In the 1800s, the British textile industry had developed a mutual bond with the slave-based cotton plantations of the United States. By 1803, cheap cotton at the hands of slave labor had become the leading export of the United States. Britain imported his cotton to produce high-quality cloth cheap enough to undermine the native cloth industries of almost every other country in the global market such as the Indian cotton industry. President James Monroe tried to leverage this dependency as an opportunity to induce Britain to establish reciprocal trade agreements between the United States and their colonies, but Britain would not budge.
After the war, in 1815 Congress repealed several acts which imposed duties on ships and vessels and on goods, wares and merchandise imported into the United States. The original duties were charged per ton, and established to protect or favor imports coming into the United Sates in American owned vessels. The intent of repealing the act was to establish reciprocal free trade with other nations, and stated that such repeal would take effect in favor of any foreign nation, whenever the President "shall be satisfied that the discriminating or countervailing of such foreign nation, so far as they operate to the disadvantage of the United States, have been abolished".
In Monroe's 1821 State of the Union, at the onset of his second term, the president stated to Congress that by this act, a proposition was made to open up our commerce in a way that he believed would be acceptable to all. Nations would be free to bring their manufactured goods into our ports in exchange for American goods using their own vessels without any additional duties or fees. All that was being asked, is that in return, like accommodations would be granted to American ships. The act pertained to the transport of goods only, each country continued to have the right to admit or prohibit any articles based upon their own terms and conditions. By all accounts, this seemed like a very fair proposition, and even liberal according to the president. Especially, at the time since most of exports from America consisted of raw materials which were in high demand by manufacturers and producers in many foreign nations. Monroe called it liberal, because it actually was to the advantage of the European manufacturers since it took many vessels to transport the many different raw materials from the United States, but only one to bring back the finished goods. For example, the duties imposed on cotton was equal to that of the textiles (clothing, linen, etc) that was coming back to the United Sates. Because of this, there was an expectation that other countries would jump on this opportunity with reciprocal agreements.
And in this mindset, Monroe believed that the United States had the right to expect that "this commerce" as he called would be reciprocated by the all the kingdoms of Europe including their colonies. Since many of the nations of Europe who relied exclusively on manufacturing would incur such a great advantage, it would only be fair that they open trade with their colonies as well. Repealing the discriminatory duties was done at great expense (loss of tax revenue) to the United States, and as an indemnity for this loss, open trade with the colonies was expected. This expectation was especially true from Great Britain who was so dependent upon the cotton produced by slave labor in America. As Monroe described it, "it was known that the supplies which the colonies derived from us were of the highest importance to them, their labor being bestowed with so much greater profit in the culture of other articles." All Monroe wanted was fair and equal treatment. As he stated when articles are admitted "on conditions equally applicable to all, it seems just that the articles thus admitted and invited should be carried thither in the vessels of the country affording such supply and that the reciprocity should be found in a corresponding accommodation on the other side." It was in this spirit, that Congress repealed the tonnage act of 1815. However, Great Britain did not return the favor. In 1815, Great Britain opened trade with the united States in it's principle ports, but did not extend these policies to the West Indies. Instead, Great Britain claimed "the exclusive supply of those colonies", and insisted that all navigation of goods to and from these colonies be in their own vessels. Because these restrictions still existed, Monroe was refusing to repeal the tonnage duties on the vessels of Great Britain. If Great Britain was not going to open trade with it's colonies, then the United States would not repeal it's tonnage duties on cotton.
Here is an excerpt from Monroe's 1821 State where he explains why the repeal was not extended to Great Britain.
"By an act of [1815-03-03], so much of the several acts as imposed higher duties on the tonnage of foreign vessels and on the manufactures and productions of foreign nations when imported into the United States in foreign vessels than when imported in vessels of the United States were repealed so far as respected the manufactures and productions of the nation to which such vessels belonged, on the condition that the repeal should take effect only in favor of any foreign nation when the Executive should be satisfied that such discriminating duties to the disadvantage of the United States had likewise been repealed by such nation.
By this act a proposition was made to all nations to place our commerce with each on a basis which it was presumed would be acceptable to all. Every nation was allowed to bring its manufactures and productions into our ports and to take the manufactures and productions of the United States back to their ports in their own vessels on the same conditions that they might be transported in vessels of the United States, and in return it was required that a like accommodation should be granted to the vessels of the United States in the ports of other powers. The articles to be admitted or prohibited on either side formed no part of the proposed arrangement. Each party would retain the right to admit or prohibit such articles from the other as it thought proper, and on its own conditions.
When the nature of the commerce between the United States and every other country was taken into view, it was thought that this proposition would be considered fair, and even liberal, by every power. The exports of the United States consist generally of articles of the 1st necessity and of rude materials in demand for foreign manufactories, of great bulk, requiring for their transportation many vessels, the return for which in the manufactures and productions of any foreign country, even when disposed of there to advantage, may be brought in a single vessel. This observation is the more especially applicable to those countries from which manufactures alone are imported, but it applies in great extent to the European dominions of every European power and in a certain extent to all the colonies of those powers. By placing, then, the navigation precisely on the same ground in the transportation of exports and imports between the United States and other countries it was presumed that all was offered which could be desired. It seemed to be the only proposition which could be devised which would retain even the semblance of equality in our favor.
