Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/604

 594 Docwnents 5. The prohibition of our citizens to take commissions from foreign powers.' I understand this, as the paper does, hable to no exception. 6. The provision against reprisals, until justice be refused or un- reasonably delayed,'' will contribute to peace. 7. The prohibition of countenance to foreign privateers etc." This I understand as the paper does; liable to no objection. 8. I rank among the rights surrendered the clause respecting pro- visions being seizable.* The paper has not taken into the account, that the seizor will be always the judge, whether they are so: that G. Britain has avowed her doctrine on the 8th of June 1793; and that she has again commented upon it in the same way by her late order. ° 3. The favors which we have gained are 1. The India trade, and the power of supplying Canada etc. with European, Asiatic and domestic articles." The paper does not touch the great objection, that british vessels come so high up, while our's are admitted only so low down.' It is a disadvantage; but it's value is not very important. It will be played off more against Mr Jay's vigilance, than for any other purpose. 2. The trade to the East Indies.* From the article on this subject we certainly derive two advantages. I. The conversion of what has been hitherto a favor into a compact; namely, a direct trade from the East Indies to the Ud. States. 2. the prohibition of higher duties on our exportations than on british expor- tations. And the paper supposes, that every thing else is left upon it's old footing; and the same indulgencies may be granted after the treaty, as before. This is apparently the case. But these doubts occur, i. whether many American merchants will risque themselves upon the chance of receiving these indulgences in the face of a treaty ; and know- ing that they may be deprived of the opportunity of employing their spare time in going from the East Indies to China etc. with a coasting freight, they may not withdraw from the trade. — 2. whether the prob- ability is not greater, that the indulgencies will be withdrawn, after such a treaty than before it. For why has the british government expressly stipulated against the continuance of the privilege, if it was intended to leave a discretionary power to enforce the restriction, or not? 4. The miscellaneous matter of the treaty. ■ Art. XXI. 2 Art. XXII. 3 Art. XXIV. 5 The text of the orders of June 8, 1793, is given in Moore, International Arbitrations, I. 300-301, and in American State Papers, Foreign Relations, I. 240; that of the orders of April, 1795. was never published. Moore. I. 310. 6 Art. III. ' In the former case to the highest ports of entry on the rivers; in the latter, only to the mouths, s Art. XIIT.
 * In Art. XVIII. See Moore, Digest 1/ International Lazu, VII. 675-679.