Reciprocity treaties only, partially, of value,
- ever, as shown in the note,[1] were, for the time,
satisfactory to both countries, in so far as they materially tended to increase intercourse, while they, certainly, proved advantageous, in the long run, to the shipowners of England. But they were full of inconsistencies, and, as the trade between nations increased, it became simply impossible to carry them out satisfactorily.
Nor was it, indeed, likely that people of different nations, who had been thus far "educated" to the advantages derivable from free intercourse, would continue to endure the absurd clauses of treaties prohibiting them from using corn, cotton, sugar, and numerous other necessaries of life, piled in heaps as these often were in their stores and warehouses, merely because they had been imported in other ships than those of Great Britain, or of the countries where they had been produced.
and do not check the anomalies of Protection. The fact was, that while these treaties did create a sort of uniformity before unknown, and so far increased the facilities of intercourse, they did not obviate the most glaring hardships and inconveniences of the previous system of protection. An American vessel, for instance, might bring American cotton to England direct; but if this cotton had been landed at any foreign port, neither the ships of that country nor of any other could have conveyed it
- ↑ In 1814 there were entered inwards 1,290,248 tons of British shipping, and 599,287 tons of foreign shipping. In 1824 there were entered inwards 1,797,320 tons of British shipping, and 759,441 tons of foreign shipping. In 1846 there were entered inwards 4,294,733 tons of British shipping, and 1,806,282 tons of foreign shipping. The clearances at the respective dates were about the same in amount and proportion.
