and factors coming to, and trading in the United States; when we compare them with the eaſe, facility, and advantages of Engliſhmen, becoming naturalized American citizens, every one is left to wonder at the motives, the policy, and inducements, which authorize the diſparity.—In ſhort, there ſeems to be little leſs than a communion of commercial benefits on the one ſide, againſt limitations, reſtrictions, taxes and prohibitions on the other!

With reſpect to the relative ſituation of the two countries, in regard to navigation—the laſt diviſion of our ſubject—in order to place it fairly before the public, it may not be improper to recite a few clauſes from ſeveral principal ſtatutes of the Britiſh parliament, viz. from an act entitled, "An act for the encouraging and increaſing of ſhipping and navigation," "An act for the encouragement of trade," and from other acts ſupplementary thereto.

The firſt of theſe ſtatutes12 Cha. 2. ch. 18. enacts, Section 1. That no goods or commodities whatſoever ſhall be imported into, or exported out of any lands, iſlands, plantations, or territories, to his majeſty belonging, or in his poſſeſſion, or which may hereafter belong unto, or be in the poſſeſſion of his majeſty, his heirs and ſucceſſors, in Aſia, Africa, or America, in any other ſhips, veſſel or veſſels whatſoever, but in ſuch ſhips or veſſels as do truly, and without fraud, belong only to the people of England, or Ireland, dominion of Wales, or town of Berwick upon Tweed, or are of the built of, and belonging to, any of the ſaid lands, iſlands, plantations or territories, as the proprietors and right owners thereof, and whereof the maſter and three fourths of the mariners, at leaſt, are Engliſh, under the penalty of veſſel and cargo.

Sect. 3. Extends the ſame prohibition to all goods or commodities whatſoever, of the growth, production and manufacture of Africa, Aſia or America, under like penalties.

Sect. 4. Provides that no goods or commodities, that are of foreign growth, production, or manufacture, and which are to be brought into England, Ireland, Wales, the iſlands of Guernſey or Jerſey, or town of Berwick upon Tweed, in Engliſh built ſhipping, or other ſhipping belonging to ſome of the aforeſaid places, and navigated by Engliſh mariners, as aforeſaid, ſhall be ſhipped or brought from any other place or places, country or countries, but only from thoſe of the ſaid growth, production, or manufacture, or from thoſe ports where the ſaid goods and commodities can only, or are, or uſually have been firſt ſhipped for tranſportation, and from none other places or countries, under the forfeiture of veſſel and cargo.

Sect. 6. That from henceforth it ſhall not be lawful to any perſon or perſons whatſoever, to load, or cauſe to be loaden, and carried in any bottom or bottoms, ſhip or ſhips, veſſel or veſſels whatſoever, whereof any ſtranger or ſtrangers born, (unleſs ſuch as are citizens or naturalized), be owners, part owners, or maſters, and whereof three fourths of the mariners, at leaſt, ſhall not be Engliſh, any fiſh, victual, wares, goods, commodities or things, of what kind or nature ſoever the ſame ſhall be, from one port or creek of England, Ireland, Wales, iſlands of Guernſey or Jerſey, or town of Berwick upon Tweed, to another port or creek of the ſame, or any of them, under the forfeiture of veſſel and cargo.

The 6th Section of the Act for the encouragement of trade, contains the following prohibition. 15 Cha. 2. ch. 7.

That no commodity of the growth, production or manufacture of Europe, ſhall be imported into any land, iſland, plantation, colony, territory or place to his majeſty belonging, or which ſhall hereafter belong unto, or be in poſſeſſion of his majeſty, his heirs and ſucceſſors, in Aſia, Africa, or America, (Tangier only excepted), but what ſhall be bonâ fidê, and without fraud, laden and ſhipped in England, Wales, or in the town of Berwick upon Tweed, and in Engliſh built ſhipping, &c. whereof the maſter and three fourths of the mariners, at leaſt, are Engliſh, and which ſhall be carried directly thence to the lands, iſlands, plantations, &c. and from no other place or places whatſoever, under the penalty of the forfeiture of goods and veſſel.

