You have proven no such thing. You haven’t even addressed the fact that I have SHOWN that foreign ships DID carry cotton and other crops from Southern ports before, and right up to, secession, yet you ignore that evidence.
Actually I didn't read the evidence. I had to go back and look at that message because the first time I saw it, I couldn't understand what you were saying. Now that i've looked at it more closely, it appears you were saying British ships carried cotton for export.
The tariffs and penalties were on imports. Foreign ships were not allowed to carry cargoes between ports, and so the only cargo that could have been carried for import would have had to go to New Orleans. Now it might have been legal for the ship to stop elsewhere, unload it's cargo, then go to New Orleans with an empty hold and then load up cotton from there and then go to Europe, but i'm not completely sure about that.
What I am certain they could not have done was to stop at one port, say Mobile, load cargo and then proceed to New Orleans and load or unload cargo.
Only American ships could do that, and this rule is still in effect today.
And yes I ignore that evidence, because it doesn't directly address the dispute over the cost of tariffs and the effect of the Navigation act of 1817. There were no tariffs or rules on export cargo, only import cargo.