APPENDIX, N° II. 
4 77 
English have once enjoyed a right, recognised by an 
authentic instrument, afterwards reduced by the vicissitudes 
of human affairs to a dormant state ; but never extinguished : 
mere disuse, occasioned by the varying circumstances of 
succeeding times, is surely very different from renunciation 
or forfeiture. 
“ But supposing that the implied right to equality of 
favour was not so explicitly admitted as it is by Article 18. ; 
supposing further, that the fact of the waters of the Krimea 
had not been so specifically established as it is by Article 38. ; 
nay, that England could produce no title at all in support 
of this claim ; there are other arguments to influence the 
decision of the question in our favour, derived from the 
liberal system of the Sublime Porte itself in its foreign rela- 
tions, from the fitness of things, and connected with the 
interests of this Empire. 
“ In the daily transactions between the Chancery of State 
and the different European legations, how often do preten- 
sions come uuder discussion which are unsupported by 
conventions ad hoc. The invariable practice is, to refer all 
such doubtful cases to the test of antient usage, which is 
almost always considered as equivalent; and lapse of time, 
so far from rendering precedent obsolete, generally stamps 
it with additional value in the eyes of the Porte. In proof 
of which may he cited the conduct of the Peis Effendi 
towards the English. Embassy in 1795, when certain reforms 
were projected in the Custom-house tariff ; by which the 
duties on foreign merchandise were collected ad valorem, 
in order to bring the chargeable valuation nearer to the 
current prices of the day. The two Imperial Courts not 
acceding to the proposed change, on the ground of their 
commercial tariffs forming an integral part of the text of 
their respective treaties of peace, the Sublime Porte desisted 
from the measure with respect to them: and, although we 
could not make the same plea (inasmuch as our tariff stood 