In addition to the Sections of the foregoing Acts, the following clauſes are taken from two other Acts, paſſed in the 26th and 27th years of the preſent King of England, ſince the American revolution, ſupplementary and confirmatory of the prohibitions and reſtrictions of the acts aforeſaid, as they reſpect the United States, viz.

That no ſhip or veſſel built in any of the colonies of North America, now called the United States of America, during the time that any act or acts of parliament made in Great-Britain, prohibiting trade and intercourſe with thoſe colonies,The laws prohibiting trade and intercourſe with America were repealed in the year 178 • , by 23 Geo. 3d. ch. 26. was or were in force, nor any ſhip or veſſel which was owned by, or belonging to the ſubjects of the United States, or of any of the ſaid States reſpectively, during the exiſtence of thoſe acts, and not regiſtered before the commencement thereof, is or ſhall be entitled to be regiſtered under this preſent act, or to any of the privileges or advantages of a Britiſh built ſhip or veſſel, unleſs ſuch ſhip or veſſel ſhall have been taken and condemned as lawful prize, or have been ſtranded, ſhall have been built or rebuilt, and regiſtered in the manner heretofore practiſed and allowed.

From and after the 1ſt day of Auguſt, 1786, no ſhip or veſſel ſhall be deemed or taken to be Britiſh built, or enjoy the privileges thereunto belonging, which ſhall from thenceforth be rebuilt or repaired in any foreign port or place, if ſuch repairs ſhall exceed fifteen ſhillings for every ton of the ſaid ſhip or veſſel, except to enable her to perform the voyage in which ſhe ſhall then be engaged. 26 Geo. 3d ch. 60.

"For obviating all doubts which may ariſe, touching the meaning and conſtruction of the act made and paſſed in the 26th year of his preſent majeſty, for the further increaſe and encouragement of ſhipping and navigation," Be it enacted and declared, that all ſhips and veſſels, which, by ſaid act, are declared not to be entitled to any of the privileges or advantages of a Britiſh built ſhip, or of a ſhip owned by Britiſh ſubjects, and all ſhips and veſſels not regiſtered according to the directions and regulations of the ſaid acts, ſhall, although ſuch ſhips and veſſels may be owned by his majeſty's ſubjects, be held and deemed, to all intents and purpoſes, as alien ſhips, and ſhall, in all caſes, be liable to ſuch and the ſame penalties and forfeitures as alien ſhips, in the like caſes, are or ſhall by law be liable to. 27 Geo. 3. ch. 19.

Although the acts, from which the foregoing clauſes are tranſcribed, paſſed in the 12th and 15th years of the reign of Charles 2d. and the 26th and 27th of George 3d. yet the firſt act was produced during Cromwell's protectorſhip, at the inſtigation of Mr. St. John, who, through reſentment, from an unſucceſſful negotiation with which he had been charged to the ſtates of Holland, procured its adoption. The policy of theſe acts, the pride and boaſt of Engliſhmen, and to which they ſhew an enthuſiaſtic, if not a bigoted attachment, has been, and is ſtill conſidered as the foundation of the maritime importance of England. Lord Hawkeſborough, in his diſcourſe with regard to neutral nations, calls Cromwell's act A NOBLE STRAIN OF COMMERCIAL POLICY, which hath proved the fertile ſource of all the naval power, which hath operated inſenſibly to the preſervation, and hath been the ſpring from whence hath flowed, the wealth and greatneſs of England.

How far this noble ſtrain of commercial policy ought to be reſiſted, or harmonized with; and whether, in the poetic language of the noble Lord, the United States ought to echo to the ſong, and in notes reſponſive, bear up its lengthened ſound, let it be the object of the following obſervations to examine.

