In 1829, President Andrew Jackson reversed course from the Adams’ administration and unilaterally opened up America’s ports to Great Britain to improve trade relations and negotiate a new trade deal. According to Andrew Jackson, it was a smashing success and through a series of negotiations led by his Minister Plenipotentiary Louis McClane America’s trade was on the most favorable footing with Great Britain and new trade deal just around the corner. It was not only a time for Jackson to pat himself and his minister on the back, but also an opportunity to get a jab in on his political opponents. Andrew Jackson was able to do what should have been done by either party years earlier.
Despite the importance of American trade to Great Britain and her colonies, American vessels had been excluded from the ports of British Colonies from 1783 until l807 when Jefferson retaliated with the Embargo Act of 1807. Following the War of 1812, President Monroe signed trade acts in 1818 and 1820 that put severe restrictions on trade with Great Britain. The acts were considered a defensive measure and included a clause that would rescind and suspend the trade restrictions whenever the President of the United States received satisfactory evidence that the Government of Great Britain will open the ports of its colonies. President Adams came close to doing this with the Trade act of 1823, but when negotiations between deteriorated in 1826 and 1827, Adams rescinded the Act of 1823 and returned the status back to that of 1818 and 1820.
It wasn't until 1829 under the Jackson administration that the first successful attempt at improving trade relations with Great Britain were made. In 1829, President Andrew Jackson instructed former Senator Louis McClane, now Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to make a clean break from the Adams administration and disregard any issues that were currently under dispute. McLane's main assignment was to open trade between the United States and the British West Indies. McLane's efforts were well received by Lord Aberdeen in St. James. Negotiations led to the opening of our ports of entry to British and British colonial vessels in exchange for the opening of all free colonial ports to U.S. vessels. It may not have been the full and reciprocal trade that John Quincy Adams was looking for, but it was enough for the Jackson administration to claim success. In his second State of the Union Address, Jackson described the "arrangement with Great Britain" as one that "has settled a question that has for years afforded matter for contention and almost uninterrupted discussion". According to Jackson, the arrangement led to "no less than six negotiations" and promised to provide results that were favorable to both sides.
"An arrangement has been effected with Great Britain in relation to the trade between the United States and her West India and North American colonies which has settled a question that has for years afforded matter for contention and almost uninterrupted discussion, and has been the subject of no less than six negotiations, in a manner which promises results highly favorable to the parties."Critics complained that Mr. McLane was being outwitted by the British because many of the British colonial ports remained closed to us and the advantage of trade remained entirely on the side of the British. Jackson did not deny that in theory, Great Britain had every right to "monopolize the trade with her colonies" and exclude the United States from participating, but he reminded Congress of the olive branch that had been offered to the British Government in the 1818 and 1820 Acts. An olive branch of trade that if she wished to trade with the United States, she must do so "upon principles of just reciprocity" and with the status of ‘most favored nation’.
"The abstract right of Great Britain to monopolize the trade with her colonies or to exclude us from a participation therein has never been denied by the United States. But we have contended, and with reason, that if at any time Great Britain may desire the productions of this country as necessary to her colonies they must be received upon principles of just reciprocity, and, further, that it is making an invidious and unfriendly distinction to open her colonial ports to the vessels of other nations and close them against those of the United States."Mr. Jackson followed with a bit of history regarding our trade negotiations with Great Britain beginning with the Jay Treaty of 1794 and 1795. The Jay Treaty gave the United States status of 'most favored Nation' and opened up the British West Indies under renewable terms limited to one year at a time. The treaty was very unpopular with the people because of the restrictive nature and limited terms. American merchants were limited in both quantity and variety of produce that could be shipped to the colonial islands. According to the British laws, American vessels were denied the privilege of transporting any goods from the British Colonies to another foreign port; they could only transport them back to the United States. Also, American vessels were precluded from carrying molasses, sugar, cocoa, and cotton from the United States to any other part of the world. The people expected that these strict restrictions on American vessels would have been rejected by the Senate, but it squeaked through with a vote of 20 to 10 on June 24, 1795. Ever since trade negotiations with Great Britain remained very contentious. Despite Great Britain’s willingness to negotiate, the previous administration had failed make a deal that was good for America.
