Benns: British West India Carrying-Trade 109 
The situation under this act was bad enough for the United 
States, but it was made still worse by the introduction of the 
element of doubt, confusion, and ambiguity in the form of 
another act, approved July 5, 1825, entitled “AN ACT to regu- 
late the trade of the British possessions abroad”. This act 
contained eighty-six detailed articles and appeared, among 
other things, to re-enact all the provisions of the earlier act of 
June 27. There were some minor changes, such as the addi- 
tion of one new free port to the list of free ports, and the 
admission of hay and cotton free of duty into all the free ports, 
and beef, fresh or salted, and pork into Newfoundland. Con- 
fusion and doubt were introduced into the situation, however, 
by the fourth article, which read : 
IV. And whereas, by the law of navigation, foreign ships are per- 
mitted to import into any of the British possessions abroad, from the 
countries to which they belong, goods the produce of those countries, 
and to export goods from such possessions, to be carried to any foreign 
country whatever; and whereas it is expedient that such permission 
should be subject to certain conditions: Be it therefore enacted, that 
the privileges thereby granted to foreign ships shall be limited to the 
ships of those countries, which, having colonial possessions, shall grant 
the like privileges of trading with those possessions to British ships, 
or which, not having colonial possessions, shall place the commerce and 
navigation of this country, and of its possessions abroad, upon the foot- 
ing of the most favored nation, unless his Majesty, by his order in 
council, shall, in any case, deem it expedient to grant the whole or any 
of such privileges to the ships of any foreign country, although the con- 
ditions aforesaid shall not, in all respects, be fulfilled by such foreign 
country.^® 
If the preamble of this article referred to the third of 
these new acts, entitled “AN ACT for the encouragement of 
British shipping and navigation”, one looked in vain in it for 
any such provision. The chief purpose of this third act was 
to restrict to British ships the trade between the United King- 
dom and its possessions."^^ If, on the other hand, this fourth 
article referred to the act of June 27, again one looked in vain 
for any such provision. It could not be found. The confu- 
sion which existed as a result of these new acts is well illu- 
strated by the rulings of British officials themselves. Can- 
ning, basing his opinion on the preamble to the fourth article 
of the act of July 5, construed the act to open to foreign ves- 
Am. State Papers, For. Rel., VI, 306-321. 
’^^Ibid., VI, 307. 
YI, 321-323. 