Admitting the advantages of navigation, and of a carrying trade, to be unqueſtionable, as a mean of wealth and defence, which will ſcarcely be denied;— a commercial intercourſe ought equally, as has been already ſuggeſted, to reciprocate ſuch advantages;— and the benefits received ſhould equal thoſe which are beſtowed: But the inquiry recurs, What is the ſtate of the caſe, as it reſpects the important ſubject in diſcuſſion? It is, in fact, that in the year ending the 1ſt of October, 1790, the United States allowed to the veſſels of Great-Britain, five times the direct freightage that they received; and of courſe, our carrying trade contributed to the wealth and defence of Great-Britain in the proportion of four parts in five, at leaſt, of what it did to the advantage and benefit of the United States!!

The whole tonnage of veſſels, on which duty was paid in the United States, in the aforementioned year, was 761,710 tons, of which there were belonging to the United States 492,100 tons, to other nations 269, 610 tons, of which Great-Britain had 226,953 tonsSee Mr. Jefferſon's ſtatement to Congreſs in December, 1793. Alſo Tench Coxe's view of the United States.: whereby Great-Britain drew for the freightage, calculating but one trip, or two paſſages to the veſſels, at the mean rate of fifty ſhillings ſterling per ton, on each paſſage, 1,134,765 pounds ſterling, which ſum, if rendered into dollars, amounts to 5,043,400 dollars, or about one quarter part of the value of the exports of the United States, by the employment of eleven hundred and thirty-four ſhips, of two hundred tons each; which, if calculated to carry twelve men to each veſſel, employed 13,608 ſeamen; whilſt the direct freightage of American veſſels, to and from the Britiſh dominions, employed no more than 43,580See Mr. Jefferſon's ſtatement. tons of ſhipping, leaving the immenſe balance of 183,370 tons in favour of the ſhipping of Great-Britain:—ſo that he relative advantages, on the employment of the reſpective ſhips and ſeamen of the two countries, ſtood in the proportion of two hundred and eighteen ſhips to eleven hundred and thirty-four: in ſeamen, of 2,616 to 13,608—and in the value of freightage, 968,444 dollars to 5,043,400, without taking into view the advantage of freightage from port to port, permitted to Engliſh veſſels in the United States, and not allowed to American veſſels in the Britiſh dominions, which muſt add much to the already too glaring diſparity.

The whole carrying trade of the Engliſh Weſt-India iſlands, in the year 1772, by the Britiſh accounts, (ſee ſtatement below

"An accurate abſtract of the number of veſſels, which appears, from the regiſters of ſhipping, to have been cleared from each reſpective Engliſh iſland, during a year of great export, diſtinguiſhing the Britiſh from American built ſhipping.

Iſlands. Britiſh ſhips. Amer. ſhips. Britiſh tons. Amer. tons. Jamaica, 145 136 26,906 15,847 Barbadoes, 47 13 6,546 1,172 St. Kitts, 35 20 6,494 2,310 Antigua, 28 22 4,073 2,290 St. Vincents, 25 9 3,042 1,100 Tobago, 6 3 615 320 Montſerrat, 10 9 1,437 1,043 Nevis, 18 0 2,851 Grenades, 51 49 7,717 5,942 Dominica, 32 21 3,933 2,433 Britiſh, 397 282 63,614 Britiſh, 397 63,614 American, 282 32,457 679 96,071 Total 1772

See George Chalmers' opinions on public law and commercial policy, publiſhed in the year 1784.

An account of ſugar and rum imported into England, from March 25 to October 19, in the year 1785. Ships. Caſks of ſugar. Caſks of rum. Jamaica, 132 48,615 14,743 Antigua, 30 13,505 529 St. Kitts, 30 14,220 628 Barbadoes, 18 7,275 133 Grenades, 35 11,841 1,634 Montſerrat, 5 2,159 58 Nevis, 8 3,974 116 Dominica, 9 3,601 14 St. Vincent, 10 4,273 251 Tortola, 5 2,110 24 Tobago, 6 669 54 Total, 288 112,272 18,184

See Anderſon on commerce, vol. 4. page 602.

