130 
Indiana University Studies 
in the act of 1823, and there applied to British colonies alone, remains 
part of the law of the United States.^® 
This abrupt refusal on the part of the British Government 
to negotiate regarding the British West India trade left Galla- 
tin at a loss as to what course to pursue. His instructions, 
of course, provided for no such contingency. “He had to act 
for himself, and he was much perplexed to form any theory 
of British motives which would serve to guide his course.”^® 
With Canning's note before him, however, he came to the 
following conclusion: 
On three points we are, perhaps, vulnerable. 
1. The delay in renewing the negotiation. 
2. The omission of having revoked the restriction on the indirect 
intercourse, when that of Great Britain had ceased. 
3. Too long adherence to our opposition to her right of laying pro- 
tective duties. This might have been given up as soon as the act of 
1825 had passed. 
These are the causes assigned for the late measures adopted toward 
the United States on that subject, and they have undoubtedly had a 
decisive elfect, as far as relates to the order in council, assisted as they 
were by the belief that our object was to compel this country to regulate 
the trade on our own terms. 
Gallatin believed, however, that even these facts would not 
account for the refusal to negotiate, and the apparent deter- 
mination to exclude American shipping thereafter from par- 
ticipation in the trade of the British colonies. He felt an 
“alteration in the disposition" of the British Government 
towards the United States since he had last been in England 
in 1818. “Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Robinson had it more 
at heart to cherish friendly relations than Mr. Canning and 
Mr. Huskisson", he wrote. The difference, he thought, might 
perhaps be “in the times rather than in the men". 
Treated, in general, with considerable arrogance till the last war; 
with great attention, if not respect, during the years that followed, the 
United States are now an object of jealousy, and a policy founded in 
that feeling has been avowed.®^ 
Feeling that the American position was perhaps not alto- 
gether invulnerable, Gallatin in his reply to Canning did not 
make out so strong a case for the United States as Adams 
himself might have done. At the very outset he admitted 
Am. State Papers, For. Rel., VI, 253. 
Adams, Life of Albert Gallatin, 617. 
Senate Docs., 22 Cong., 1 Sess., Ill, No. 132, p. 10. 
51 Ibid. 
