NOTE ON TRADE RELATIONS. 139 



(the United States Secretary of State) said (British Case, App., 

 p. 101) :- 



" The subject to which that Act relates has so recently and so fully 

 been discussed between the two Governments, that it may be super- 

 fluous, though it cannot be unseasonable, to assure the British Cabi- 

 net, as you are authorised to do, that it was adopted with a spirit in 

 nowise unfriendly to Great Britain ; and that, if at any time the dis- 

 position should be felt there to meet this country by arrangements 

 founded on principles of reciprocity, it will be met, on the part of 

 the United States, with an earnest wish to substitute a system of the 

 most liberal intercourse, instead of that of counter-prohibitions, 

 which this Act has only rendered complete." 



1822. Something of an arrangement was put into operation by a 

 British Order-in-Council and a proclamation of the President of the 

 United States. (United States Counter-Case, App., p. 133.) 



1823. The situation was altered by the passage of a United States 

 statute which, among other things, insisted that customs duties upon 

 imports into British colonies from the United States should be no 

 greater than upon similar imports from Great Britain. This statute 

 evoked reprisals upon the part of the British. (Ibid., p. 134.) 



1825. A British statute contained a basis for arrangement, and 

 negotiations were reopened, but without effect (Ibid., p. 135) ; and 



1826 A British Order-in-Council declared that the United 



159 States not having complied with the requirements of the 



statute of 1825, all trade and intercourse between the United 



States and the greater part of the British colonial ports should cease. 



This was confirmed by the statute of 1827. (Ibid., p. 135.) 



1827. The President of the United States issued a similar non- 

 intercourse proclamation the effect being to revive the prohibitory 

 legislation of 1818 and 1820. (Ibid., p. 136.) 



1830. An understanding was at length arrived at. It was 

 brought into operation by the United States proclamation (5th Octo- 

 ber, 1830) and the British Order-in-Council (5th November, 1830). 

 Under the terms of these documents a very large measure of freedom 

 of navigation was agreed to. It did not extend, however, to fishing- 

 vessels. The executive action, moreover, was upon both sides volun- 

 tary. No treaty was made. (British Case, App., pp. 570, 786.) 



o 