Many considerations of great weight gave us a right to expect that this commerce should be extended to the colonies as well as to the European dominions of other powers. With the latter, especially with countries exclusively manufacturing, the advantage was manifestly on their side. An indemnity for that loss was expected from a trade with the colonies, and with the greater reason as it was known that the supplies which the colonies derived from us were of the highest importance to them, their labor being bestowed with so much greater profit in the culture of other articles; and because, likewise, the articles of which those supplies consisted, forming so large a proportion of the exports of the United States, were never admitted into any of the ports of Europe except in cases of great emergency to avert a serious calamity.
When no article is admitted which is not required to supply the wants of the party admitting it, and admitted then not in favor of any particular country to the disadvantage of others, but on conditions equally applicable to all, it seems just that the articles thus admitted and invited should be carried thither in the vessels of the country affording such supply and that the reciprocity should be found in a corresponding accommodation on the other side. By allowing each party to participate in the transportation of such supplies on the payment of equal tonnage a strong proof was afforded of an accommodating spirit. To abandon to it the transportation of the whole would be a sacrifice which ought not to be expected. The demand in the present instance would be the more unreasonable in consideration of the great inequality existing in the trade with the parent country.
Such was the basis of our system as established by the act of 1815 and such its true character. In the year in which this act was passed a treaty was concluded with Great Britain, in strict conformity with its principles, in regard to her European dominions. to her colonies, however, in the West Indies and on this continent it was not extended, the British Government claiming the exclusive supply of those colonies, and from our own ports, and of the productions of the colonies in return in her own vessels. To this claim the United States could not assent, and in consequence each party suspended the intercourse in the vessels of the other by a prohibition which still exists.
Just
a few years later, the British Parliament did offer to open up the West
Indies Trade. An offer was originally made by Britain in 1822, with
the United States relaxing some some restrictions in 1823. In December of 1822, President Monroe shared this news with Congress and by proclamation on August 24th, opened the ports of the United States to the vessels of Great Britain with some limitations.
There was still some doubt whether the Congressional act applied to the British colonies in the West Indies, but Monroe explained that since the act of the British parliament opened them, then America would too. Monroe's goal was to have reciprocal trade agreements with both Great Britain and France. He believed this was in the best interest of American as well as the British and French."Since your last session the prohibition which had been imposed on the commerce between the United States and the British colonies in the West Indies and on this continent has likewise been removed. Satisfactory evidence having been adduced that the ports of those colonies had been opened to the vessels of the United States by an act of the British Parliament bearing date on the 24th of June last, on the conditions specified therein, I deemed it proper, in compliance with the provision of the first section of the act of the last session above recited, to declare, by proclamation bearing date on the 24th of August last, that the ports of the United States should thenceforward and until the end of the next session of Congress be opened to the vessels of Great Britain employed in that trade, under the limitation specified in that proclamation."
"A doubt was entertained whether the act of Congress applied to the British colonies on this continent as well as to those in the West Indies, but as the act of Parliament opened the intercourse equally with both, and it was the manifest intention of Congress, as well as the obvious policy of the United States, that the provisions of the act of Parliament should be met in equal extent on the part of the United States, and as also the act of Congress was supposed to vest in the President some discretion in the execution of it, I thought it advisable to give it a corresponding construction.Should the constitutional sanction of the Senate be given to the ratification of the convention with France, legislative provisions will be necessary to carry it fully into effect, as it likewise will be to continue in force, on such conditions as may be deemed just and proper, the intercourse which has been opened between the United States and the British colonies. Every light in the possession of the Executive will in due time be communicated on both subjects.Resting essentially on a basis of reciprocal and equal advantage, it has been the object of the Executive in transactions with other powers to meet the propositions of each with a liberal spirit, believing that thereby the interest of our country would be most effectually promoted. This course has been systematically pursued in the late occurrences with France and Great Britain, and in strict accord with the views of the Legislature. A confident hope is entertained that by the arrangement thus commenced with each all differences respecting navigation and commerce with the dominions in question will be adjusted, and a solid foundation be laid for an active and permanent intercourse which will prove equally advantageous to both parties."
Finally, in 1830 President Andrew Jackson accepted an agreement of reciprocal trade with some exceptions between the British West Indies and the United States. Great Britain flooded the world market with American cotton and dominated the industry until the 1860s.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29463
The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America by Charles C. Little and James Brown (1846) pg. 223
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/publications/FRB/pages/1920-1924/26396_1920-1924.pdf (Federal Reserve Bulletin, May 1923 pg 567)
http://cwh.ucsc.edu/brooks/India,_Britain_and_America.html
http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/O-W/Reciprocity-1776-1830.html
No comments:
Post a Comment