Benns: British West India Carrying-Trade 205 
Am. Navigation Act (1820), GO- 
TO; and Monroe’s proclamation 
(1822), 87-88; free warehousing 
port established in, 108; and 
proposed Am. legislation (1827), 
137 ; opposes Brit, concessions to 
Am. ships, 169; views of editors 
of, toward “Reciprocity of 1830”, 
183-184. 
Newfoundland, and Am. Naviga- 
tion Act (1820), 69-70; and Mon- 
roe’s proclamation (1822), 87- 
88 ; and Brit. Colonial Trade 
acts (1825), 107-109. 
New Hampshire, editor in, ap- 
proves Am. Navigation Act 
(1818), 52. 
New Jersey, Senator from, votes 
against Am. Navigation Act 
(1818), 52; Senator from, votes 
against Am. Navigation Act 
(1820), 70. 
Newport, R.I., town meeting urges 
retaliatory legislation, 44. 
New Providence, petitions to be 
made a depot for trade with 
U.S., 68. 
Newton, Congressman, chairman of 
Com. on Commerce, 70; remains 
firm for continuance of retali- 
atory legislation, 80-81. 
New York (city), meeting to con- 
sider commercial retaliation, 44; 
chamber of commerce of, favors 
continuance of retaliatory legis- 
lation, 79. 
New York (state), grants Cong, 
power to prohibit commerce 
(1785), 12. 
Norfolk, Va., discontented with 
commercial convention (1818), 
59; opposed to Am. Navigation 
Act (1820), 71; decline in com- 
merce of, 77 ; demands repeal of 
Am. navigation acts, 77 ; opinion 
in, toward rumored concessions 
from Great Britain, 81; criti- 
cism of Monroe’s proclamation 
(1822), 89. 
North Carolina, agriculture and 
lumber of, affected by Am. Navi- 
gation acts, 26; meetings in, to 
urge repeal of Am. navigation 
acts, 78. 
Nova Scotia, Am. ship-carpenters 
seek work in, 36; and negotia- 
tions leading to commercial con- 
vention (1818), 56, 59; and re- 
port of Senate Com. on For. Rel., 
61; and negotiations (1819), 62; 
and Brit, free port act (1818), 
65-66; and Am. Navigation Act 
(1820), 69-70; and Monroe’s 
proclamation (1822), 87-88; free 
warehousing port established in, 
108; and proposed Am. legisla- 
tion (1827), 137; desires con- 
tinued exclusion of Am. ships 
from B.W.I., 169. 
Orders in council relating to B. 
W.I. trade, (1783), 10; (1815), 
29; (1818), 66; (1826), 119, 121; 
(1830), 184. 
Panama Congress, G. Canning dis- 
turbed by, 107. 
Parliament, acts of, regarding B. 
W.I. carrying-trade, (1805), 23; 
(1818), 65-67; West Indian and 
Am. Trade Bill (1822), 82-85; 
Colonial Trade Bill (1822), 82; 
(1825), 107-110; (1827), 154; 
(1830), 185-186. 
Pennsylvania, favors giving Cong, 
greater power over commerce, 
12-13. 
Petersburg, Va., meeting to con- 
sider repeal of Am. navigation 
acts, 78. 
Petitions and memorials regarding 
B.W.I. trade, see Memorials. 
Philadelphia, memorial from mer- 
chants and traders of, 12. 
Pinkney, W., negotiates regarding 
B.W.I. trade, 23-24. 
Pitt, W., introduces bill to admit 
Am. ships into B.W.I., 8-9; min- 
istry of, falls, 10. 
Portland, Me., 91. 
Portsmouth, N.H., petition urging 
retaliatory legislation, 14; meet- 
ing urges retaliatory legislation, 
44; defends Am. navigation acts, 
79. 
Prussia, 104. 
Quebec, made a free warehousing 
port, 108. 
Randolph, E., criticizes Article 
XII of Jay Treaty, 17. 
“Reciprocity of 1830”, negotiations 
leading to, 165-168, 171-173, 175- 
178; reception of, in U.S., 180- 
184; privileges gained by, 184; 
criticism of, 185-188. 
Rhode Island, governor’s message 
refers to crisis in Am. naviga- 
tion, 42. 
Richmond, Va., criticized Am. Nav- 
igation Act (1820), 71; meeting 
considers demand for repeal of 
Am. retaliatory legislation, 78. 
Robinson, F. J., introduces bill in 
Parlia., regarding B.W.I. trade. 
