Open Collections

BC Historical Books

BC Historical Books

BC Historical Books

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting (pursuant to a resolution of the House… United States. President (1817-1825 : Monroe) 1823

Item Metadata

Download

Media
bcbooks-1.0308182.pdf
Metadata
JSON: bcbooks-1.0308182.json
JSON-LD: bcbooks-1.0308182-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): bcbooks-1.0308182-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: bcbooks-1.0308182-rdf.json
Turtle: bcbooks-1.0308182-turtle.txt
N-Triples: bcbooks-1.0308182-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: bcbooks-1.0308182-source.json
Full Text
bcbooks-1.0308182-fulltext.txt
Citation
bcbooks-1.0308182.ris

Full Text

     rLtfUs—
1*71 ]
:TBSSMr'
FROM   THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
TRANSMITTING
(Pursuant to a resolution of the House of Representatives, of the 22d ult.)
&t)t <&QVVt89W%WW
BETWEEN THE
Government of the United States and Great Britain.
RELATIXG TO THE
NEGOTIATION OF THE CONVENTION
OF THE 20tb OCTOBER, 1818»
FEBRUARY 15, 1823.
Read, and ordered to lie upon the table.
WASHINGTON :
»HÎ3rTED  BY GAEES  &? SEATON»
1823. •-♦  -t C71]
t
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives, 22d of January last, requesting a communication to the House
of all the correspondence between the Government of the United
States and Great Britain, relating to tbe negotiation of the convention of the 20th of October, 1818, which may not/be inconsistent with
the public interest, I transmit, herewith, to the House, a report from
the Secretary of State, together with the papers requested by the resolution of the House.
JAMES MONROE.
Washington, ISth February, 1823.
^i  [71]
Department of State,
Washington, 13th February, 1823.
The Secretary of State, to whom has been referred the resolution
of the House of Representatives of the United States, of the 22d of
January last, requesting the communication to the House of " all the
M correspondence between the Government of the United States and.
" Great Britain, relating to tbe negotiation of the convention entered
" into between the two Governments, on the 20th of October, 1818,
gg which may not be inconsistent with tbe public interest," has- tbe
honor of submitting to the President of the United States the papers
required by the said resolution.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.  [ 71   ]
LIST OF PAPERS.
No. I. Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, to Mr. Baker, Charge d'Affaires     -
enclosing copy of a letter from Collector at
Barnstable to Secretary of Treasury, of
2. Mr. Baker to Mr. Monroe       -
3. Extract. Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams, Envoy, &c.
at London - - jpg
4. Do.       Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe   - JÈg
5. Do.       Same to Lord Castlereagh
6. Do.        Same to Mr. Monroe
Enclosing copy of a letter to Lord Castlereagh
7. Extracts. Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe -
8. Do.        Same to same -
With copy of extract of a letter from Lord Ba-
thurst -
9. Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe      -
With copy of a letter from Lord Batliurst to Mr.
Adams        -
10. Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe      - - -
With a copy of a letter from Lord Bathurst to
Mr. Adams, of
11. Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams     -
12. Same to same ij|S ~  |3
13. Extract. Same to same -
Same to same -
Same to same -
Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe -
Same to same -
Same to same -
With copy of a note from Mr. Adams to  Lord
Castlereagh, of       -
19. Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe      -
With copy of Lord Castlereagh's letter to Mr.
Adams, of -
20. Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe      -
21. Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams
22. Mr. Bagot, Envoy, &e. to Mr. Monroo
23. Mr. Monroe to Mr. Bagot     SI
24. Mr. Bagot to Mr. Monroe
14.
Do.
15.
Do.
16.
Do.
17.
Do.
18.
Do.
July
18,1
3
1815.
Aug.
31
July
21
Aug.
15
9
Sept.
5
19
£6
25
Oct.
31
25
Nov.
8
Oct.
30
Feb.
27
27
1816
May
24
July
8
Aug.
13
24
Sept.
18
27
17
Oct.
.5
Sept.
28
Dec.
24
Feb.
5
1817
Nov.
27
1816
Dec.
30
31 8
[ 71 ]
25. Mr. Monroe to Mr. Bagot      - - ^m
26,f Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe     -
Enclosing copy of four articles proposed by Lord
Castlereagh.
27. Extract. Mr. Adams to Lord Castlereagh
28. Do.       Lord Castlereagh to Mr. Adams
29. Mr. Rush, acting Secretary of State, to Mr. Ba
got ------
30. Same to same -
31. Mr. Bagot to Mr. Rush -
Enclosing copy of the orders issued by Admiral
Milne; and copy of a letter from Captain
Chambers to same.
32. Extract. Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, to Mr.
Rush, Envoy, &c. at London
33. Do. Same to same -
34. Do. *       Same to Mr. Gallatin
35. Full power to Messrs. Gallatin and Rush
36. Extract. Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush
37. Do.        Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams
38. Do.        Same to same
39. Extracts. Mr. Adams to Messrs. Gallatin and
Rush
40. Extract.   Same to Mr. Gallatin '£jjjÊ
41. Do. Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams
42. Do. Same to same -
43. Do. Same to same -
44. Do.        Same to same
45. Do. Same to same -
46. Do. Same to same -
47. Mr. Adams to Messrs. Gallatin and Rush
48. Extract.   Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams
49. Do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush
50. Same to same (two articles enclosed)
51. Do.        Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams
52. Extracts. Same to same -
53. Extract.   Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush
Jan.    7 1817
Mar. 20
April 21
May   7
IS »so
Aug.   4
8
Nov.
6
May
21
22
22
3,0
June
26
July
25
28
29
Aug.
13
15
28
Oct.
12
19
27
Nov.
2
Dec.
8
1
May
7
June
14
Sept.
17
May
27
1818
818
1819
1820 [71]
Mr. Monroe to Mr. Baker, Charge d9Affaires from England.
Department of State,
July 18, 1815»
Sir: I have the honor to communicate to you a copy of a letter
from the Collector of the Customs at Barnstable, to the Secretary
of the Treasury, by which it appears that an American vessel, engaged in the cod fishery, in long. 65 20, lat. 42 41, was warned
off, by the commander of the British sloop of war Jaseur, and ordered not to approach within 60 miles of the coast; with which order, the
commander of the American vessel immediately complied. It appears, also, that a similar warning had been given by the commander of the Jaseur to all the other American vessels that were then in
sight.
This extraordinary measure has excited no small degree of surprize. Being altogether incompatible with the rights of the United
States, it is presumed that it has not been authorized by your government. I invite your attention to it, in the hope, that, as you
have been charged by your government with the execution of the
late treaty of peace, and are acquainted with its views on all questions connected with it, you will consider yourself authorized to interpose to prevent the progress of an evil which will be so extensively and deeply felt by the citizens of the United States.
I have the honor, &c. &c.
JAMES MONROE.
Anthony St. John Baker, Esq.
fyc. tiçc. Sçc.
Collector of Customs at Barnstable, to ^^^ecretary of the Treasury.
Collector's Office, Barnstable, July 3, 1815.
Sir: I think it my duty to inform $oo* that the captain of a vessel regularly licensed for the cod fishery^Jias just reported to this
office, that on the 19th day of June last, being in long. 65 20, N lat.
42 41, about 45 miles distant from Cape Sables, be fell in with his
Britannic Majesty's sloop of war Jaseur, N. Lock, commander, who
warned him off, and endorsed his enrolment and license in the words
following:
4, Warned off the coast by his Majesty's sloop Jaseur, not to come
within sixty miles.
N. LOCK, Captain.
June 19th, 1815." 19
[71]
In consequence of which, the fisherman immediately left the fishing ground, and returned home without completing his fare.
The captain of the fisherman further states, that all the fishing
vessels then in sight were warned off in the same manner, by the said
captain Lock.
I am, Sir, very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
ISAIAH L. GREEN,
Collector»
Hon. A. J* Dallas, Esq. ^p
Mr. Baker to Mr. Monroe*
Philadelphia, August 31,1815.
Sir: I have tbe honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of
the 18th ultimo, together with its enclosure, relating to the warning
off, to the distance of 60 miles from the coast of Nova Scotia, of some
American fishing vessels, by His Majesty's brig Jaseur.
This measure was, as you have justly presumed in your note, totally unauthorized by His Majesty's Government, anil I have the
satisfaction to acquaint you, that orders have been given by the Naval Commanders in Chief on the Halifax and Newfoundland Stations, which will effectually prevent the re-currence of any similar
interruption to the vessels belonging to the United States engaged in
fishing on the high seas.
I have the honour to be, with the greatest consideration, and respect, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
| | ANTHONY ST. J. BAKER.
Hon, James Monroe, 1||
Sçe. Sçc. Sçc.
Extract of a letter fma Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, to Mr. Adams.
July 21st, 1815.
ijflW Among the acts whieh we have to complain of with greatest earnestness, is a late warning given by the Commander of a British
sloop of War to our fishermen, near the coast of the British northern
colonies, to retire thence to the distance of 20 leagues. This, it is
presumed, has been done under a construction of the late treaty of
peace, which, by being silent on the subject, left that important interest to rest on the ground on which it was placed by the treaty of t?l]
it
17S3. The right to the fisheries required no new stâpuîation to support it. It was sufficiently secured by the treaty of 1783. This important subject will claim your early attention. The measure thus
promptly taken by the British Government, without any communication with this Government, notwithstanding the declaration of our
Ministers at Ghent, that our right would not be affected by the silence
of the treaty, indicates a spirit which excites equal surprise and regret:
one which by no means corresponds with the amicable relations established between the two countries by that treaty, or with the spirit
with which it has been executed by the United States..
As you are well acquainted with the solidity of our right to the
fisheries in question, as well as to those on the Grand Bank, and elsewhere on the main ocean, to the limit of a marine league only from
the coast, (for the pretension to remove us 20 leagues is too absurd
fo be discussed,) I shall not dilate on it, especially at this time. It is
sufficient to observe here, that the right of the United States to take
fish on the coast of Newfoundland, and on the coasts, bays, and
creeks, of all other His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America,
and to dry ano* cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbors, and
creeks, of Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands, and Labrador, in short,
that every right appertaining to the fisheries which was secured by
the treaty of 1783, stands now as unshaken and perfect as it then did,
constituting a vital part of our political existence, and resting on the
same solid foundation as our Independence itself. In the act of dismemberment and partition, the rights of each party were distinctly
defined. So much of territory and incidental rights were allotted to
one—so much to the other; and as well might it be said, because our
boundary had not been retraced in the late treaty, in every part, that
certain portions of our territory hod reverted to England, as that
our right to fish, by whatever name secured, had experienced that
fate. A liberty of unlimited duration, thus secured, is as much a
right, as if it had been stipulated by any other term. Being to be
enjoyed by one, adjoining the territory allotted by tbe partition to
the other party, it seemed to be the appropriate term. I have made
these remarks to shew the solid ground on which this right is deemed
to rest by this government, relying on your thorough knowledge of
the subject to illustrate and support it in the most suitable manner.
It can scarcely be presumed, that the British Government, after
the result of the late experiment, in the present state of Europe, and
under its other engagements, can seriously contemplate a renewal of
hostilities. But it often happens with nations, as well as with individuals, that a just estimate of its interest, and duties, is not an infaillible criterion of its conduct. We ought to be prepared at every
point to guard against such an event. You will be attentive to circumstances, and give us timely notice of any danger which may be
menaced. W. 12 [ 71 ] f
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe.
London, 15th August, 1815.
" I had mentioned the subject of the slaves in my first interview
with b^m,(Lord Castlereagh,) and he had then expressed an intention
to refer it to the Commissioners, with whom we were then negotiating the commercial convention. But they received no instructions
relative to it, and considered their powers as limited to the objects
upon which my colleagues were authorized, conjointly with me, to
treat.^The day before Lord Castlereagh left town, I spoke to him
again concerning it. He had just received despatches from Mr. Baker relating to it, but had not had time to read them, and merely told
me that, during his absence, Lord Liverpool, or Lord Bathurst, would
attend to the business of his Department. After writing the note,
of which the copy is enclosed, I requested an interview with Lord
Liverpool, for which he appointed last Saturday, but an accident
prevented me from then meeting him. I have renewed the request,
but as he was not in town, when my note was sent, it may be deferred until after Mr. Bagot's departure."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Lord Castlereagh.
Charles Street, TTestminster, 9th August, 1815.
"In two several conferences with your Lordship, I have had the
honor of mentioning the refusal of his'Majesty's naval commanders,
who, at the restoration of peace between the United States and Great
Britain, were stationed on the American coast, to restore the slaves
taken by them from their owners in the United States during the war,
and then in their possession, notwithstanding the stipulation in the
first article of the treaty of Ghent, that such slaves should not be
carried away. Presuming that you are in possession of the correspondence on this subject, which has passed between the Secretary of
State of the United States, and Mr. Baker, it will be unnecessary
for me to repeat the demonstration, that the carrying away of these
slaves is incompatible with the terms of the treaty, If But, as a refer-
rence to the documents of the negotiation at Ghent may serve to elucidate the intentions of the contracting parties, I am induced to present them to your consideration, in the hope, that the Minister of
his Majesty, now about to depart for the ijnited States, may be authorized to direct the restitution of the slives, conformably to the
treaty, or to provide for the payment of toe value of those carried
away contrary to that stipulation; which, jin the event of their not
being restored, I am instructed by my government to claim. The
first projet of the treaty of Ghent was offered by the American
plenipotentiaries, and that part of the first article relating to slaves,
was therein expressed in the following manner: "All territory, [ 71 ]
13
places, and possessions, without exception, taken by either party from
the other, during the war, or which may be taken after the signing
of this treaty, shall be restored without delay, and without causing
any destruction, or carrying away any artillery, or other public property, or any slaves, or other private property."