N. B. Anderſon makes the whole Weſt-India tonnage, in the year 1787, 528 ſhips, 123,581 tons, outward, and 132, • 22 tons inward."

), including that part of it which was participated in, by the citizens of the United States, employed 96,071 tons of ſhipping, of which 32,457 tons belonged to the citizens of the United States, employing three hundred and eighty-two American veſſels, with their complements of ſeamen.

The trade to and from the United States to Newfoundland, employed one hundred and twenty-five American veſſels, in the year 1771, carrying 8475 tons, employed chiefly in the exchange of proviſions for fiſh, of which they purchaſed 67,000 quintals, being about a ninth of the fiſh caught, and about a fifth of the tonnage employed, in the Newfoundland fiſhery, in the tranſporting the fiſh:—the whole tonnage, including that of the United States, being 41,424 tons, and the whole number of veſſels, five hundred and four, from which, deducting the American veſſels and tonnage, left 379 Britiſh veſſels, the tonnage of which were 32,949 tons, as will appear by the following detail of the Newfoundland fiſhery in the year 1771, taken from George Chalmers' opinions on intereſting ſubjects of public law and commercial policy.

"Britiſh fiſhing veſſels, of which 244 on the great bank fiſhing, 269 ſhips. Britiſh trading veſſels, 110 American ditto, 125 Total, 504 ſhips. Tonnage of Britiſh trading and fiſhing veſſels, 32,949 tons. ditto American, 8,475 Total, 41,424 tons. Number of men in the Britiſh fiſhing veſſels, 4477 ditto in the Britiſh trading veſſels, 1118 ditto in American ditto, 865 Fiſhermen, ſhoreſmen, and paſſengers from Britain and Ireland, 5529 Inhabitants, who remained during the winter, 6913 18,902 The number of boats employed by fiſhing ſhips, 556 do. yearly from Great-Britain and Ireland, and having no ſhare in veſſels fiſhing on the great bank, 559 The number of boats employed by the inhabitants, 1178 2288 The quintals of fiſh made in fiſhing ſhips, 236,000 quintals 645,322 ditto in bye boats, 147,999 quintals 645,322 ditto by the inhabitants, 261,240 quintals 645,322 The quintals of fiſh carried to foreign market, 580,204 Tons of oil exported, 2,846 Tierces of ſalmon exported, 1,248."

With reſpect to the trade to Canada and Nova-Scotia, before the revolution, it might have employed about five thouſand tons of American ſhipping, which, if taken in connection with the advantage the United States now derive from the direct trade, in American bottoms, with the Engliſh Eaſt-India ſettlements,It is true, Great-Britain licenſes American veſſels, contrary to her colonial ſyſtem, by the 13th article of the treaty, to import and export direct to, and from her Eaſt-India ſettlements, interdicting all freightage from one port to another, but under the expreſs exception of ſuch articles, of which the importation or exportation, reſpectively, to, or from the ſaid territories, ſhall not be entirely prohibited. The right of freightage, granted by this article, is a limited one, and may be wholly reſtrained by the expreſs ſtipulation itſelf; but if this was not the caſe, the liberty given is not an important conceſſion in favour of our navigation, or carrying trade. The trade will employ but few veſſels, and requires a great exportation of ſpecie, added to any cargo which might be ſhipped from the United States, to afford a tolerable freight upon the little bulky, and high-priced manufactures, ſuch as muſlins, calicoes, &c. of the Eaſt-India ſetttlements. amounting to 1155See Nourſe's ſtatement of American tonnage for the year 1794, marked D. tons; the general reſult of comparative advantages, from the freightage afforded, by the commerce of the reſpective countries, admitting the participation of benefits before the revolution to be conſidered as data, on which to ground an opinion, of what would have been the effect of a more liberal policy, than the one, which has been purſued by Great-Britain, in the admiſſion of American veſſels into her colonies, upon the ſame footing ſince, as before the revolution, would probably be as follows.

