Champlain ;-they certainly ought not to be allowed to say so, nor to do so. Cogent reasons may exist for the one, and not for the other.

The object to be attended to,-the justice of the case, is reciprocity of duties on the goods which pass from the one country to the other. It may suit the policy of Britain that no duties be charged on certain articles shipped by her merchants for Canada, and at the same time be very contrary to her interest or wishes, that the Americans also, should be allowed to send the same articles to Canada, free of duty. Whatever duties are charged on goods coming from one side of the line, may be charged on goods coming from the other, if thought adviseable: here the reciprocity would be perfect.

The Americans lay a duty of about 15 per cent. on almost every thing they get from Canada, while they annually send into Canada goods to near three times the amount, on which no duties are paid. Formerly, Canada was supplied with teas, cotton goods, silk, and all other East India articles by the British merchant, but

at present the large quantities of East India goods used in Canada, are supplied exclusively by the Americans. In the article of tea alone, it will be seen by a reference to the list, that the amount is near 20,0001. a year, which is a trifle even, compared to the sums annually paid for cotton goods.

By the 13th article of the treaty of commerce, 1794, "His Majesty consents "that the vessels belonging to the citizens "of the United States of America shall be "admitted and hospitably received in all "the sea-ports and harbours of the British "territories in the East Indies; and that "the citizens of the said United States

66

may freely carry on a trade between the "said territories, and the said United "States in all articles of which the im

portation or exportation respectively to 86 or from the said territories shall not be entirely prohibited."

66

In consequence of this permission, the Americans have gone largely into the East India trade; and, from a variety of advantages attached to a neutral flag, they have been able (particularly since the commencement of the French revolution) tà

import India goods into America, and transport them into Canada, so much cheaper than can be done by the British merchants, that the latter are entirely cut out of the trade. Not only the East India company are sufferers by it, but also the British mercantile and shipping interests. Add to this, that the money carried out of Canada in payment of these goods, creates a scarcity of cash, which lowers the rate of exchange, and occasions thereby an increase of price on every article of produce exported from Canada; and this increase falls on the person for whose account the produce is exported. Canadian produce is increased in price to the European consumer; and, in the English market, is less able to compete with the same sort of produce brought from America and elsewhere; and all this arises in consequence of the article in the treaty before quoted, allowing the Americans to carry into Canada, East India articles, groceries, &c. duty free. I, therefore, humbly conceive, that if the advantage of the mercantile and shipping interests of Britain is consulted, the above article ought to be abolished, or rather so modified that the British merchant

might send his goods into market on the same terms that the Americans do.

To strike effectually at the root of the evil, I believe the best way would be to prohibit the Americans from going to India. If the goods are once in the United States, it will be next to impossible to prevent their being carried into Canada, their line of boundary being so extensive. I cannot pretend to say what advantages result to our East India possessions, from the Americans having liberty to go there; but, it strikes me, as being very much against the mercantile and shipping interests of Britain.

The Americans for some years past, have supplied, not only Canada, but likewise the West India islands, and the Spanish main, with a variety of Asiatic produce, brought from thence in American bottoms, which, it is presumed, must have been brought in British bottoms, had the trade not been thrown open to America. I do not pretend, however, to be suf-. ficiently informed on this matter, to embrace the question in all its different bearings.

I understand that a new treaty is now on the stocks between Britain and America. If the first ten articles of the treaty of 1794 are still declared permanent, particularly the third article, and this, after maturely considering its operation in Canada, and weighing the information which the merchants connected with Canada are ready and able to give, we may presume that something more is taken into consideration by our legislators than we are aware of, otherwise they would not do that which seems to every one who knows the Canada trade, to be contrary to the best interests of Britain.-I say of Britain, for I hold it to be a thing certain that the footing on which the trade at present stands, is the best that can be for Canada; for it assuredly is advantageous to Canada, to receive tea, groceries, and East India goods in great abundance, and at a cheaper rate than she can from England. But, it is disadvantageous to Britain both in a commercial and political point of view, that her colonies should draw their supplies from any other quarter than from Britain; it would in time render them independent