The projet was returned by the British plenipotentiaries, with the
proposal of several alterations, and, among the rest, in this part of
the first article, which they proposed should be so changed as to
read thus—
Ê All territory, places, and possessions, without exception, belonging to either party, and taken by the other, during the war, or
which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, shall be restored
without delay, and without causing any destruction, or carrying away
any of the artillery, or other public property, or any slaves, or other
private property, originally captured in the said forts or places, and
which shall remain therein upon the exchange of the ratifications
of this treaty."
It will be observed that, in this proposal, the wo^ds " originally
captured in the said forts or places, and which shall remain therein
upon the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty," operated as a
modification of the article as originally proposed in the American
projet. Instead of stipulating that no property, public or private,
artillery, or slaves, should be carried away, they limited the prohibition of removal to all such property as had been originally captured
in the forts and places, and should remain there at the exchange of
the ratifications. They included within the limitation, private as
well as public property; and had the article been assented to in this
form by the American plenipotentiaries, and ratified by their government, it would have warranted the construction which the British
commanders have given to the article as it was ultimately agreed to,
and which it cannot admit.
For, by reference to the protocol of conference held on the 1st of
December, 1814, there will be found among the alterations to the
amended projet, proposed by the American plenipotentiaries, the
following:
" Transpose alteration consisting of the words i originally captured
in the said forts or places, and which shall remain therein, upon the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty, after the words public property,' agreed to by the British plenipotentiaries."
It thus appears, that the ilmerican plenipotentiaries admitted, with
regard to artillery and public property, the limitation which was proposed by the British amended projet, but that they did not assent to
it with regard to slaves and private property; that, on the contrary,
they asked such a transposition of the words of limitation, as would
leave them applicable only to artillery and public property, and would
except slaves and private property from their operation altogether.
That the British plenipotentiaries and government, by this proposed
transposition of the words, had full notice of the views of the other
contracting party, in adhering to the generality of the prohibition,
to carry away slaves and private property, while acquiescing in a li- 14
[71 ]
mitation with respect to artillery and public property. With this notice, the British government agreed to the transposition of the words,
and, accordingly that part of the article, as ratified by both governments, now stands thus:—
P All territory, places, and possessions whatsoever, taken by either
party, from the other, during the war, or which may be taken after
the signing of this treaty, excepting only the islands hereinafter
mentioned, shall be restored without delay, and without causing any
destruction, or carrying away any of the artillery, or other public
property originally captured in the said forts or places, and which
shall remain therein upon the exchange of the ratifications of this
treaty, or any slaves, or other private property."
From this review of the stipulation, as originally proposed at the
negotiation of Ghent, as subsequently modified by the proposals of the
respective plenipotentiaries, and as finally agreed to by both the contracting parties, I trust it will remain evident that, in evacuating all
places within the jurisdiction of the United States, and in departing
from their waters, the British commanders were bound not to carry
away any slaves, or other private property of tbe citizens of the
United States, which had been taken upon their shores. Had the
construction of the article itself been, in any degree, equivocal, this
statement of the manner in which it was drawn up, would have sufficed to solve every doubt of its meaning. It would also shew, that
the British plenipotentiaries were not unaware of its purport as understood by those of the United States."
EXTRACT.
Mr* Adams to Mr. Monroe.
LonOon, 5th September, 1815.
" In compliance with your instructions of 21st July, I have this day addressed Lord Castlereagh, claiming payment from the British government
for the slaves carried away from Cumberland Island, and the adjoining
waters, after the ratification of the treaty of peace, and in contravention
to one of the express stipulations of that treaty.
" My preceding despatches, Nos. 9 and 10, will have informed you of the
steps I had taken, by an official letter to Lord Castlereagh, and by a personal interview with the Earl of Liverpool, in relation to this subject, previous to the receipt of your last instructions. The letter to Lord Castlereagh has, hitherto, remained unanswered; and Lord Liverpool made no
attempt to answer either the reasoning of your letter on the subject to
Mr. Baker, or the statement of the proof, with regard to the meaning of
the article, resulting from the manner in which it had been drawn up and
agreed to. The substance of what he said, was, that, in agreeing to the
article as it stands, they had not been aware that it would bind them tore-
store the slaves, whom their officers had enticed away, by promises of freedom. [71]
15
"The case of these slaves carried away from Cumberland, 9eems not
even t© admit of the distinction to which Mr. Baker and Lord Liverpool resorted. Yet the prospect of obtaining either restoration or indem*
nity, appears to me not more favorable in this case than in any others of the
same class. If there were any probability that this government would admit the principle of making indemnity, it would become necessary for me
to remark, that the list of slaves transmitted to me, and of which I have
sent to Lord Castlereagh a copy, is not an authenticated document."
Mr. Adams to Lord Castlereagh.
Charles street, Westminster, 5th September, 1815.
My Lord: In the letter which I had the honor of addressing to your
Lordship, on the 9th of August last, I stated that I had been instructed by
my government to claim the payment of the value of the slaves carried
aWay from the United States, by the British naval commanders stationed on
the American coast, notwithstanding the express stipulation to the contrary in the first article of the treaty of Ghent, in the event that such slaves
should not be restored to their owners.
The enclosed is a copy of a list of seven hundred and two slaves, taken
in the state of Georgia, by the forces under the command of Rear Admiral
Cockburn, arid carried away, after the ratification of the treaty of peace,
from Cumberland Island, or the waters adjacent to the same, which has
been transmitted to me by the Secretary of State of the United States,
with a new instruction to claim the indemnity, justly due to the owners, to
the full value of each slave. Should his Majesty's government now prefer
to restore the slaves, who must yet be in their possession, or that of their
officers, it is presumed to be sull practicable; but their removal having
been in contravention to the express stipulation of the treaty, it is to the
faith of Great Britain, pledged by that stipulation, that the United States
can alone recur for indemnification to the owners for the loss of their property, if the slaves are not restored.
If it should be deemed expedient rather to make this compensation than
to restore the slaves to their owners, I am authorized to enter into such arrangements' as may be proper for ascertaining the amount of the indemnity
to be made, and settling the manner in which it maybe allowed.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration,
Your Lordship's very humble and obedient servant,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe, stating the substance of a conversation with Lord Bathurst.
London,^19^ September, 1815.
É The transactions to which yeur instructions, of 21st July, have reference, were of a character to excite, in the highest degree, the attention of 16
[71]
the government of the United States. So many simultaneous acts of British ofiicers, at various stations, and upon both elements, indicating a marked spirit of hostility, were calculated to inspire serious doubts with regard
to the pacific, not to say the amicable dispositions of the British government; and the latter part of your despatch made it incumbent upon me,
under certain contingencies, to- take measures of which nothing that had
occurred here had induced me even to think, as precautions which the
course of events might render expedient, The commercial convention had
shewn how excessively difficult it was for British and American plenipotentiaries to agree upon any one point, in which the mutual interests of the
two countries were involved. It had shewn how very few points there were
upon which any agreement could be made, and it was evident, from every
thing excepting the personal courtesies of the Prince and his cabinet, that
the animosities of the condition from which the two nations had lately
emerged, had very little subsided. I had, however, before the receipt of
your d jspatch, not a suspicion that an immediate renewal of hostilities was
contemplated; and even now, although I perceive no reason for flattering
myself that any satisfaction will be given us, upon any one of our causes of
complaint, yet I do not apprehend that any act of open and avowed hostility will be sanctioned by the British government, at the present moment.
It must, however, be added, that the most, perhaps the only unequivocal
pledge of pacific intentions, is the reduction of the fleet, not only to a peace
establishment, but to an unusually small one. Your despatch, and the several procedures to which it related, awakened an anxiety that nothing
should be omitted which could be of any possible utility to our interests in
this quarter.
Having formally renewed the claim for the restitution of the slaves carried away contrary to the engagements of the treaty of peace, or for payment of their value as the alternative, there were other objects which I
deemed it necessary to present again to the consideration of this government. In the first instance it seemed advisable to open them by a verbal
communication, and I requested of Lord Bathurst an interview, for which
he appointed the 14th instant, when I called at his office in Downing street.
I said that, having lately received despatches from you, respecting several
objects of some importance to the relations between the two countries, my
first object, in asking to see him, had been, to inquire whether he had received from Mr. Baker a communication of the correspondence between
you and him, relative to the surrender of Michillimakinac; to the proceedings of Colonel Nichols in the southern part of the United States; and to the
warning given by the captain of the British armed vessel Jaseur, to certain
American fishing vessels, to withdraw from the fishing grounds to the distance of sixty miles from the coast. He answered, that he had received all
these papers from Mr. Baker, about four days ago; that an answer with regard to the warning of the fishing vessels had immediately been sent; but,
on the other subjects, there had not been time to examine the papers and
prepare the answers. I asked him if he could, without inconvenience, state
the substance of the answer that had been sent. He said, certainly. It
had been, that, as on the one hand Great Britain could not permit the vessels of the United States to fish within the creeks, and close upon the
shores, of the British territories, so, on the other hand, it was by no means
her intention to interrupt them in fishing any where in the open sea, or
without the territorial jurisdiction, a marine league from the shore. And,
therefore, that the warning given at the place stated, in the case referred to,
was altogether unauthorized.   I replied, that the particular act of the Bri- E 71 ]
IT
tish commander, in this instance, being disavowed, I trusted that the British government, before adopting any final determination upon the subject,
would estimate, in candor, and in that spirit of amity which my own government was anxiously desirous of maintaining, in our relations withthis-
country, the considerations Which I was instructed to present in support
of the right of the people of the United States to fish on the whole coast of
North America, which they have uniformly enjoyed from the first settlement of the country: that it was my intention to address, in the course
of a few days, a letter to him on the subject^? He said that they would give
due attention to the letter that I should send him, but that Great Britain
had explicitly manifested her intention concerning it: that this subject, as
I doubtless knew, had excited a great deal of feeling in this country, perhaps much more than its importance deserved; but their own fishermen con--,
sidered it as an excessive hardship to be supplanted by American fishermen,
even upon the very shores of the British dominions. I said, that those
whose sensibilities had been thus excited, had probably not considered the
question of right in the point of view in which it had been regarded by us:
that they were thé sensibilities of a partial and individual interest, stimulated by the passions of competition, and considering the right of the Ame?
ricans as if it had been a privilege granted to them by the British government. If this interest was to have weight in determining the policy of the
cabinet, there was another interest liable to be affected in the opposite manner, which would be entitled equally to consideration: the manufacturing
interest. The question of right had not been discussed at the negotiation
of Ghent. The British plenipotentiaries had given a notice that the British government did not intend hereafter to grant to the people of the United States the right to fish, and to cure and dry fish within the exclusive British jurisdiction in America, without an equivalent, as It had been granted by v the treaty of peace in seventeen hundred and eighty-three. The
American plenipotentiaries had given notice, in return, that the American government considered all the rights and liberties in and to the
fisheries on the whole coast of North America, as sufficiently secured by
the possession of them, which had always been enjoyed previous to the
revolution, and by the recognition of them, in the treaty of peace in 1783.
That they did not think any new stipulation necessary for a further confirmation of the right; no part of which did they consider as having been forfeited by the war. It was obvious, that the treaty of peace of 1783 was
not one of those ordinary treaties, which, by the usages of nations, were
held to be annulled by a subsequent war between the same parties. It was
not, simply, a treaty of peace. It was a treaty of partition between two
parts of one nation, agreeing thenceforth to be separated into two distinct
sovereignties. The conditions, upon which this was done, constituted, essentially, the independence of the United States, and the preservation of
all the fishing rights, which they had constantly enjoyed over the whole
coast of North America, was among the most important of them. This
was no concession, no grant, on the part of Great Britain, which could be
annulled by a war. There had been, in the same treaty of 1783, a right
recognized in British subjects to navigate the Mississippi. This right
the British plenipotentiaries at Ghent, had considered as still a just claim
on the part of Great Britain, notwithstanding the war that had intervened.