Dr. Britiſh ſhipping to the Amer. carrying trade, calculated upon an average of three years, viz. from 1ſt October, 1789, to the 1ſt of October, 1792, the average tonnage of which years is 211,199The Engliſh tonnage employed in the commerce of the United States, beginning with the 1ſt October, 1789, ending the 1ſt of October, 1792, is as follows, viz. N. B. As there ſeems to be a difference in the tonnage ſtatements of the year 1790, viz. in that made by Mr. Tench Coxe, and that made by Joſeph Nourſe, the avarage in this account is made upon the ſtatement, the moſt favourable to Great-Britain, viz. Nourſe's. 1790, 216,914 tons. 1791, 210,618 do. 1792, 206,965 do. whole number 633,597 tons. Average, 211,199 tons. Cr. American ſhipping by the Britiſh direct carrying trade, to and from the Engliſh European dominions, in the year 1790, viz. 43,580 The exportation from England of 82,500 hogſheads of tobacco to France, Holland, Germany, and to the northern and ſouthern ſtates of Europe, the freight.The imports into Great-Britain from Virginia and Maryland, before the American war, were 96,000 hhds. of tobacco, of which 13,500 were conſumed at home, and the duty on them, at £26 1ſ each, amounted to £ 331,675; the remaining 82,500 hhds. were exported, by our merchants, to different parts of Europe, and brought a great deal of money into this kingdom. This trade alone conſtantly employed 330 ſhips, and 3960 ſailors. See Anderſon on commerce, vol. 4. p. 187. The exportation from England of 74,375 caſks of rice, imported from the United States, and exported as above, the freight
Great-Britain imported and exported rice as follows, viz. in the year 1773.

England imported. Scotland imported. cwt. q. lb. cwt. q. lb. Carolina, 370,290 2 5 8,492 1 27 Georgia, 72,469 1 10 3,750 0 7 New-York, 2,454 3 14 12,242 2 6 Pennſylvania, 3,857 3 18 459,072 2 19 459,072 2 19 471,315 0 25

of which Great-Britain conſumed 99,438 cwt. 2 q. 1 lb. and exported 371,876 cwt. 2 q. 24 lb.

N. B. In the year ending the 30th Sept. 1792, there was exported from the United States, it is conceived, principally to Great-Britain— but of this there is no public document—viz. 112,428 hogſheads of tobacco, 141,762 tierces of rice, and 147,937 barrels of naval ſtores.

Tons, 211,199 Loſt to the United States by the Engliſh regulations of commerce in the carrying trade to and from the Engliſh Weſt-India iſlands, being before the revolution, 32,457 Ditto in the Newfoundland trade, 8,475 Ditto in the Canada and Nova-Scotia trade, (ſay) 5,000 Gained by the treaty in the Eaſt-India trade, 1,155 90,667 Balance againſt the United States, 120,532 211,199

But to extend the foregoing calculations farther, let us ſuppoſe the worſt of the caſe, as it refers to Great-Britain, which would be to admit that the veſſels of the United States ſhould have permiſſion to enter freely into the Britiſh colonies, and thereby abſorb their whole carrying trade, except that of their Eaſt-India ſettlements, of Nova-Scotia and Canada, which ſhould continue as above ſtated, the balance of freightage would ſtill be in favour of the Engliſh navigation, as will appear by the following ſtatement.

Dr. Britiſh Shipping as before ſtated, Tons 211,199 Cr. American Shipping, By the Engliſh European carrying trade, 43,580 Newfoundland, ditto, 41,424 Weſt-India ditto, 96,071 Nova-Scotia and Canada ditto, 5,000 Eaſt-India ditto, 1,155 187,230 Balance againſt the United States, 23,969 Tons, 211,199

But if the freightage in foreign veſſels is a juſt charge againſt the exports of the United States, which it undoubtedly is, it will not only affect the general balance of trade, but the particular balance in favour of Great-Britain againſt the United States: for although the freights, paid to foreigners, may not be a clear loſs to the country, as one of the beſt writers upon Engliſh commerce, Sir Joſiah Childs, aſſerts it is, it muſt, at leaſt, be conſidered as a deduction from the value of the exports, and in favour of the nation, to which ſuch freightage is paid.

