[332] Mr. Armstrong’s letter to M. Champigny, at Paris, ‘American Foreign Relations,’ vol. iii. There is a vast number of letters.

[333] Letter, August 22, 1809, to Mr. Armstrong.

[334] General Armstrong’s letter, February 4, 1808.

[335] ‘Diplomacy of the United States,’ p. 133.

[336] The convention was signed on the 3rd of July, 1815 (vide ‘Hertslet’s Treaties,’ vol. ii. p. 386); but so far as regards the great questions on which differences had arisen it settled nothing. It professed, indeed, to adjust the question of the north-east boundary; but this point was not arranged until many years afterwards, the two countries having been previously on the point of rupture. The north-west boundary, afterwards known as the Oregon dispute, was left in statu quo. Neither party cared to agitate the impressment question, although the Americans had at one period made this the chief ground for going to war. Both parties made a barren declaration, that they were desirous of continuing their efforts to promote the entire abolition of the slave-trade. The vapourings about neutral rights, with which the world had been nauseated for a number of years, were buried in silence, to be resuscitated whenever a national cry of agitation might be necessary for electioneering purposes. The question about blockade was set aside just in the like manner. The American claims relating to the impressment of seamen fell to the ground; and, with the exception of the Paris Declaration of 1856, the rights of neutrals, to a large extent, remain undecided to this day. The boundary question was deferred, not decided upon; and in 1834, as the award of the empire, the King of the Netherlands, did not satisfy either party, both refused to abide by it, and it was only settled by the award of the Emperor of Germany in 1872.

[337] The United States, in 1816, enacted “that so much of an Act as imposes a higher duty of tonnage or of import on vessels, and articles imported in vessels of the United States, contrary to the provisions of the countries between the United States and his Britannic Majesty, the ratifications whereof were mutually exchanged the 22nd of December, 1815, be, from and after the date of the ratification of the said convention, and during the continuance thereof, deemed and taken to be of force and effect.”

[338] Act, March 1, 1817.

[339] Act, April 1818.

CHAPTER XII.

Earliest formation of wet-docks and bonded warehouses—System of levying duties—Opposition to any change—Excise Bill proposed, 1733—but not passed till 1803—Necessity of docks for London—Depredations from ships in London—The extent of the plunder—Instances of robberies—Scuffle hunters—“Game” ships—Ratcatchers—River-pirates—Their audacity—Light horsemen—Their organisation—“Drum hogsheads”—Long-shore men—Harbour accommodation—Not adequate for the merchant shipping—East and West India ships—Docks at length planned—West India Docks—Regulations—East India Docks—Mode of conducting business at the Docks—London Docks—St. Katharine’s Docks—Victoria and Millwall Docks—Charges levied by the Dock Companies—Docks in provincial ports, and bonded warehouses—Liverpool and Birkenhead Docks—Port of Liverpool, its commerce, and its revenue from the Docks—Extent of accommodation—Extension of Docks to the north—Hydraulic lifts and repairing basins—Cost of new works—Bye-laws of the Mersey Board—The pilots of the Mersey—Duties of the superintendent—Conditions of admission to the service—Pilot-boats and rates of pilotage.