The American plenipotentiaries, to remove all future discussion upon both
points, had offered to agree to an article, expressly confirming both the
rights. In declining this, an offer had been made on the part of Great
Britain, of an article, stipulating to negotiate in future, for the renewal of
3 18
C 71 ]
both the rights, for equivalents, which Was declined by the American plenipotentiaries, on the express ground, that its effect would have been an
implied admission that the rights had been annulled. There was, therefore, no article concerning them in the treaty,# and the question, as to thé
right, was not discussed. I now stated the ground upon which the government of the United States considered the right as subsisting and unimpaired. The treaty of 1783, was, in its essential nature, not liable to be
annulled by a subsequent war. It acknowledged the United States as a
sovereign and independent power. It would be an absurdity, inconsistent
with the acknowledgment itself, to suppose it liable to be forfeited by a
war. The whole treaty of Ghent did constantly refer to it as existing, and
in full force; nor was an intimation given, that any further confirmation of
it was supposed to be necessary. It would be for the British government
ultimately to determine, how far this reasoning was to be admitted as correct. There were, also, considerations of policy and expediency, to which
I hoped they wouldgive suitable attention, before they should come to a
final decision upon this point. I thought it my duty to suggest them, that
they might not be overlooked. The subject was viewed, by my countrymen, as highly important, and I was anxious to omit no effort, which might,
possibly, have an influence in promoting friendly sentiments between the
two nations, or in guarding against the excitement of others. These fisheries afforded the means of subsistence to multitudes of people, who were
destitute of any other. They also afforded the means of remittance to
Great Britain in payment for articles of her manufactures, exported to
America. It was well understood to be the policy of Great Britain, that
no unnecessary stimulus should be given to the manufactures in.the United States, which would diminish the importation from those of Great Britain. But, by depriving the fishermen of the United States of this source
of subsistence, the result must be, to throw them back upon the country
and drive them to the resort of manufacturing for themselves; while, on
the other hand, it would cut off the means of making remittances in payment for the manufactures of Great Britain."
" I thought it best to urge every consideration, which might influence a
party having other views in that respect, to avoid coming to a collision
upon it. I would even urge considerations of humanity. I would say <
that fisheries, the nature of which was to multiply the means of subsistence
to mankind, were usually considered, by civilized nations, as under a sort
of special sanction. It wâs a common practice to have them uninterrupted
even in time of war. He knew, for instance, that the Dutch had been, for
centuries, in the practice of fishing upon the coasts of this island, and that
they were not interrupted in this occupation, even in ordinary times of
war. It was to be inferred from this, that, to interdict a fishery, which
has been enjoyed forages, far from being an usual act in the peaceable relations between nations, was an indication of animosity, transcending even
the ordinary course of hostility in war. He said that no such disposition
was entertained by the British government. That to shew the liberality
which they had determined to exercise in this case, he would assure me,
that the instructions which he had given to the officers on that station had
been, not even to interrupt the American fishermen, who might have proceeded to those coasts, within the British jurisdiction, for the present year;
to allow them to complete their fares, but to give them notice that this privilege could no longer be allowed by Great Britain, and that they must not
return the next year. It was not so much the fishing, as the drying and
curing onihe shores, that had been followed by bad consequences. It happened that our fishermen, by their proximity, could get to the fishing sta - [ 71 ]
19
tions sooner in the season than the British, who were obliged to go from
Europe, and who, upon arriving there, found all the best fishing places,
and drying and curing places, pre-occupied. This had often given rise to
disputes and quarrels between them, which, in some instances, had proceeded even to blows. It had disturbed the peace among the inhabitants
on the shores; and, for several years before the war, the complaints to this
government had been so great, and so frequent, that it had been impossible
not to pay regard to them. I said, that I had not heard of any such com- .
plaints before, but, that as to the disputes arising from the competition of
the fishermen, a remedy could surely, with ease, be found for them, by
suitable regulations of the government; and with regard to the peace of the,
inhabitants, there could be little difficulty in securing it, as the liberty enjoyed by the American fishermen was limited to unsettled and uninhabited
places, unless they could, in the others, obtain the consent and agreement
of the inhabitants."
" The answer which was so promptly sent to the complaint relative to
the warning of the fishing vessels, by the captain of the Jaseur, will, probably, be communicated to you before you wall receive this letter. You will
see whether it is so precise, as to the limits within which they are determined to adhere to the exclusion of our fishing vessels, as Lord Bathurst's verbal statement of it to me—namely, to the extent of one marine league from
their shores. Indeed it is to the curing and drying upon the shore, that they
appear to have the strongest objection. But that, perhaps, is because, that
they know the immediate curing and drying of the fish, as soon as they are
taken, is essential to the value, if not to the very prosecution of the fishery.
I have no expectation that the arguments used by me, either in support of
our right, or as to the policy of Great Britain, upon this question, will
have any weight here. Though satisfied of their validity myself, I am
persuaded it will be upon the determination of the American government,
and people, to maintain the right, that the continuance of its enjoyment
will alone depend."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe.
LoNnoN, 26^ September, 1815.
" I have the honor to enclose a copy of a letter which I have addressed to Lord Bathurst on the subjects referred to, in your instructions of
21st July, and concerning which I had on the 14th instant, an interview
with him, the account of which was reported in my last letter. I have
not yet received -any answer to either of those which I addressed to Lord
Castlereagh, in relation to the slaves carried away, in violation of the
first article of the treaty of Ghent."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Earl Bathurst.
Charles-street, Westminster.
9.5th September, 1815.
"In the conference with your Lordship, with which I was honored on
the 14th instant, I represented to you, conformably to the instructions 26
[71]
which I had received from the government of the United States, the proceedings of several British officers in America, and upon the American
coast, marked with characters incompatible, not only with those amicable relations, which it is the earnest desire of the American government
to restore and to cultivate, but even with the condition of peace, which
had been restored between the two countries, by the treaty of Ghent.
It was highly satisfactory to be informed, that the conduct of captain
Lock, commander of the sloop of war Jaseur, in warning American fishing vessels not to come within sixty miles of the coast of his Majesty's
possessions in North America, was unauthorized, and that the instructions to the British officers on that station, far from warranting such a
procedure, had directed them not even to molest the American fishing
vessels which might be found pursuing that occupation during the present year. In offering a just tribute of acknowledgment to the fairness
and liberality of these instructions issued from your Lordship's office,
there only remained the regret, that the execution had been so different
from them in spirit, so opposite to them in effect.
But, in disavowing the particular act of the officer, who had presumed
to forbid American fishing vessels from approaching within sixty miles of
the American coast, and m assuring me, that it had been the intention of
this government, and the instructions given bv your Lordship, not even
to deprive the American fishermen of any of their accustomed liberties,
during the present year, your Lordship did also express it, as the intention
of the British government, to exclude the fishing vessels of the United
States, hereafter, from the liberty of fishing within one marine league of
the shores of all the British territories in North America, and from that
of drying and curing their fish on the unsettled parts of those territories,
and, with the consent of the inhabitants, on those parts which have become
settled since the peace of 1783.
I then expressed to your Lordship my earnest hope, that this determination had not been irrevocably taken, and stated the instructions which
I had received to present to the consideration of his Majesty's government the grounds upon which the United States conceive those liberties
to stand, and upon which they deem that such exclusion cannot be effected without an infraction of the rights of the American people.
In adverting to the origin of these liberties, it will be admitted, I presume, without question, that, from the time of the settlements in North
America, which now constitute the United States, until their separation
from Great Britain, and their establishment as distinct sovereignties, these
liberties of'fishing, and of drying and curing fish, had been enjoyed by
them, in common with the other subjects of the British empire. In point
of principle, they were pre-eminently entitled to the enjoyment, and, in
point of fact, they had enjoyed more of them, than any other portion of
the empire; their settlement of the neighboring country having naturally
led to the discovery and improvement of these fisheries, and their proximity to the places where they are prosecuted, and the necessities of their
condition, having led them to the discovery of the most advantageous fishing grounds; and given them facilities in the pursuit of their occupation
in those regions, whieh the remoter parts of the empire could not possess.
It might be added, that they had contributed their full share, and more
than their share, in securing the conquest from France, of the provinces
on the coasts of which these fisheries were situated.
It was, doubtless, upon considerations such as these, that, in the treaty of peace, between His Majesty and the United States, of 1783, an ex- [71]
21
toess stipulation was inserted, recognizing the rights and liberties which
had always been enjoyed by the people of the United States in these fisheries, and declaring that they should continue to enjoy the right of fishing
on the Grand Bank, and other places of common jurisdiction, and have
the liberty of fisbing, and of drying and curing their fish? within the exclu*
-sive British jurisdiction, on the North American coasts, to which they
had been accustomed while themselves formed a part of the British nation. This stipulation was a part of that treaty, by which his Majesty acknowledged the United States as free, sovereign, and independent States,
and that he treated with them as such.
It cannot be necessary for me to prove, my Lord, that that treaty is
not, in its general provisions, one of those, which, by the common understanding and usage of civilized nations is, or can be considered as annulled by a subsequent war between the same parties. To suppose that
it is, would imply the inconsistency and absurdity of a sovereign and independent state, liable to forfeit its right of sovereignty, by the act of exercising it on a declaration of war. But the very words of the treaty attest, that the sovereignty and independence of the United States were not
considered or understood as grants from his Majesty. They were taken
and expressed as existing before the treaty was made, and as then only
first formally recognized and acknowledged by Great Britain.
Precisely of the same nature were the rights and liberties in the fisheries
to which I now refer. They were, in no respect, grants from the King
of Great Britain to the United States; but the acknowledgment of them,
as rights and liberties enjoyed before the separation of the two countries,
and which, it was mutually agreed, should continue to be enjoyed under
the new relations which were to subsist between them, constituted the essence of the article concerning the fisheries. The very peculiarity of the
stipulation is an evidence that it was not, on either side, understood or intended as a grant from one sovereign state to another. Had it been so understood, neither could the United States have claimed, nor would Great
Britain have granted gratuitously any such concession. . There was nothing, either in the state of things, or in the disposition of the parties,
which could have led to such a stipulation, as on the ground of a grant,
without an equivalent, by Great Britain,
Yet such is the ground upon which it appears to have been contemplated, as resting, by the British government, when their plenipotentiaries at
Ghent, communicated, to those of the United States, their intentions as to
the North American fisheries, viz: " That the British government did not
intend to grant to the United States, gratuitously, the privileges formerly
granted by treaty to them, of fishing within the limits of the British sovereignty, and of using the shores of the British territories for purposes
connected with the British fisheries."
These are the words in which the notice, given by them, is recorded in
the protocol of conference of the 8th of August, 1814. To this notice the
American plenipotentiaries first answered, on the 9th of August, that
they had no instructions, from their government, to negotiate upon the
subject of the fisheries, and afterwards, in their note of 10th November,
1814, they expressed themselves in the following terms:
" In answer to the declaration made by the British plenipotentiaries,
respecting the fisheries, the undersigned, referring to what passed in the
conference of the 9th of August, can only state, that they are not authorized to bring into discussion any of the rights, or'liberties, which the United States have heretofore enjoyed in relation thereto.   From their nature, 22
[71 ]
and from the peculiar character of the treaty of 1783, by which they were
recognized, no further stipulation has been deemed necessary, by the government of the United States, to entitle them to the full enjoyment of all
of them."
If the stipulation of the treaty of 1783, was one of the conditions by
which his majesty acknowledged the sovereignty and independence of the
United States, if it was the mere ^recognition of rights and liberties previously existing, and enjoyed, it was neither a privilege gratuitously granted, nor liable to be forfeited by the mere existence of a subsequent war. If
it was not forfeited by the war, neither could it be impaired by the declaration of Great Britain, that she did not intend to renew the grant. Where
there had been no gratuitous concession, there could be none to renew; the
rights and liberties of the United States could not be cancelled by the
declaration of Great Britain's intentions. Nothing could abrogate them
but the renunciation of them by the United States themselves.
Among the articles of that same treaty, of 1783, there is one, stipulating that the subjects and citizens of both nations shall enjoy, forever, the
right of navigating the river Mississippi, from its sources to the ocean.
And although, at the period of the negotiations of Ghent, Great Britain
possessed no territory upon that river, yet the British plenipotentiaries, in
their first note, considered Great Britain as still entitled to claim the free
navigation of it, without offering for it any equivalent. And, afterwards,
when offering a boundary line, which would have abandoned every pretension, even to any future possession on that river, they still claimed, not
only its free navigation, buta right of access to it, from-the British dominions in North Ameçica, through the territories of the United States.
The American plenipotentiaries, to foreclose the danger of any subsequent
misunderstanding and discussion upon either of these points, proposed an
article recognizing anew the liberties on both sides. In declining^ to accept it, the British plenipotentiaries proposed an article engaging to negotiate, in future, for the renewal of both, for equivalents to be mutually
granted. This was refused by the American plenipotentiaries, on the a-
vowed principle, that its acceptance would imply the admission, on the
part of the United States, that their liberties in the fisheries, recognized
by the treaty of 1783, had been annulled, which they declared themselves
in no manner authorized to concede.