The average of foreign tonnage, for three years preceding the preſent European war, was 245,158 tons,

Foreign tonnage for the year 1790, 250,546 tons. 1791, 240,552 do. 1792, 244,278 do. 735,376 Average, 245,158 tons.

which, if calculated at five pounds ſterling per ton freightage, upon two paſſages, amounts to 1,225,790 pounds ſterling, or 5,459,288 dollars, which being added to the other juſt charges againſt the exports of the United States, (noted below),

The general balance of trade, ſtated in the year 1790, by Mr. Jefferſon, in his report to Congreſs, made December 13, 1793.

The United States ſtood debtor for a general commercial balance againſt them, 235,975 dollars. The United States paid freightage to foreign nations, in the ſame year, as before ſtated, 5,459,288 The commiſſions upon the imports, not charged at the cuſtom-houſe, the duties being levied excluſive thereof, at 2½ per cent. 500,000 Goods and merchandizes ſmuggled, contrary to law, eſtimated at 2½ per cent. (only) 500,000 General balance of trade againſt the United States, 6,695,263

N. B. No notice is herein taken of goods admitted free of duty, no account thereof being kept at the cuſtom-houſe.

the general balance of trade, including that of navigation and commerce, againſt the United States, is 6,674,831 dollars; and a particular balance againſt the United States, in favour of Great-Britain, amounting to 11,078,787 dollars.

Although Mr. Jefferſon, in his report, ſtates the particular balance of trade ariſing from the imports from, and the exports to Great-Britain, to be 5,992,012 dollars againſt the United States, yet, for the greater accuracy, as well as to ſhew the Britiſh ſtatement of imports and exports into, and from Great-Britain, the following ſtatement is tranſcribed from Anderſon's Chronological Hiſtory of Commerce, which is the lateſt that it contains, and is for the year 1785.

Imports from and Exports to £. 56,647-11-11 163,348-05-03 New-England. 61,671-10-09 405,762-12-00 New-York. 57,705-06-05 369,215-08-05 Pennſylvania. 443,580-06-02 1,015,102-08-10 Virg. & Maryla. 228,070-15-10 310,198-03-07 Carolinas. 45,919-14-07 44,396-04-06 Georgia. £. 893,695-05-08 £.2,308,033-02-00
The value of the exports of the two years 1794 and 1795 was 80,000,000 of dollars, and of the two years 1791 and 1792 did not amount to 40 millions. That prodigious augmentation cannot be viewed as permanent, unleſs owing to the increaſe of the quantity of articles of our own growth, or manufacture, that were exported. But it has already been ſtated, that that quantity has received but a trifling addition, if any, ſince the former period. That increaſe is due to mere temporary cauſes; the firſt ariſing from an advanced price, of perhaps forty per cent. upon the total amount of our exports, beyond their uſual value; the ſecond, from our having become the carriers of a large proportion of the produce of ſome of the Weſt-India iſlands. Thoſe two items, both of which are owing to the preſent European war, conſtitute nearly one half of the value of our exports for the two laſt years. See Gallatin on the finances of the United States, lately publiſhed, page 27.

Balance againſt the U.S. £. 1,414,337-17-4 ſterling, or 6,285,946 dollars. To which, if is added the freightage, viz. 4,792,841 dollars, there will be a balance of 11,078,787 dollars

againſt the United States, which, if compared with the amount of exports upon an average of three years, ending on the 1ſt of October, 1793, the whole exports, upon ſuch average, being no more than 21,805,516 dollars, there is an exceſs of more than one half of our exportable produce annually accruing to Great-Britain from her commerce with the United States.

