History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 3 (of 4)Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
History
History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 3 (of 4)
Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
Commerce -- History; Shipping -- History; Steam navigation -- History
be allowed to proceed from port to port in England and then return; but
that sailing from a British port, and being bound for a foreign port,
they should be permitted to carry from one British port to another, and
then clear out and proceed on their voyage. The Customs’ authorities
reported that this could be done consistently with safety to the
revenue, provided there was a restriction that the cargoes should
not be carried in vessels under 100 tons burden, so as to prevent
smuggling, although, as a matter of fact, the light dues and other
charges must effectually prevent such a trade. Such was the bungling
scheme respecting the coasting trade proposed by Mr. Labouchere,
whereby he attempted to satisfy all parties, and bring the Americans to
terms.
[Sidenote: Mr. Bancroft recalcitrates.]
[Sidenote: Hence withdrawal of the coasting clauses.]
When Alderman Thompson asked whether any intimation had been received
from the American Government as to any convention with respect to the
coasting trade, Mr. Labouchere answered, that in a recent interview he
had had with Mr. Bancroft, that gentleman said, “he should be willing
the next day to sign any convention which should include the coasting
trade”, and Mr. Labouchere believed him to be sincere;[106] though, by
Mr. Buchanan’s letter of the 9th February (which had not yet reached
England), the American Secretary of State had expressly said, “_the
coasting trade is of course reserved_.” As a matter of course, when
Mr. Buchanan’s letter reached England all Mr. Labouchere’s visions of
reciprocity in the coasting trade vanished. At a subsequent period Mr.
Labouchere, curiously enough, entered into a defence of Mr. Bancroft,
“who was a most honourable and straightforward man.” Be that, however,
as it may, he certainly deceived Mr. Labouchere; and, indeed, Lord
Palmerston also, who up to the 5th March, expressed himself in the
strongest manner that the reply of the American Government would fully
bear out Mr. Bancroft’s pledges. Such was the ignominious rejection
of these clauses relating to the coasting trade, which had been
inserted in the Bill of 1849 to meet “the conciliatory disposition”
of Mr. Bancroft, but which his superiors at Washington sternly and
unequivocally repudiated.
[Sidenote: The debate.]
[Sidenote: Alderman Thompson, &c.]
[Sidenote: Mr. Ricardo.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account