Let it be supposed, my Lord, that the notice given by the British plenipotentiaries, in relation to the fisheries, had been in reference to another
article of the same treaty. That Great Britain had declared, she did not
intend to grant again, gratuitously, the grant in a former treaty of peace,
acknowledging the United States as free, sovereign, and independent
states; or, that she did not intend to grant, gratuitously, the same boundary line, which she had granted in the former treaty ot peace. Is it not
obvious, that the answer would have been, that the United States needed
no new acknowledgment of their independence, nor any new grant of a
boundary line. That, if their independence was to be forfeited, or their
boundary line curtailed, it could only be by their own acts of renunciation,
©r of cession, and not by the declaration of the intentions of another go-^
vernment? And, if this reasoning be just, with regard to the other articles of the treaty of 1783, upon what principle can Great Britain select
one article, or a part of one article, and say this particular stipulation is
liable to forfeiture by war, or by the declaration of her will, while she
admits the rest of the treaty to be permanent and irrevocable? In the
negotiation of Ghent, Great Britain did propose several variations of the C71 ]
23
boundary line, but she never intimated that she considered the line of the
treaty of 1783 as forfeited by the war, or that its variation oould be effected by the mere declaration of her intentions. She perfectly understood, that no alteration of that line could be effected but by the express
assent of the United States, and, when she finally determined to abide by
the same line, neither the British, nor the American plenipotentiaries, conceived that any new confirmation of it was necessary. The treaty of
Ghent, in every one of its essential articles, refers to that of 1783, as being still in full force. The object of all its articles, relative to the boundary, is to ascertain, with more precision, and to carry into effect the provisions of that prior compact. The treaty of 1783, is, by a tacit understanding between the parties, and without any positive stipulation, constantly referred to as £he fundamental law of the relations between the
two nations. Upon what ground, then, can Great Britain assume that one
particular stipulation in that treaty, is no longer binding upon her?
" Upon this foundation, my Lord, the government of the United States
consider the people thereof as fully entitled, of right, to all the liberties
in the North American fisheries, which have always belonged to them;
which, in the treaty of 1783, were, by Great Britain, recognized as belonging to them; and which they never have, by any act of theirs, consented to renounce. With these views, should Great Britain ultimately
determine to deprive them of the enjoyment of these liberties by force, it
is not for me to say whether, or for what length of time, they would submit to the bereavement of that which they would still hold to be their unquestionable right. It is my duty to hope, that such measures will not be
deemed necessary to be resorted to on the part of Great Britain; and to
state, that, if they should, they cannot impair the right of the people of
the United States to the liberties in question, so long as no formal and express assent of Hheips shall manifest their acquiescence in. the privation.
"In the interview with which your Lordship recently favored me, I suggested several other considerations, with the hope of convincing your Lordship, that, independent of the question of rigorous right, it would conduce
to the substantial interests of Great Britain herself, as well as to the observance of those principles of benevolence and humanity, which it is the
highest glory of a great and powerful nation to respect, to leave to the
American fishermen the participation of those benefits which the bounty of
nature has thus spread before them; which are so necessary to their comfort and subsistence; which they have constantly enjoyed hitherto; and
which, far from operating as an injury to Great Britain, had the ultimate
result of pouring into her lap a great portion of the profits of their hardy
and laborious industry. That these fisheries afforded the means of subsistence to a numerous class of people in the United States, whose habits of
life had been fashioned to no other occupation, and whose fortunes had allotted them no other possession. That to another, and, perhaps, equally
numerous class of our citizens, they afforded the means of remittance and
payment for the productions of British industry and ingenuity, imported
from the manufactures of this United Kingdom. That, by the common
and received usages among civilized nations, fishermen were among those
classes of human society whose occupations, contributing to the general
benefit and welfare of the species, were entitled to a more than ordinary
share of protection. That it was usual to spare and exempt them even
from the most exasperated conflicts of national hostility. That this nation
had, for ages, permitted the fishermen of another country to frequent and
fish upon the coasts of this Island, without interrupting them, even in times 24
[71]
of ordinary war. That the resort of American fishermen to the barren,
uninhabited, and, for the great part, uninhabitable rocks, on the coasts of
Nova Scotia, the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and Labrador, to use them occasionally for the only purposes of utility of which they are susceptible, if it
must, in its nature, subject British fishermen, on the same coasts, to the
partial inconvenience of a fair competition, yet produces, in its result, advantages to other British interests equally entitled to the regard and fostering care Of their Sovereign. By attributing to motives derived from
such sources as these, the recognition of these liberties by his Majesty's government, in the treaty of 1783, it would be traced to an origin certainly
more conformable to the fact, and surely more honorable to Great Britam,
than by ascribing it to the improvident grant of an unrequited privilege, or
to a concession extorted from the humiliating compliance of necessity.
" In repeating, with earnestness, all these suggestions, it is with thehope
that, from some, or all, of them, his Majesty's government will conclude
the justice and expediency of leaving the North American fisheries, in tfte
state in which they have, heretofore, constantly existed; and the fishermen
of the United States unmolested in the enjoyment of JLheir liberties."
Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe.
London, 31 st October, 1815.
Sir: I have the honor to enclose copies of two papers received
from Lord Bathurst, relative to the taking and carrying away of
slaves from the United States by the British naval commander, in
violation of the first article of the treaty of Ghent, arfd also by an
abuse of the privilege allowed to a flag of truce.
I have the honor to be, respectfully,
Sir, your very humble, and obedient servant,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
Lord Bathurst to Mr. Adams.
Foreign Office, October 25, 1815.
The undersigned, one of his Majesty's principal Secretaries of
State, has had the honor to receive Mr. Adams's letters of the 9th
of August, and 5th of September last, the first of which recites the
first article of the treaty of Ghent, and requires *' that his Majesty's,
naval commanders, who, at the restoration of peace between the
United States and Great Britain, were stationed on the American
coast, should restore the slaves taken by them from their owners in
^the United States during the war, and then in their possession.''
This claim is set up in consequence of the following interpretation,
which is given to the first article of the said treaty, by the government of the United States, in as far as it relates to slaves and private
property, namely, <• That, in evacuating all places within the jurisdiction of the United States, and, in departing from their waters, the [71]
25
British commanders were bound not to carry away any slaves, or
other private property of the citizens of the United States, which had
been taken up on their shores:" and it takes its origin from a different construction of the same article of the treaty, by his Majesty's
naval officers on the coast of America, who, (according to Mr. Monroe's letter to Mr. Baker, of the 1st of April.) contend, that I Slaves
and other private property, are comprised under the same regulation
with artillery, and other public property, and that none ought, in
consequence, to be restored, except such as were, at the time of the
exchange of the ratifications of the treaty, in the forts and places
where they were originally taken." ||p
The arguments brought forward by the American government, in
support of their understanding of the first article of the treaty of
Ghent, rest partly upon the wording of the article itself, and partly
upon such collateral evidence as may be deduced from tbe intention
of the negotiators at the time they drew up that article.
The undersigned need not remind Mr. Adams of the inconvenience
which'would result, were the parties, upon whom treaties are binding, to recur to the intentions of the negotiators of such treaty, instead of taking as their guide the context of the treaty itself, on. any
point of controversy respecting %$
The undersigned is, however, willing to waive this objection.
In this instance, it would appear that the alteration in the original
article, proposed by the British Commissioners, was introduced by
a verbal amendment suggested by the American Plenipotentiaries.
Many alterations of this kind took place, sometimes at the suggestion of one party, and sometimes of the other. But it surely is not
meant to be inferred from this, that a change of phrase, professedly
verbal, is to be taken as necessarily denoting or importing an admitted change of construction. It is certainly possible, that one party
may propose an alteration, with a mental reservation of some construction of his own, and that he may assent to it, on a firm persuasion, that the construction continues to be the same, and that, therefore, he may conciliate, and yet concede nothing by giving his assent.
The proposed alteration was considered as merely verbal; no suspicion appears to have been entertained, that it changed the stipulation
as originally introduced; and it is not averred that the American
Plenipotentiaries then thought of the construction now set up by
their government. The meaning of the British negotiators is admitted to have been made quite apparent by their projet, and, as nothing
passed indicative of any objection to it, on the part of the American
Commissioners, or of any departure from it by the British negotiators, when the alteration wasr suggested by one party, and acceded to
by the other, and, as there was no discussion on the propriety of
. making the restitution more extensive as to slaves, and other private
property, than as to the other property mentioned, the undersigned
cannot subscribe to the conclusions which Mr. Adams and his government have drawn from this manner of viewing the subject.
The undersigned will now proceed to examine that part of the subject which regards the construction that has been given to tbe con- 26
[71]
text of tbe article in question, by the government of the United
States.
By the first article of the treaty, it is stipulated, that " there shall
be a firm and universal peace between his Britannic Majesty and the
United States, and between their respective countries, territories, cities, towns, and people of every degree, without exception of places
or persons, jj All hostilities, both by sea and land, shall cease as soon
as this treaty shall have been ratified by both parties, as hereinafter
mentioned. All territory, places, and possessions, whatsoever, taken
by either party from the other during the war, or which may be taken
after the signing of this treaty, excepting only the islands hereinafter
mentioned, shall be restored without delay, and without causing any
destruction, or carrying a way of any of the artillery, or other public
property, originally captured in said ports or places, and which shall
remain therein upon the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty,
or any slaves or other private property. And all archives, records,
deeds, and papers, either of a public nature, or belonging to private
persons, which, in the course of the war, may have fallen into the
bands of the officers of either party, shall be, as far as may be practicable, forthwith restored and delivered to the proper authorities
and persons to whom they respectively belong."
" Sucli of the islands in the bay of Passamaquoddy as are claimed
by both parties, shall remain in the possession of the party in whose
occupation they may be at the time of the exchange of the ratifications of thi§ treaty, until the decision respecting the title to the said
islands shall have been made in conformity with the fourth article of
this treaty."
" No disposition made by this treaty, as to such possession of the
islands and territories claimed by both parties, shall, in any manner
whatsoever, be construed to affect the right of either."
The main purport of the first article in the former part of it, relates to the general pacification, and, in the latter part of it, to some
of the direct consequences on the territorial possessions of the two
countries, and the property within such possessions. As to the public
property in the posts or places to be restored, it provides, that, if it
shall have the double condition annexed to it, of having been originally captured therein, and of remaining therein when the ratifications are exchanged, then such property is to be restored, and it is
not to be destroyed, or carried away.
It would surely have been unusual and unreasonable to have stipulated for the restitution of any property, which never had belonged
to the fort or place, or which had been already destroyed, or carried
away, so as no longer, in fairness, to have been considered as belonging to it, for it would seem to have no connection with tbe subject-
matter of that part of the article in which tbe stipulation concerning
it, must be supposed to occur. As to public property, it appears
quite plain, that the carrying away here spoken of, is from the fort,
or place to which it belonged, and from no other; for the condition
which is admitted to apply to that, would otherwise have no application at all.  And no sound reason can be given, why the condition [71 ]
27
might not, in both its branches, apply as well to private, as to public
property, provided the construction would fairly admit of it. Both
parties appear to agree to the conditions which relate to public property. But, then immediately follows, in the same sentence, thj!
words U or any slaves, or other private property," and here, the
question is, whether slaves and other private property are to be restored under the same limitation, provided in the same article, and in
that part of it, which immediately precedes the words in question, or
whether they are to be restored under different provisions.
In the first place, the words do not admit of, nor is it contended by
either party that there is, any distinction, whatever, made in this article, between slaves and other private property. They areincontes-
tibly placed on the same footing, and whatever stipulations/in this
article apply to slaves, as one description of private property, must,
of necessity, apply equally to all other private property^referred to
in the article.
The question then is, Under what conditions is it stipulated that
private property, (slaves inclusive,) is to be restored? If it be contended, that, by the position of the words in this article, private property is released from all the conditions under which it is admitted
that public property is to be restored, the restitution becomes in that
case unconditional. But Mr. Monroe does not contend for an unconditional restitution» and therefore seems to admit, that the stipulation respecting private property is not a new and substantial stipulation, independent of preceding words, but that the words " carrying away," which, in the preceding part of the sentence, apply to the
restitution of public property, apply equally to the restitution of private property. But, if the words " carrying away," apply to private as well as to public property, how entirely arbitrary it is to
say, that the intervening words do apply to the one, and do not apply
to the other, although the words if carrying away," grammatically
govern both. Admitting, however, this arbitrary construction, still
it would be more extensive than that for which Mr. Monroe contends. For, in case there could be no limitation assigned, as to the1
place where the private property was originally captured, nor any
limitation as to the place from whence the private property was not
to be carried away, all merchant vessels, therefore, captured on the
high seas, and their effects, must, according to this construction, be
restored, even if they should not be within the limits of the United
States, at the time of the exchange of the ratifications.^ Neither could
there be any limitation as to the time subsequent to which the carrying away is not to take place. It must be from the commencement
of the war, or from the signature of the treaty, or from the exchange
of the ratifications: whereas, Mr. Monroe contends, that the places
where they had been originally captured, the places from whence they
must not be carried away, and the period to which this limitation applies, are all ascertained by the first article.
According to the construction of this article by the American gor
vernment, the private property, in contemplation, is limited to such
as had been originally captured within the territories of the United 28
[71]
States, and such property, so captured, must not be carried away
after the exchange of the ratifications, nor from any place within the
limits of the United States, whether this private property be, at that
period, in American ports, or British ships of war, or British vessels.