Exports. 1791, 18,399,202 dollars. 1792, 21,005,568 dollars. 1793, 26,011,788 dollars 65,416,558 Average 21,805,516 dollars.

See Tench Coxe's ſtatement of exports, in his view of the United States.

Obſerve, that the above ſtatement does not include the imports or exports to and from the Britiſh colonies.

If the foregoing ſtatements are founded upon facts; (for it is by facts and ſtatements of this ſort that the commercial policy of a country muſt be adjudged);— if they juſtly point out the relative advantages, ariſing from the commerce and navigation of the two countries, can there be a doubt remaining, as to the ill policy of our exiſting regulations of commerce? and is it not obvious, that a balance of trade, ſo immenſe in its amount, and ſo ruinous in its conſequences, threatning both public and private credit with ſhipwreck, ought, by ſome means or other, to be remedied? and to what meaſure, concurrent to thoſe already ſuggeſted, can we better recur, than to an American navigation act, ſimilar to that of Great-Britain? It is a meaſure of juſtice to ourſelves, of protection to our citizens, and of reciprocity to Great-Britain. Tench Coxe, in his view of the United States, obſerves upon it, That the article of the Britiſh trade laws, which confines the importation of foreign goods to the bottoms of the country producing them, and of their own citizens, appears applicable to our ſituation. By means of thoſe two flags, we ſhould be certain of the neceſſary importations; and we ſhould throw out of each department of the carrying trade, every competitor, except the ſhips of the nation by which the goods were produced or manufactured. All trade with ſeveral countries, ſuch as China and India, whoſe veſſels ſeldom or never make foreign voyages, would be ſecured in our own hands. It will be found, that a modified application of this regulation, in practice, will be attended with no difficulties or inconveniences; and beſides the immediate benefits already mentioned, our merchants will be led directly to the original market for the ſupplies of which we ſtand in need. Inſtead of purchaſing goods of Ruſſia, or the Eaſt-Indies, in England, France, or Holland, our own ſhips will ſail directly to the fountain, from whence they have hitherto flowed to us through foreign channels. The credits given to us in Europe, after the peace, kept us in the practice of going to a very few places, for all our importations. But they have truſted us, in many inſtances, at a dear rate indeed; and however uſeful credit may be, as a ſupplement to our means of trade, in this young country, it is very certain that we ſhould firſt lay out to the beſt advantage, our funds in hand.

Leſt it may be objected, that the reforms herein ſuggeſted, in the commercial ſyſtem of the United States, might impugn the revenue, and thereby produce miſchief and diſorder in the public finances;— but as this is neither intended, nor expected; and with a view to prevent ſuch a ſuggeſtion, as well as to avoid unneceſſary amplification, it may not be improper to ſuggeſt the following queries.

Query 1. Whether the revenue upon goods imported, ought to be calculated upon, beyond the value of the goods or produce exported?

2. Whether an increaſe of revenue, ariſing from an undue importation in one year, muſt not be followed by a reduced revenue in ſucceeding years; and if the exceſs be repeated, (the imports exceeding the exports), whether the revenue, grounded upon ſuch importations, will not be ſubjected to a gradual reduction, if not a final extinction?

3. Whether the amount of the importations would in fact be diminiſhed by particular prohibitions, taking ſeveral years together; and whether the excluſion of articles, unneceſſary and luxurious, would not produce the ſame revenue, by the increaſe of ſuch articles as were uſeful and convenient?

4. And, laſtly, Whether a diminution in the revenue from a partial excluſion of foreign tonnage, by an American navigation act, might not readily be indemnified by an increaſed duty upon the domeſtic?

Before the preſent ſubject is concluded, it may not be improper to make a few additional obſervations.