"Antecedently to 1794 a portion of our productions was admitted into the colonial islands of Great Britain by particular concessions, limited to the term of one year, but renewed from year to year. In the transportation of these productions, however, our vessels were not allowed to engage, this being a privilege reserved to British shipping, by which alone our produce could be taken to the islands and theirs brought to us in return. From Newfoundland and her continental possessions all our productions, as well as our vessels, were excluded, with occasional relaxations, by which, in seasons of distress, the former were admitted in British bottoms.
By the treaty of 1794 she offered to concede to us for a limited time the right of carrying to her West India possessions in our vessels not exceeding 70 tons burthen, and upon the same terms as British vessels, any productions of the United States which British vessels might import therefrom. But this privilege was coupled with conditions which are supposed to have led to its rejection by the Senate; that is, that American vessels should land their return cargoes in the United States only, and, moreover, that they should during the continuance of the privilege be precluded from carrying molasses, sugar, coffee, cocoa, or cotton either from those islands or from the United States to any other part of the world. Great Britain readily consented to expunge this article from the treaty, and subsequent attempts to arrange the terms of the trade either by treaty stipulations or concerted legislation have failed, it has been successively suspended and allowed according to the varying legislation of the parties."Jackson now took opportunity to criticize the actions taken under the Adams administration. The most prominent point of contention between the two Governments was that American vessels were limited to carrying only American products. American vessels were not allowed to transport British goods from the colonies to any foreign ports and were charged higher duties that British vessels. Between 1825 and 1827, the British Parliament had passed legislation to eliminate these points, but according to Jackson, "On our part each of the above points had in succession been explicitly abandoned in negotiations". Jackson's words seem subtle, but he clearly placing the blame on the United States, and specifically the Adams administration.
"The following are the prominent points which have in later years separated the two Governments: Besides a restriction whereby all importations into her colonies in American vessels are confined to our own products carried hence, a restriction to which it does not appear that we have ever objected, a leading object on the part of Great Britain has been to prevent us from becoming the carriers of British West India commodities to any other country than our own. On the part of the United States it has been contended, first, that the subject should be regulated by treaty stipulation in preference to separate legislation; second, that our productions, when imported into the colonies in question, should not be subject to higher duties than the productions of the mother country or of her other colonial possessions, and, 3rd, that our vessels should be allowed to participate in the circuitous trade between the United States and different parts of the British dominions.
The first point, after having been for a long time strenuously insisted upon by Great Britain, was given up by the act of Parliament of [1825- 07], all vessels suffered to trade with the colonies being permitted to clear from thence with any articles which British vessels might export and proceed to any part of the world, Great Britain and her dependencies alone excepted. On our part each of the above points had in succession been explicitly abandoned in negotiations preceding that of which the result is now announced."Jackson was now ready to announce that the new arrangement made with Great Britain by his minister, Louis McLane "secures to the United States every advantage asked by them". It was a trade deal that would put America first. According to Jackson, our trade would now be placed on a more favorable footing than ever before, and we would now "enjoy in the colonial ports of Great Britain every privilege allowed to other nations". Jackson described a new world which was going to open the door to greater prosperity and new exciting opportunities not only for us, but the entire civilized world. The new arrangement was to create what Jackson called "neutral ports" where open and honest competition between nations would maintain their dignity and shield them from the influence of "seductive and vitiating (fraudulent) circumstances".
"This arrangement secures to the United States every advantage asked by them, and which the state of the negotiation allowed us to insist upon. The trade will be placed upon a footing decidedly more favorable to this country than any on which it ever stood, and our commerce and navigation will enjoy in the colonial ports of Great Britain every privilege allowed to other nations.
That the prosperity of the country so far as it depends on this trade will be greatly promoted by the new arrangement there can be no doubt. Independently of the more obvious advantages of an open and direct intercourse, its establishment will be attended with other consequences of a higher value. That which has been carried on since the mutual interdict under all the expense and inconvenience unavoidably incident to it would have been insupportably onerous had it not been in a great degree lightened by concerted evasions in the mode of making the transshipments at what are called the neutral ports. These indirections are inconsistent with the dignity of nations that have so many motives not only to cherish feelings of mutual friendship, but to maintain such relations as will stimulate their respective citizens and subjects to efforts of direct, open, and honorable competition only, and preserve them from the influence of seductive and vitiating circumstances."There were lots of questions about the trade deals, and critics complained that it was being done in secret. At the close of the last session, Congress had been given a copy of the instructions which were given to Mr. McLane, but many details of the negotiation were withheld from Congress because as of what Jackson called confidential negotiations. Jackson promised that as soon as there is evidence of "execution on the part of Great Britain", the whole matter would be laid before Congress, but he had to dispel rumors that to restore reciprocal trade, McLane had done so "at the sacrifice of public interest in other areas". Jackson told Congress that this was "wholly unfounded", and that the change of direction that has taken place was done so honorably and with best intentions by both parties. Unfortunately, I could not find any information about these rumors, so for now they will have to remain a mystery lost in history.