But if the first article provide for all these stipulations, one of
tfiem, placing private property on the same footing as that on which,
by the same, public property is placed, and the others establishing
dissimilar conditions, it is impossible to look at those passages in this
first article, which can alone be made to apply to such provisions,
and not be at once satisfied that these limitations cannot be extracted
without such omissions and interpolations, as the undersigned is persuaded that it is not the intention of the American government to
maintain. As to the application of this article to private property,
on ship board, neither does the first article itself, nor did any discussion respecting it, express or refer to any such restitution of property-
remaining in British ships of war or British vessels. There are not
only no words in the article, which stipulate such a provision, but
there is a provision in thé second article, which stipulates the contrary. By the second, the conditions are stipulated on which vessels
and their effects are to be restored.#They are to be restored, if the
vessels be not captured, until after a given time from the exchange of
the ratifications. If the vessels were captured previousrto the time
limited, neither they, nor their effects, are to be restored, wherever
such vessels, with their effects, may be, although they should be within
the limits of the United States; yet, according to the stipulations of
the second article, which have a direct application to private property, on ship board, if they have been captured within a limited timef
they may be carried away at any subsequent period, without reference to the exchange of the ratifications.
To Mr. Monroe's observation, that destruction, in the first article, cannot apply to slaves, it might be sufficient to answer, that
the expression may certainly apply to other private property, and
that the stipulations which apply to the one, must apply to the other;
but the observation is, in truth, not material to the question at issue, because the point in dispute is not with reference to private
property destroyed, but to private property carried away, which
words, it is admitted, do apply to slaves and other private property.
The question then seems to be this: Is that construction the true
one which is the most simple, and is grammatically correct, and
was that which, it is admitted, one of the contracting parties intended, and against which the other did not at the time object; or is
that construction to be adopted which was not at the time profess*-
ed, which the words in the article do not express, and which is in
contravention of the article which immediately follows it?
In this alternative, the undersigned has no hesitation in communicating to Mr. Adams, that the British government is under the necessity of adhering to the construction of tbe disputed point, in the
first article of the treaty of Ghent, as set forth in this note, much
as it has to regret, that that construction should differ so widely
from that of the government of the United States. /
[71]
29
The undersigned requests Mr. Adams to accept the assurances of
BATHURST.
his high consideration.
Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe.
London, 8th November, 1815.
Sir: Since I had the honor of wrrting you last, of the 31st ultimo,
I have received from Lord Bathurst a note in answer to my letter
to him relating to the fisheries, copy of which is herewith enclosed.
I hope shortly to reply to this note, and perceive nothing in it, which
can render the rights of the United States, to the participation in
the fisheries, in any manner dubious.
It will be for the government of the United States to determine,
whether the negotiation, proposed by Lord Bathurst, will be advisable, and I pray to be honored with the President's instructions
on the subject, as soon as possible.
I am, with great respect,
Sir, your very obedient humble servant,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
Hon. James Monroe,
&c. &c. &c. l*fe
Lord Bathurst to Mr. Adams.
Foreign Office, October 30th, 1815,
The undersigned, one of his Majesty's principal Secretaries of
State, had the honor of receiving the letter of the Minister of the
United States, dated the 25th ultimo, containing the grounds upon
which the United States conceive them selves, at the present time, entitled to prosecute their fisheries within the limits of the British
sovereignty; and to use British territories for purposes connected
with the fisheries.
A pretension of this kind was certainly intimated on a former occasion, butin a manner so obscure that his Majesty's government
were not enabled even to conjecture the grounds upon which it could
be supported.
His Majesty's government have not failed to give to the argument
contained in the letter of the 25th ultimo, a candid and deliberate
consideration; and, although they are compelled to resist the claim
of the United States, when thus brought forward as a question of
right, they feel every disposition to afford to the citizens of those
states, all the liberties and privileges connected with the fisheries*
which can consist with the just rights and interests of Great Bri* 30
[ 71 ]
tain, and secure his Majesty's subjects from those undue molestations
in their fishery, which they have formerly experienced from citizens
of the United States.  The Minister of the United States appears, by
his letter, to be well aware that Great Britain has always considered
the liberty formerly enjoyed by the United States, of fishing within
British limits, and using British territory, as derived from the third
article of the treaty of 1783, and from that alone.    And that the
claim of an independent state to occupy and use at its discretion, any
portion of the territory of another, without compensation, or corresponding indulgence, cannot rest on any other foundation than conventional stipulation.     It is unnecessary to inquire into the  motives
which might have originally influenced Great Britain, in conceding
such liberties to the United States, or whether other articles of the
treaty, wherein these liberties are specified, did, or did not, in fact,
afford an equivalent for them; because all the stipulations profess to
be founded on reciprocal advantages and mutual convenience.   If the
United States derived from that treaty privileges from which other
independent nations, not admitted by treaty, were excluded, the duration of the privileges must depend on the duration of the instrument
"by which they were granted, and if the war-abrogated the treaty, it
determined the privileges.    It has been urged, ïfrdeed, on the part of
the United States, that the treaty of 1783 was of a peculiar character, and that because it contained a recognition  of American independence, it could not be  abrogated by a subsequent war between
the parties.    To a position of this novel nature, Great Britain cannot
accede.    She knows of no exception to the rule, that all treaties are
put an end to by a subsequent war between the same parties; she
cannot, therefore, consent to give to her diplomatic relations with
one state, a different degree of permanency from that on which her
connection with all other states depends.    Nor can she consider any
one state at liberty to assign to a treaty made with her, such a peculiarity of character, as shall make it, as to duration, an exception to
all other treaties, in order to found, on a peculiarity thus assumed, an
irrevocable title to all  indulgences, which have all the features of
temporary concessions.
The treaty of Ghent has been brought forward by the American
Minister, as supporting by its reference to the boundary line of the
United States, as fixed by the treaty of 1783, the opinion that the
treaty of 1783 was not abrogated by the war. The undersigned,
however, cannot observe in any one of its articles, any express or
implied reference to the treaty of 1783, as still in force. It will not
be denied, that the main object of the treaty of Ghent, was the mutual restoration of all territory taken by either party from the other
during the War. As a necessary consequence of such a stipulation,
each party Reverted to their boundaries as before the war, without
reference to the title by which these possessions were acquired, or to
the mode in which their boundaries had been previously fixed. In
point of fact, the United States had before acquired possession of
territories, asserted to depend on other titles than those which Great
Britain could confer. The treaty of Ghent, indeed, adverted, as a [71]
31
fact of possession, to certain boundaries of the United States, which
were specified in the treaty of 1783, but surely, it will not be contended, that, therefore, the treaty of 1783 was not considered at an
end.
It is justly stated by the American Minister, that the United
States did not need a new grant of the boundary line. The war did
not arise out of a contested boundary; and Great Britain, therefore,
by the act of treating with the United States, recognized that nation
in its former dimensions, excepting so far as the jus belli had interfered with them, and it was the object of the treaty of Ghent to cede
such rights to territory as the jus belli had conferred.
Still less does the free navigation of the Mississippi, as demanded
by,the British negotiators at Ghent, in any manner expreès or imply the non-abrogation of the treaty of 1783, by the subsequent war.
it was brought forward by them, as one of many advantages, which
they were desirous of securing to Great Britain, and if, in the first
instance demanded without equivalent, it left it open to the negotiators of the United States to claim for their government, in the course
of their conferences, ay corresponding benefit. The American minister will recollect, that propositions of this nature were, at one time,
under discussion, and that they were only abandoned at the time that
Great Britain relinquished her demand to the navigation of the Mississippi. If then the demand on the part of Great Britain, can be
supposed to have given any weight to the present argument of the
United States, the abandonment of that demand must have effectually
removed it.
It is by no means unusual for treaties containing recognitions and
acknowledgments of title, in the nature of perpetual obligation, to
contain, likewise, grants of privileges liable to revocation. The treaty of 1783, like many others, contained provisions of different characters, some in their own nature irrevocable, and others of a temporary nature.    If it be thence inferred, that, because some advantages specified in that treaty, would not be put an end to by the war,
therefore all the other advantages were intended to be equally permanent, it must first be shewn that the advantages themselves are of
the same, or, at least, of a similar character; for the character of one
advantage recognized, or conceded by treaty, can have no connection
with the charaeter^of another, though conceded by the same instrument, unless it arises out of a strict and necessary connection between the advantages themselves.    But, what necessary connection
can there be between a right to independence and a liberty to fish
within British jurisdiction, or to use British territory?    Liberties
within British limits are as capable of being exercised by a dependent, as by an independent state, and cannot, therefore, be the necessary consequence of independence.
The independence of a state is that which cannot be correctly said
to be granted by a treaty, but to be acknowledged by one. In the
treaty of 1783, the independence of the United States was certainly
acknowledged, not merely by the consent to make the treaty, but by
the previous consent to enter into the provisional articles executed in 32
[71]
November, 1782. The independence might have'been acknowledged,
without either the treaty or the provisional article»! but by whatever
mode acknowledged, the acknowledgment is, in its own nature, irrevocable. A power of revoking, or even of modifying it, would be
destructive of the thing itself, and, therefore, all such power is necessarily renounced, when the acknowledgment is made. The war
could not put an end to it, for the reason justly assigned by the American Minister, because a nation could not forfeit its sovereignty by
the act of exercising it; and for the further reason that Great Britain,
when she declared war on her part, against the United States, gave
them, by that very act, a new recognition of their independence.
The nature of the liberty to fish within British limits, or to use
British territory, is essentially different from the right to independence, in all that may reasonably be supposed to regard its intended
duration. The grant of this liberty has all the aspect of a policy
temporary and experimental, depending on the use that might be made
of it, on the condition of the islands and places where it was to be
exercised, and the more general conveniences or inconveniences, in a
military, naval, or commercial point of view, resulting from the access of an independent nation to such islands and places.
When, therefore, Great Britain, admitting the independence of the
United States, denies their right to the liberties for which they now
contend, it is not that she selects, from the treaty, articles, or parts
of articles, and says, at her own will, this stipulation is liable to forfeiture by war, and that it is irrevocable; but the principle of her
reasoning is, that such distinctions arise out of the provisions themselves, and are founded on the very nature of the grants. But the
rights acknowledged by the treaty of 1783, are not only distinguishable from the liberties conceded by the same treaty, in the foundation
upon which they stand, but they are carefully distinguished in the
treaty of 1783 itself. The undersigned begs to call the attention of
the American Minister to the wording of the 1st and 3d articles, to
which he has often referred, for the foundation of his arguments. In
the first article, Great Britain acknowledges an independence already expressly recognized by the powers of Europe, and by herself, in
her consent to enter into provisional articles, of November, 1782. In
the 3d article, Great Britain acknowledges the right of the United
States to take fish on the banks of Newfoundland, and other places,
from which, Great Britain has no right to exclude an independent
nation. But they are to have the liberty to cure and dry them %i
certain unsettled places, within his majesty's territory. If these
liberties, thus granted, were to be as perpetual and indefeasible as
the rights previously recognized, it is difficult to conceive, that the
Plenipotentiaries of the United States would have admitted a variation of language, so adapted to produce a different impression; and,
-above all,that they shouldhave admitted so strange a restriction of aper-
petual and indefeasible right, as that with which the article concludes,
which leaves a right so practical and so beneficial as this is admitted
tto be, dependent on the will of British subjects, in their character of 1>71 ]
33
inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the soil, to prohibit its exercise altogether.
It is surely obvious, that the word right is, throughout the treaty,
used as applicable to what the United States were to enjoy, in virtue
of a recognized independence, and the word liberty to what they were
to enjoy, as concessions strictly dependent on the treaty itself.,
The right of the United States has been asserted upon other arguments, which appear to the undersigned not altogether consistent
with those that had been previously advanced. It has been argued
by the Minister of the United States, that the treaty of 1783 did not
confer upon the United States the liberty of fishing within British
jurisdiction, and using British territory, but merely recognized a
right, which they previously had; and it has been thence inferred,
that the recognition of this right, renders it as perpetual as that of
their independence.
If the treaty of 1783 did not confer the liberties in question, the
undersigned cannot understand why, in their support, the point
should have been so much pressed, that the treaty is in force, notwithstanding the subsequent war. If, as stated by the American
Minister, tbe time of the settlement of North America was the origin,
of the liberties of the United States, in respect to the fisheries, and
their independence, as recognized in 1783, was, as further argued by
him, the mere recognition of rights and liberties previously existing,
(which must have been in virtue of their independence,) it would
seem to follow, that their independence was recognized from the time
of the settlement of North America—for no other period can be assigned. Tbe undersigned is totally unable to collect when the American Minister considers the independence of his country to have
commenced; yet this is a point of no small importance, if other rights
are to be represented as coeval with it, or dependant on it.
As to the origin of these privileges, in point of fact, the undersigned is ready to admit, that, so long as tbe United States constituted a part of the dominions of his Majesty, the inhabitants had the
enjoyment of them, as they had of other political and commercial
advantages, in common with his Majesty's subjects. But they had,
at the same time, in common with his Majesty's other subjects, duties to perform; and when the United States, by their separation from
Great Britain, became released from the duties, they became excluded,
also, from the advantages of British subjects. They cannot, therefore, now claim, otherwise than by treaty, the exercise of privileges
belonging to them as British subjects, unless they are prepared to
admit, on the part of Great Britain, the exercise of the rights which
she enjoyed previous to the separation.