An American navigation act, it is conceived, muſt operate not leſs beneficially to the agricultural, than to the commercial ſtates, by giving ſecurity to the tranſportation of their produce to foreign markets at all times, and eſpecially in times of war; and ſhould it be ſound, that the competition, in the ſupply of veſſels, ſhould not at firſt be ſufficient to furniſh the freightage at the loweſt rates, (which muſt ſoon be the caſe,) the agricultural ſtates, under ſuch circumſtances, would be wanting in a juſt view of their true intereſts, not to co-operate in the meaſures neceſſary to produce it: In proof of which, it may be aſked, what would have been the probable ſituation of the ſouthern ſtates, from the preſent European war, if the United States had been without navigation? Their produce muſt, in all probability, have periſhed upon their hands, or have been tranſported to market at ſo heavy an expenſe, as to have left little to the profit of their lands: whereas they have found immenſe prices for their productions, whilſt our ſhips and veſſels have had ample and generous freights for their tranſportation. The union of the commercial and agricultural intereſt in this, as in moſt other caſes, has been found contributive to the general welfare; and perhaps no meaſure of more general policy, or particular advantage, applying to the northern and ſouthern ſtates, could be readily deviſed for the mutual benefit of agriculture and commerce, than an American navigation act, upon the principles herein propoſed.

But when we conſider the encouragement of navigation as contributive to the general defence, without going far into the hiſtory of ancient or modern nations, there are few or no inſtances of a country holding extenſive colonies or poſſeſſions abroad, or of enjoying power or reſpectability at home, or among the neighbouring ſtates, without the aid of a maritime force. Navigation, as a nurſery of ſeamen, and as a mean of beſtowing wealth and power, is found, by experience, to be among the firſt objects of national policy. The Carthagenians maintained their independence, and were ſucceſsful rivals to the Roman power, as long as they preſerved their naval ſuperiority:— The moſt brilliant achievements of the Athenians were through the means of their fleets:—The anſwer given by the oracle of Delphi to the Athenians, to fortify their city with wooden walls againſt the invaſion of Xerxes, is an advice which has been ſucceſsfully adopted by the French and Engliſh,Poſtlethwaite and ought to be operative upon the citizens and government of the United States.

France, by the eſtabliſhment of diſtant colonies, and by laying a duty, amounting to a prohibition, upon foreign ſhipping, in the time of Lewis 14th, gained ſuch an aſcendency upon the ocean, that her fleets became formidable to thoſe of England, Holland, and Spain: England, although always known as a maritime power, yet from the time of King Edgar, to that of Queen Elizabeth, made no great figure upon the ocean:—Her colonies, principally Virginia, and afterwards the Carolinas, added to the wiſe proviſions and prohibitions of her navigation acts, firſt laid the foundation, and afterwards eſtabliſhed her maritime importance.

To the policy of theſe acts ought the citizens of the United States to have recourſe, as a mean of procuring their country's proſperity and power, as a meaſure of ſecurity againſt foreign invaſion;—to convoy and to protect their commerce, to aſſure to them the juſt reward of their labour, and to protect it againſt foreign interference:—as a defenſive meaſure, to equalize the advantages of commerce with foreign nations; to place prohibitions againſt prohibitions, and generally to ſecure thoſe benefits, to which their ſituation, productions and good policy ought to entitle them.

To conclude:—Fellow-Citizens of the United States! let not "partial views, or local prejudices," deter you from a due conſideration of the meaſures herein recommended: weigh well your commercial and political ſituation with Great-Britain! Let unity of action and deſign (the chief characteriſtics of a nation) mark your meaſures and councils!—Weak— timid—yielding politics never yet achieved any thing of importance!—It is for you to ſay, whether you will be a great, independent, enterpriſing and commanding people;—or a weak—dependent—timid— and degraded one!—Speak the word, infuſe your influence into your government; and thoſe acts and meaſures will ſoon be purſued, which will not only ſecure you againſt the impending evils, which threaten you, but will waft to your favoured ſhores, progreſſive wealth, proſperity, and power.

FINIS.