"When your preliminary interposition was asked at the close of the last session, a copy of the instructions under which Mr. McLane has acted, together with the communications which had at that time passed between him and the British Government, was laid before you. Although there has not been any thing in the acts of the two Governments which requires secrecy, it was thought most proper in the then state of the negotiation to make that communication a confidential one. So soon, however, as the evidence of execution on the part of Great Britain is received the whole matter shall be laid before you, when it will be seen that the apprehension which appears to have suggested one of the provisions of the act passed at your last session, that the restoration of the trade in question might be connected with other subjects and was sought to be obtained at the sacrifice of the public interest in other particulars, was wholly unfounded, and that the change which has taken place in the views of the British Government has been induced by considerations as honorable to both parties as I trust the result will prove beneficial."Jackson then pivoted to the actions he and his party took to make all this possible, and perhaps a chance to thrown in a jab at the opposition party. Here he gave the credit to the new 21st Congress which was decidedly pro-Jacksonian. By reversing course from the Adams administration and proactively opening American ports to British vessels they were able to restore the "mutual confidence and good feeling" that is ultimately required to establish trade on fair principles. Incidentally, this was the same approach that the British took back in 1825. In 1825, the British offered to allow American vessels to carry goods from British ports to any foreign ports and expected us to return the favor, something the Adams administration and the Anti-Jacksonian Congress at the time failed to do. Jackson intended to take full advantage of this new " most frank and friendly spirit on the part of Great Britain" to cultivate the good relations with Great Britain to the fullest extent of his ability.
"This desirable result was, it will be seen, greatly promoted by the liberal and confiding provisions of the act of Congress of the last session, by which our ports were upon the reception and annunciation by the President of the required assurance on the part of Great Britain forthwith opened to her vessels before the arrangement could be carried into effect on her part, pursuing in this act of prospective legislation a similar course to that adopted by Great Britain in abolishing, by her act of Parliament in 1825, a restriction then existing and permitting our vessels to clear from the colonies on their return voyages for any foreign country whatever before British vessels had been relieved from the restriction imposed by our law of returning directly from the United States to the colonies, a restriction which she required and expected that we should abolish. Upon each occasion a limited and temporary advantage has been given to the opposite party, but an advantage of no importance in comparison with the restoration of mutual confidence and good feeling, and the ultimate establishment of the trade upon fair principles."And finally, Jackson could not complete this section without saying a few words about the service rendered by Louis McLane during the negotiations at the Court of St. James. Jackson stated that while the "best commentary" on his services would be the results themselves, it would break his heart ("doing violence to my feelings) if he did not take the opportunity to express his gratefulness and high esteem for the talents and efforts of his minister on this occasion.
"It gives me unfeigned pleasure to assure you that this negotiation has been throughout characterized by the most frank and friendly spirit on the part of Great Britain, and concluded in a manner strongly indicative of a sincere desire to cultivate the best relations with the United States. To reciprocate this disposition to the fullest extent of my ability is a duty which I shall deem it a privilege to discharge."
References
Presidency.ucsb.edu. (2019). Second Annual Message | The American Presidency Project. [online] Available at: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/second-annual-message-3 [Accessed 5 Jan. 2019].De Bow, J. (1854). Encyclopaedia of the trade and commerce of the United States. London: Trübner & Co., pp.9-10.
En.wikipedia.org. (2019). Louis McLane. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_McLane [Accessed 5 Jan. 2019].
Wagner, D. (2019). 1826 John Quincy Adams - Rescinding Free Trade with Great Britain. [online] Stateoftheunionhistory.com. Available at: http://www.stateoftheunionhistory.com/2018/03/1826-john-quincy-adams-rescinding-free.html [Accessed 5 Jan. 2019].
No comments:
Post a Comment