If it be contended, on the part of the United States, that, in consequence of having been once a part of the British dominions, they
are now entitled, as of right, to all the privileges which they enjoyed
as British subjects, in addition to those which they have as an independent people, the undersigned cannot too strongly protest against
such a doctrine; and it must become doubly necessary for Great Bri-
5 34
[71]
tain to hesitate in conceding the privileges which are now the subject
of discussion, lest, by such a concession, she shoulcTfrërsupposed to
countenance a principle not less novel than alarming.
But, though Great Britain can never admit the claim of the United
States to enjoy those liberties, with respect to the fisheries, as matter
of right, she is, by no means, insensible to some of those considerations with which the letter of the American Minister concludes.
Although his Majesty's government cannot admit that the claim of
the American fishermen to fish within British jurisdiction, and to use
the British territory for purposes connected with their fishery, is analogous to the indulgence which has been granted to enemy's subjects
engaged in fishing on the high seas, for the purpose of conveying
fresh fish to market, yet they do feel that the enjoyment of the liberties, formerly used by the inhabitants of the United States, may Mè
very conducive to their national and individual prosperity, though
they should be placed under some modifications; and this feeling operates most forcibly in favor of concession. But Great Britain can
only offer the concession in a way which shall effectually protect her
oWn subjects from such obstructions to their lawful enterprises, as
they too frequently experienced immediately previous to the late war,
and which are, from their very nature, calculated to produce collision and disunion between the two States.
It was not of fair competition that his Majesty's government hajl
reason to complain, but of the pre-occupation of British harbors ana
creeks, in North America, by the fishing vessels of the United States,
and the forcible exclusion of British vessels from places where the
fishery might be most advantageously conducted. They had, likewise, reason to complain of the clandestine introduction of prohibited
goods into the British colonies, by American vessels, ostensibly engaged in the fishing trade, to the great injury of the British revenue.
The undersigned has felt it incumbent on him thus generally to notice these obstructions, in the hope that the attention of the government of the United States will be directed to the subject; and that
they may be induced, amicably and cordially, to co-operate with his
Majesty's goverment in devising such regulations as shall prevent tlfe
recurrence of similar inconveniences.
His Majesty's government are willing to enter into negotiations
with the government of the United States for the modified renewal
of the liberties in question; and they doubt not that an arrangement
may be made, satisfactory to both countries, and tending to confirm
the amity now so happily subsisting between them.
The undersigned avails himself of this opportunity of renewing
to Mr? Adams the assurances of his high consideration.
BATHURST. [71]
Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adamû*
Department of StatE>
February 2.7, 1816%
Sir: It being repisesented, by your letter of the 8th of-November»
that the British Government was disposed to regulate, in concert
with the United States, the taking of fish on*the coasts, bays, and
creeks, of all his Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, and the
curing, and drying of fish, by their citizens, on the unsettled bays,
Ijjarbors, and creeks, of Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands, and Labra*
dor, in such manner as to promote tbe interest of both nations, yott
will consider this letter an authority and instruction to negotiate a
Convention for these purposes. ||R 99?
I have the honour to be, &c.
JAMES MONROE*
Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams*
Department of Stat%
27 th February, 181 &
SiR: Since my last, of the 10th of December, I hâve had the honor*
to receive your letter of November 21st, with those of the 12th, I9tb*
26th, and 30th of September, the 7th, and 31st of October, and
8th of November. With the latter, a copy of Lord Bathurst's reply
to your note of September 25th, on the fisheries, was likewise received.
It appears by these communications, that, although the British
Government denies our right of taking, curing, and drying fish within their jurisdiction, and on the coast of the British provinces iri
North America, it is Willing to secure to our citizens thé liberty
stipulated by the treaty of 1783, under such regulations as will se-»
cure the benefit to both parties, and will likewise prevent the smuggling of goods into the British provinces, by our vessels engaged in
the fisheries.
jit is hoped, that the reply which you intimate ^oU intended giv^
ing to Lord Bathurst's note, may have produced some change in the.
sentiments of the British Government on this interesting subject; it
isl nevertheless, thought proper to enclose you an instruction, to be
snewn to the British Government, authorizing you to negotiate £
convention, providing for the objects contemplated.
< It is very important that this trust should be executed in a manner not to weaken our right, which, it is presumed, may fee done
with the concurrence of the British Government, either by the reset*
vation of mutual. rights, or making the Instrument a remedy foj*
abuses. 36
C Hi
As to the manner in which the injuries complained of by the Bri-
tish Government are to be remedied, you will be able in aid of your
own knowledge of the subject, to obtain better information than I can
communicate.
The British project will shew the nature and extent of these injuries, and it will be your object to make the remedy as harmless to
our citizens, and safe to the public rights, as possible.
I have the honor to be, &c.
JAMES MONROE.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams.
Department of State,
■•"',.,. i|| May 24, 1816.
" A hope is entertained that you will have arranged with the British government the difference respecting the fisheries, before this
reaches you. Should you not have been able to do it, you will endeavor to comprise it in the general arrangement which you are
authorized to make, on the principles stated in my letter of the 27th
of February."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams.
Department of State,
July 8, 1816.
€S Mr. Bagot has received a power to arrange the difference respecting the taking and curing and drying fish on the shores of the
British colonies; but whether it authorizes such an arrangement as
will be useful and satisfactory to us, I am as yet uninformed."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams.
Department of State,
August 13, 1816.
" Ontbe other subject,* Mr. Bagot offered to secure to us the
right in question, on the Labrador Shore, between Mount Joli, and
the Bay of Esquimaux, near the entrance of tbe Strait of Belle-Isle,
* Ksbertfesi5 [71 ]
m
It was necessary for me to seek detailed information of tbe value of
this accommodation, from those possessing it at Marblehead, and
elsewhere, which I did; the result of which was, that it would be
more for our advantage to commence at the last mentioned point,
and to extend the right, eastward, through the Strait of Belle-Isle,
as far along the Labrador Coast as possible. To this he objected,t
offering, then, an alternative on the shore of the Island of Newfoundland, to commence at Cape Ray, and extend, east, to the Ramea Islands. 1 Of the value of this coast, I am likewise ignorant. É The negotiation must, therefore, be again suspended, until I obtain the information requisite to enable me to act in it,
"It is probable that the arrangement of these two interests will
again rest with you. The advantage of it, as you are already authorized to treat on other important subjects, is obvious.
B At the commencement of our conferences, Mr. Bagot informed
me of an order which had been issued by Admiral Griffith to the
British cruisers, to remove our fishing vessels from the coasts of
those Provinces, which he would endeavor to have revoked, pending
the negotiation. His attempt succeeded. I shall endeavor to have
this revocation extended, so as to afford the accommodation desired,
until the negotiation is concluded. All the information which has
been, or may be obtained on this subject, shall be transmitted to
you."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to the Secretary of State, dated,
London, 24th August, 1816.
B On Wednesday last I had an interview with Lord Castlereagh,
in which he informed me that this government declined entering upon
any negotiation relative to the commercial intercourse between the
United States and the British colonies in the West Indies: that they
were averse to any discussion relative to blockades, and the other
conflicting pretensions of neutral and belligérant rights; and that
they were willing to receive any proposals that we may wish to offer, respecting the intercourse, by land, between the United States
and the British continental colonies, and respecting seamen; but
there was a manifest reluctance to negotiate even upon these points»
With regard to the West Indies, he said it was understood by this
government that the United States would be perfectly free to adopt
any countervailing regulations, either of prohibition, or of additional
duties, that they might think advisable: that Great Britain would
have no right to complain of them: that the determination, in this instance, arose altogether from that of adhering to their colonial system, of the wisdom of Which he spoke as being, in his own mind, not
unquestionable, but from which it was not thought expedient now to
depart." 38
[71 ]
From Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, dated London, 18th
September, 1816.
[[extra ct.]
U You will perceive, by all my late despatches, that there is no prospect
of doing any thing here, in the way of a negotiation upon objects of commerce. I addressed yesterday to Lord Castlereagh a note, renewing the
proposal to negotiate; the object of which is to have the refusal explicitly
signified in writing. In my last interview with Lord Castlereagh, he did
unequivocally decline negotiation upon the trade between the United
States and the British colonies in the West Indies, and upon all the questions relating to neutral rights in time of maritime war. He said they
were willing to receive any proposition respecting seamen, and respecting
the inland intercourse between the United States and the British colonies
in North America. I told him I should repeat the proposal for treating, in
k note. He expressed a wish that I would not mention, in the note, the
neutral questions, at all. I was somewhat surprised at the objection, but
promised him I would give it full consideration before I sent in the note.
1 did, accordingly, take ample time for reflection, and have concluded that
I ought not only to include them in the note, but to urge with earnestness
the reasons which make it peculiarly desirable that the two government^
should come to an understanding upon those points, before the recurrence
of a maritime war."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Mams to the Secretary of State, dated
Iff London, 27th September, 181(L
*f I have the honor of enclosing, herewith, a copy of the note which I have
addressed to Lord Castlereagh, renewing the proposal for the negotiation
of a treaty of commerce. From the determination of this government, as
communicated to me in my personal interview with him on the 21st of
August, it is to be expected that they will dedine treating upon the subject of our trade with the British colonies, in the West Indies, and upon
the questions relating to neutral interests during maritime war. They
may profess te be willing to receive specific proposals relative to seamen,
and to our inland intercourse with their colonies in North America; but,
it is not probable that, upon either of those subjects, they will agree to any
thing that can be satisfactory to you—nor shall I think it expedient to con*
elude any separate arrangement concerning them, excluding the others,
■without further instructions to that effect. In the conversations that |
have had with Lord Castlereagh, he has given me very distinctly to underf
stand, that, with regard to seamen, if they should even agree to the proposed stipulation of excluding from the respective naval and merchant
services the native citizens and subjects of each other, they will not un<-
derstand it as implying or intending an engagement to renounce the practice of taking men from our vessels, in the event of a future maritime war.
In the instructions hitherto transmitted to me, it is not insisted that
such a renunciation should be included in the article; yet, I cannot but
suppose it was expected, that, if the article should be agreed to, it would'
be with at least a tacit understanding, that the practice of impressment
«halt be abandoned." :' fit     '""§     ' f C*i 3   ,. 3Ô
||| il^*. Adams to Lord Castlereagh.
13 Craven Street, 17th September, 1816.
The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary
from the United States of America, has the honor of renewing to Lord
Castlereagh the proposal which he has been instructed to make on the part
of the government of the United States, for tàie negotiation of a treaty of
commerce, embracing all the principal objects, most interesting to the
friendly and commercial intercourse between the two nations. He has
already exhibited to his lordship the authority with which he has been
furnished by the American government for that purpose, and has fully
stated to him the motives which induced $this proposal. They are all
founded in the anxious desire of the American government to cultivate the
harmony between the two nations, and to concert, by engagements of mutual accommodation, such arrangements of the points from which differences have, unfortunately, arisen heretofore, or which might have a tendency to produce them hereafter, as may be satisfactory to both parties, guard
against future misunderstandings, and promote that amicable temper and
disposition which can alone perpetuate the peace and friendship, dictated
by the clearest and highest interests, both of Great Britain and of the United States.
It will be recollected by Lord Castlereagh, that the commercial convention of 3d July, 1815, was not considered, at the time of its conclusion, as
the ultimate or definitive arrangement of the commercial relations between
Hbe high contracting parties. Other objects, besides those upon which the
«agreement was completed, were discussed in the course of that negotiation,
pthers yet, including all, or most of those upon which Great Britain is
now again invited to treat, were presented to the attention of the British
Plenipotentiaries, but postponed, in consideration of peculiar circumstances then operating, and which have happily since been done away. In
bringing them again to the view of the British cabinet, the undersigned
$as the honor of distinctly specifying the several objects upon which the
Aïnerican government repeats the proposal to enter into further recipror
cal commercial stipulations, of suggesting the urgent additional motives for
desiring them, which have arisen since that period, and of exposing thp
liberal principles upon which they propose that this supplementary treaty
should be founded.      H
1. The commerce between the United S&ttes and the British colonies in Nortji
America, and in the West Indies.
From the relative geographical position of those countries; from the nature of their respective productions; and from the wants on either side,
which may be most advantageously, if not exclusively supplied by the
other; this commerce is not only of the greatest convenience to both parties, but, in some respects, and on many occasions, it is of the first necesr
sity to the colonies. At the time when the commercial convention of 3d
July, 1815, was negotiated, this commerce was open to vessels of the Unitl
ed States. The ports of the British colonies in the West Indies are still
accessible, under certain restrictions, to French, Spanish, Dutch, Danish!
'Xnd Swedish vessels; and while the ports of every nation in the West In-?
dies, Great Britain alone excepted, are in like manner accessible to Amer-,
ican vessels, they have been, and still are, by new regulations, enforced
since the conclusion of that convention, rigorously exctuded^frem the Bri- 40
C71]
tish ports. This exclusion of ail participation in the advantage of carrying between the two countries, the articles of a commerce mutually beneficial to both parties, has not only the aspect of a policy peculiarly pointed
against the United States, but it defeats, in a great degree, the principle of
equalising the advantages of the commerce between the two countries, by
equalising the duties and charges upon the vessels of both, in the direct
intercourse between them. For, while British vessels, after performing a
direct voyage from Europe to the United States, are there received upon
terms of equality with those of the United States, they now enjoy the exclusive benefit of resorting to an intermediate market in the West Indies,
while the vessels of the United States are restricted to the direct interchange, to and from Europe. The result of which is, that British vessels
enjoy, in the ports of the United States, important advantages, even over
the vessels of the United States themselves. It must be obvious that this
cannot long be tolerated; that, if the commerce with those parts of the British dominions is not placed on a footing of reciprocity, similar restraints
will become indispensable on the part of the United States. Such countervailing restraints were proposed at the last session of Congress, and
postponed, in the hope that satisfactory arrangements might be made, before the next meeting, to prevent a recurrence to a system of commercial
hostility, inconsistent with the interests of both nations, inauspicious to the
amicable relations now existing between them, and repugnant to the most
earnest wishes of the American government. In the arrangements proposed, they do not contemplate any interference, on their part, with the
colonial monopoly of Great Britain. It is not asked that she should renounce the right of prohibiting the importation, into her colonies, from the
United States, of whatever articles she may think fit: but that the commerce which, for their and her own advantage, Great Britain allows between them and the United States, should be placed on the same footing
of reciprocity as the direct trade between Great Britain and the United
States was intended to be placed by the Convention of 3d July, 1815.
While on this subject, the undersigned cannot but remark the extraordinary measures relating to the commercial intercouse between the United
States, and the British colonies in North America and in the West Indies, adopted' since the conclusion of the Commercial Convention of 3d
July, 1815. In all of them, very heavy duties have been imposed upon
the importation of American produce, even when carried in British ships.
A heavy duty of exportation has been laid, in the province of Nova Scotia,
upon plaster of Paris, an article for which there is no other market than
the United States. And, in the province of Upper Canada, an act of the
provincial legislature having first vested in the lieutenant governor and
council the power of regulating the commercial intercourse between that
province and the United States, that body did, on the 18th of April last,
issue an order, imposing heavy duties upon many articles of the growth or
manufacture of the United States, with an addition of twelve per cent, on
all those duties, upon importation in American vessels, and a tonnage duty
of twelve shillings and sixpence per ton, upon every vessel exceeding five
tons burthen, entering any port or harbor of the province, and belonging
to citizens of the United States. The inland commerce between the United States and Upper Canada, is believed to be of paramount importance to
the province: but, were it even equally important to the United States,
measures like these can be viewed in no other light than as efforts to en-
gross,exclusively, the whole of the trade on one side.   It would be far [7* ]
41
more agreeable to the American government to settle this intercourse by
amicable concert, than to be left under the necessity of meeting a system
of exclusion by countervailing regulations.
2, Seamen*
| It is proposed to stipulate, that neither the United States nor Great Britain shall employ, in their naval or merchant service, native citizens or
subjects of the other party, with the exception of those already naturalized, of whom the number is very small. From the well-known fact that the
wages of seamen in time of peace are invariably higher in the American
service, of both descriptions, than in the British, it is apparent that the advantage of this stipulation will be almost entirely on the side of Great
Britain. Although obviously proper that it should be reciprocal, it is offered, not as an engagement from which the United States expect to derive
any advantage, in itself, but as the means to Great Britain of reserving to
herself the services of all her own native seamen, and of removing forever
the necessity of resorting to means of force, either by her naval officers, to
.take men from the vessels of the United States, or by the United States, to
resist the renewal of that practice, in the event of any future maritime war,
to which they may be neutral. In adopting the principle proposed, the
American government are prepared to secure its faithful execution by any
reciprocal regulation which may be deemed necessary, consistent with their
Constitution and the spirit of their laws.
3. Neutral and Belligérant Bights.
It is equally desirable, in the view of the American government, to arrange at this time, every question relating to neutral rights: particularly
those concerning blockade; contraband of war; visits at sea of merchant
vessels by ships of war; the trade with the colonies of enemies, and between them and the parent country, and the trade from one port of an enemy to another. The tendency of discordant principles upon these points
to embroil neutral and belligérant states with each other, has been shown,
by the melancholy experience of ages. The frequent departures, during
the most recent wars, from all acknowledged principles founded on the
general usages of nations, have still more unsettled whatever reliance might
heretofore have been placed upon their authority.ff A time of peace, when
the feelings of both parties are free from the excitement of any momentary
interest, and when the operation of the principles to be sanctioned by mutual compact depends upon contingencies which may give either party the
first claim to the stipulated rights of the belligérant or of the neutral, must
be more favorable to the amicable adjustment of these questions, than a time
of actual war, under circumstances when the immediate interests of each
party are engaged in opposition to those of the other. Whether Great
Britain or the United States will be first engaged in a maritime war with
any third party, cannot now be foreseen; but it is of the deepest interest
to the permanency of the peace and friendship between them that they
should come to an explicit understanding with each other upon the points
here referred to, before the occurrence of any such event on either side.
It is not tjie desire of the American government to propose, upon these sub-,
jects, any innovation upon principles often recognised by Great Britain
herself, in her treaties with other powers.   They wish only, by a mutual 42
[71]
compact now formed, to guard against collisions, which the recollection of
the past so. forcibly admonishes the rulers of both nations to obviate, if
possible, for the future.
4. Slaves carried away .from the United States, by British officers, after
the Peace.
As the construction given by his Majesty's government, to the first article in the treaty of Ghent, m referenceip the slaves, carried away from the
United States by British officers, after tmS ratification of the peace, is so
directly at variance with..the construction which the American government think alone applicable toit, the undersigned has been further instructed to propose that this question should be submitted to the decision of some
friendly sovereign. This reference is suggested by provisions in the
treaty of Ghent itself, applicable to the contingency of differences in other
instances; and it is conceived that, when such differences exist, no better
mode can be adopted for settling them in a satisfactory manner.
Should his Majesty's government think proper to accept this proposal
for a negotiation, upon the points with regard to which the general wishes^
of the government of the United States have been here frankly exposed,
the undersigned will be ready to enter into further communications with any
person who may be authorized to confer with him for the purpose of such
a negotiation. If the offer should not be deemed acceptable, he requests
the honor of as early an answer as may be convenient.
The undersigned prays Lord Castlereagh to accept the assurance of his
high consideration. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
13, Craven street, 17th Sept. 1816.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to the Secretary of State, dated
London, 5th October, 1816.
" Lord Castlereagh left London this week upon a visit to Ireland. Previous to his departure I received from him a letter, of which a copy is
herewith enclosed. Although the absence of several of the Cabinet Ministers is alleged as the motive for postponing the answer to my note of
the 17th September, and although his Lordship promises to lay the subjects
suggested in it before his colleagues, immediately after his return, there is
no reason to expect that any departure from the policy already determined
upon will take place. It is probable that you will receive this despatch
about the time of the meeting of Congress. Any measures in the spirit,
and with the object, of those proposed at the last session, and then postponed, may be now adopted without hesitation. My own entire conviction is,
that the operation of such measures, if successful, will be the only possible
means of convincing this government of the expediency of relaxing from
the rigour of their exclusive colonial system. It is, and uniformly has
been, my opinion, that the result of the equalisation of duties will be to
the advantage of Great Britain, and to our disadvantage. But the principle was sanctioned, by an act of Congress, before the Convention of 3d July, 1815, was negotiated. The benefit of the Convention to us, if any, is
in the India trade; but as its duration is to be so short, the only chance of
having it renewed, at the end of its four years, with additional articles of
more liberality, will be effective counteracting regulations in respect to the
commerce with the British colonies in the West Indies." [71]
Lord Castlereagh to Mr» Adams, dated Foreign Office, September
|kg 28$, 1816.
Sir: I very much regret that the absence from London, at tbis
season of the year, of several of the Prince Regent's ministers, will
preclude me from returning as early an answer to your note of the
17th as I should wish, under the sense I entertain of the great import
tance of the several objects to which it invites the attention of this
government.
I have myself obtained the permission of the Prince Regent t©
make a short excursion to Ireland on my private affairs, but I shall
certainly return to London by the middle of November, and shall
lose no time, as soon after that period as my colleagues shall be re*
assembled, to bring the various objects referred to in your note under their deliberation.
I request you will accept the assurances of the high consideration
with which I have the honor to be,
Sir, your most obedient humble servant,
CASTLEREAGH.
John Quincy Adams, Esq.
Sçc. Sçc. $c.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to the Secretary of State, dated
London, 24th December, 1816.
if Yesterday morning I received a note from Lord Castlereagh,
requesting me to call upon him; and he informed me, that, as he was
going out of town for a few days, he had sent for me to say, that he
had not forgotten his promise to me before his departure for Ireland;
that the proposal in my note of 27th September, for a commercial negotiation, should be considered immediately after his return; that two
cabinet councils had already been held on the subject, and, as soon
as the objects could be sufficiently matured, for the proper authority
to be given to him to treat, I should hear from him again. It would
seem from this, as if the proposal would be so far accepted as to enter upon a negotiation; but, I beg leave to point your attention to an
article in the Courier of last evening, stating the proceedings in the
island of Dominica, after the late hurricane, including a letter from
Earl Bathurst, dated the 28th of September last, and to an advertisement from the Victualling Office, for a supply of flour, to be delivered at several of the West India islands, from the United States,
both in the same paper." 44
[71]
Mr. Monroe to Mr. Adams.
Department of State, February 5, 1817.
Sir: I have the honor to forward to you, herewith, a copy of my
correspondence with Mr. Bagot, in relation to the fisheries, on the
coast of Labrador, &c. from which you will perceive, that our negotiation on that interesting subject has not had the desired result.
Mr. Bagot professes, on the part of his government, the most conciliatory dispositionin regard to this affair, and it is yet to be hoped
that it may be satisfactorily settled. With this view,, the President
intends to renew the negotiation as soon as he can obtain the information necessary to enable him to decide what arrangement would
be best calculated to reconcile the interests of both parties, which he
hopes to do in the course of a few months. In the mean time, he expects that no measures will be taken by the British government to
alter the existing state of things, and that it will be in your power to
obtain the renewal of tb.3 order to the naval officer, commanding on
that station, not to interrupt or disturb our fishermen during the approaching season.
You will see the importance of an early attention to this subject,
as the fishing season is fast approaching.
I have the honor to be, &c.
JAMES MONROE.
Mr. Basot to Mr. Monroe.
m
Washington, November 27,1816.
Sir: In tbe conversation w7hich I had with you a few days ago,
upon the subject of the negotiation into which the British government is willing to enter, for the purpose of affording to the citizens of
the United States such accommodation for their fishery, within the
British jurisdiction, as may be consistent with the proper administration of his Majesty's dominions, you appeared to apprehend that neither of the propositions which I had had the honor to make to you upon this subject, would be considered as affording, in a sufficient degree, the advantages which were deemed requisite.
In order that I may not fail to make the exact nature of these propositions clearly understood, and that I may fully explain the considerations by which they have been suggested, it may, perhaps, be desirable that I should bring under one view the substance of what I
have already had the honor of stating to you, in the several conferences
which we have held upon this business.
It is not necessary for me to advert to the discussion which has tak-
en place between Earl Bathurst and Mr. Adams. In thjr correspondence which has passed between them, you will have already seen, in
the notes of the former, a full exposition of the grounds upon which
-v [*]
45
b*"
the liberty of drying and fishing within the British limits, as granted
to the citizens of the United States by the treaty of 1783, was considered to have ceased with the war, and not to have been revived by
the late treaty of peace.
You will also have seen therein detailed the serious considerations,
affecting not only the prosperity of the British fishery, but the general
interests of the British dominions, in matters of revenue, as well as
government, which made it incumbent upon his Majesty's government to oppose the renewal of so extensive and injurious a concession,
within the British sovereignty, to a foreign state, founded upon no
principle of reciprocity, or adequate compensation, whatever. It has
not been thought necessary to furnish me with additional argument
upon this point. I therefore confine myself, upon the present occasion, to a brief repetition of what I have already, at different periods,
had the honor to submit to your consideration, upon the subject otaui
arrangement, by which it is hoped practically to reconcile the different views of our respective governments.
It will be in your recollection, that, early in the month of July last,
I had the honor to acquaint you that I had received instructions from
my government to assure you, that, although it had been felt necessary to resist the claim which had been advanced by Mr. Adams, the
determination had not been taken in any unfriendly feeling towards
America, or with any illiberal wish to deprive her subjects of adequate means of engaging in the fisheries; but that, on the contrary,
many of the considerations which had been urged by Mr. Adams, on
behalf of the American citizens formerly engaged in this occupation,
had operated so forcibly in favor of granting to them such a concession as might be consistent with the just rights and interests of Great
Britain, that I had been furnished with full powers from his Royal
Highness the Prince Regent to conclude an arrangement upon the
subject, which it was hoped might at once offer to the United States a
pledge of his Royal Highness' good will, and afford to them a reasonable participation of those benefits of which they had formerly the
enjoyment. 3P
It being the object of the American government, that, in addition
to the right of fishery, as declared by the first branch of the 4th article
of the treaty of 1783, permanently to belong to the citizens of the United States, they should also enjoy the privilege of having an adequate
accommodation, both in point of harbors and drying ground, on the
unsettled coasts within the British sovereignty, I had the honor to
propose to you, that that part of the southern coast of Labrador which
extends from Mount Joli, opposite the eastern end of the island of
Anticosti, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, to the Bay and Isles Esquimaux, near the western entrance of the Straits of Belle Isle, should
be allotted for this purpose, it being distinctly agreed that the fishermen should confine themselves to the unsettled parts of the coast, and
-that all pretension to fish or dry within the maritime limits, or on
any other of the coasts of British North America, should be abandoned. H 48
[fi]
Upon learning from you, some weeks afterwards, that, from tbe information which you had received upon tbe subject o#tWs coast, yoà
were apprehensive that it would not afford, in a sufficient degree, tbe
advantages required, I did not delay to acquaint you* that I was authorized to^ffer another portion of coast, whtébit was certainly not
so convenient to the British government to assign; but which they
would, nevertheless, be willing to assign, and which, from its natural and local advantages, could not fail to afford every accommodation of which the American fishermen could stand in need. I had
then the honor to propose to you, as an alternative, that, under similar conditions, they should be admitted to that portion of the southern
Coast of Newfoundland wThich extends from Cape Ray, eastward, to
tbe Ramea islands, or to about the longitude of 57 west of Greenwich.
The advantages of this portion of coast are accurately known to
the British government; and, in consenting to assign it to the uses of
the American fishermen, it was certainly conceived that an accommodation was afforded as ample as it was possible to concede, without
abandoning that control within the entire of his Majesty's own harbors and coasts, which the essential interests of his Majesty's dominions required. That it should entirely satisfy the wishes of those
who have for many years enjoyed, without restraint, the privilege of
using, for similar purposes, all the unsettled coasts of Nova Scotia
and Labrador, is not to be expected; but, in estimating the value of
the proposal, the American government will not fail to recollect that
it is offered without any equivalent, and notwithstanding the footing
upon which the navigation of the Mississippi has been left by the treaty of Ghent, and the recent regulations by which the subjects of his
Majesty have been deprived of the privileges, which they so long enjoyed, of trading with the Indian nations within the territory of the
United States.
I have the honor to be, &c.
CHARLES BAGOT.
The Secretary of^State to Mr. Bagot.
Department of State,
December 30th, 1816.
Sir: I have had the honor to receive your letter of the 27th of
November, and to submit it to the consideration of the President.
In providing for the accommodation of the citizens of the United
States, engaged in the fisheries, on the coast of his Britannic Majesty's colonies, on conditions advantageous to both parties, I concur
in the sentiment, that it is desireable to avoid a discussion of their
respective rights; and to proceed, in a spirit of conciliation, to examine
What arrangement will be adequate to the object. The discussion
which has already taken place between our governments, has, it is * _    ..       [71]      g*   . ,     47
presumed, placed the claim of each party in a just light. I shall,
therefore, make no remark on that part of your note, which relates to
the right of the parties, other than by stating, that this government
entered into this negotiation., on the equal ground of neither claiming or making any concession in that respect.
You have made two propositions, tbe acceptance of either of whitt
must be attended with the relinquishment of all other claims on the
part of the United States, founded on the first branch of the fourth,
article of the Treaty of 1783. In the first, you offer the use of the
territory on theNJiabrador coast, lying between Mount Joli and the
Bay of Esquimaux, near the entrance of the Strait of Belle-Islej
and in the second, of such part of the southern coast of the Island of
Newfoundland, as lies between Cape Ray and the Uamianp Islands.
~3j have made every inquiry that circonstances have permitted,
respecting both these coasts, and find that neithjer wa^ afford torthe
citizens of the United States the essential accommodation which is
desired— neither having been mucb frequented by them heretofore, or
likely to be in future. I am compelled, therefore, to decline both
propositions.
I regret that it has not been in my power to give an earlier answer
to your note: you will, however, have the goodness to impute the
delay to a reluctance to decline any proposition which you had made,
by the order of your government, for the arrangement of an inter»
est of such high importance to both nations, ancr to tbe difficulty of
obtaining all Ibe information necessary W guide this government in
the decision.
P9 I have the*Bonor to be, &c.
JAMES MONROE.
VThe Rt. Hon. Charles Bagot.
Mr. Bagot to Mr. Monroe.
H Washington^ December 31, 1816.
Sir: I have had the honor to receive yourletter of yesterday's date,
acquainting me that neither of the propositions which I had submitted to your consideration, upon the subject of providing for the citizens of the United States, engaged in the fisheries, some adequate
accommodation for their pursuit upon the coasts of his Majesty's
territories, having been found to afford the essential convenieneies
which are desired, you are compelled to decline them.
The object of his Majesty's government, in framing these propositions, was to endeavor to assign to the American fishermen, in the
prosecution of their employment, as large a participation of the convenieneies afforded by the neighboring coasts of his Majesty's settlements, as might be reconcileabJe with thejust rights and interests of
his Majesty's owrn subjects, and the due administration of his Majes- 48
[ 71]
ty's dominions; and, it was earnestly hoped, that either one or
the other of them would have been found to afford, in a sufficient degree, the accommodation which was required.
The wish of his Royal Highness the Prince Regent to extend to
the citizens of the United States every advantage, which, for the
purposes in view, can be derived from the use of his Majesty's coasts,
has no other limit, than that which is necessarily prescribed by a regard to the important considerations to which I have adverted. His
Royal Highness is willing to make the utmost concession which
these considerations will admit; and in proof of the sincerity of this
disposition, I have received his Royal Highness's instructions to acquaint you, that if, upon examination of the local circumstances of
the coasts, which I have had the honor to propose, the American government should be of opinion that neither of them, taken separately, would afford, in a satisfactory degree, the conveniencies which
are deemed requisite, his Royal Highness will be willing that the
citizens of the United States should have the full benefit of both of
them, and that, under the conditions already stated, they should be
admitted to each of tbe shores, which I have had the honour to point
out.
In consenting to assign to their use so large a portion of his Majesty's coasts, his Royal Highness is persuaded that he affords an
unquestionable testimony of his earnest endeavor to meet, as far as is
possible, the wishes of the American Government, and practically
to accomplish, in the amplest manner, the objects which they have
in view. The free access to each of these tracts, cannot fail to offer
every variety of convenience which the American fishermen can require in the different branches of their occupation; and it will be observed, that an objection, which might possibly have been felt to the
acceptance of either of the propositions, when separately taken, is
wholly removed, by the offer of them conjoin^; as, from whatever
quarter the wind may blow, the American vessels ingaged in the fishery, will always have the advantage of a safe port under their lee.
His Royal Highness conceives, that it is not in his Royal Highness's power to make a larger concession than that which is now
proposed, without injury to the essential rights of his Majesty's dominions, and some of the chief interests of his Majesty's own sub-
jects. But it will be a source of sincere satisfaction to his Royal
" Highness, if, in the arrangement, which I have the honor to submit,
the citizens of the United States shall find, as his Royal Highness
confidently believes that they will find, ample means of continuing to
pursue their occupation, with the convenience and advantage which
they desire.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, Sir, &c.
CHARLES BAGOT. C ?i ]
49
The Secretary of State to Mr. Bagot.
Department of State, January 7th, 1817.
Sir: I have had the honor to receive your letter of the 31st of December, proposing an accommodation of the difference between our
governments, relative to the fisheries comprised in the first branch
of the fourth article' of the treaty of 1783, byÉhe allotment of both
the coasts, comprised in your former propositions.
Having stated in my letter of the 30th of December, that, according to the best information which I had been able to obtain, neither
of those coasts had been much frequented by our fishermen, or was
likely to be so in future, I am led to believe that they would not,
when taken conjointly, as proposed in your last letter, afford the accommodation which is so important to them, andfwhich it is very satisfactory to find it is the desire of your government that they should
possess. From the disposition manifested by'your government, which
corresponds with that of the United States, a strong hope is entertained, that further inquiry into the subject will enable His Royal
Highness the Prince Regent to ascertain, that an arrangement on a
scale more accommodating to the expectation of the United States
will not be inconsistent with the interest of Great Britain.
In the mean time, this government wTill persevere in its measures
for obtaining such further information, as will enable it to meet
yours in the conciliatory views which are cherished on both sides.
I have the honor to be, &c.
JAMES MONROE.
The Rt. Hon. Charles Bagot.
Mr. Adams to the Secretary of State, dated London, 20th March, 1817.
Sir: The day before yesterday, I had an interview with Lord Castlereagh, when fie informed me that the British government had come
to a determination respecting the commercial part of the proposals
for the negotiation of a further treaty, which I had made last September. That they were still not prepared to abandon their ancient
colonial system, but they were willing to extend to the United States
the benefits of the free port act, to the same extent that they were now
enjoyed by the vessels of European nations, and to give a partial admission of our vessels to the island of Bermuda, and to Turk's Island. And, with regard to the intercourse between the United States
and the adjoining British provinces, they would renew a proposal
heretofore made, founded altogether upon the principle of reciprocity,
which proposal he read to me, from a paper which he said was not
quite finished, but which would be sent me in the course of the next
day. Last evening I received a note from Mr. Hamilton, the Under
Secretary of State in the Foreign Department, with a draft of four
articles, a copy of which, hastily made, I now enclose, as Mr. Eve- 50
[71 ]
rett leaves town this morning. The part read to me by Lord Castlereagh was the fourth article, excepting the last paragraph.
1 do not think it possible to make any thing out of these articles
to;which I can, under my present instructions, agree.||T therefore
enclose copies of them, with the request of immediate further instructions. j| Lord Castlereagh informed me, that they had received information that the act of Congress, prohibiting the clearance of foreign
vessels for ports to wrhich vessels of the United States are not admitted, had passed; and he repeated the assurance, that this government
considered it as perfectly proper, and as giving them no cause of
complaint or dissatisfaction. It seems to me, however, that the very
slight and partial concessions in the enclosed articles, are intended
to counteract its effects, and this opinion contributes to caution me
against subscribing to them without your further orders. Lord Cas-
tlereagh's offer is to make them supplementary to the Convention of
3d July, 1815, and to be in force for the same time.
I am, with great respect,
Sir, your very humble and obedient servant,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS,
ARTICLE 1.
His Britannic Majesty consents to extend to the United States
the provisions of the Free Port Act, as established by the 45th Geo.
3d, c. 57, (except as far as relates to negro slaves, which, under the
abolition acts, can no longer be lawfully exported from any British
possession to any foreign country) that is to say, that any sloop,
schooner, or other vessel whatever, not having more than one deck,
and being owned and navigated by subjects of the United States,
may import into any of the free ports in his Majesty's possessions in
the West Indies, from the United States, any of the articles enumerated in the above act, being of the growth or production of the
United States, and any coin, bullion, diamonds, and precious stones,
and the said articles being of the growth or production of the United
States; and also all other articles imported into the said free ports,
by virtue of this convention, from the United States, shall be subject,
in all respects, to the same rules, regulations, and restrictions, and
shall enjoy the same advantages, as tore-exportation, as are now applied to similar articles when imported by authority of the said act,
from any other foreign country, and re-exported from the said possessions of his Majesty. His Britannic Majesty further consents,
that any vessel of the United States, as above described, may export
from any of the said ports, to the United States, rum, of the produce
of any British colony or possession, and also all manner of goods,
wares, or merchandise, which shall have been legally imported into
those possessions of his Majesty in which the said free ports are
established, except masts, yards, or bowsprits, pitch, tar, andtur- 171 ]
51
pentine; and also except such iron as shall have been brought from
the British colonies or plantations in America.
And whereas, by an act passed in the 48th year of his Majesty's
reign, cap. 125, rice, grain, and flour, are added to the articles previously allowed to be imported into the said free ports, it is agreed,
that those articles may be imported from the United States into the
said free ports, in vessels of the United States, as above described;
and it is agreed, on the part of the United States, that any facilities granted in consequence of this convention, to American vessels in his Majesty's said colonies and possessions, shall be reciprocally granted, in the ports of the United States, to British vessels
of a similar description, engaged in the intercourse so allowed to
be carried on; and that if, at any future period, during the con*
tinuance of this convention, his Britannic Majesty should think
fit to grant any further facilities to vessels of the United States,
in the said colonies and possessions, British vessels trading between the said colonies and possessions and the United States,
shall enjoy in the ports of the latter equal and reciprocal advantages.
It is further agreed, that articles imported into the said free ports
of the United States, by virtue of this convention, shall pay the same
duties as are or may be payable upon similar articles when imported
into the said free ports from any other foreign country. And the
same rule shall be observed on the part of the United States, in regard to all duties chargeable upon all such articles as may, by virtue
of this convention, be exported from the said free ports to the United
States./ But his Britannic Majesty reserves (o himself the right to
impose higher duties upon all articles so allowed to be imported
into the «aid free ports from the United States, or from any other foreign country, than are or may be chargeable upon all similar articles when imported from any of his Majesty's possessions.
ARTICLE 2.
His Britannic Majesty engages to allow the vessels of the United
States to import into the island of Bermuda the following articles,
to wit: Tobacco, pitch, tar, turpentine, hemp, flax, masts, yards,
bowsprits, staves, heading boards, and plank, timber, shingles, and
lumber of any sort; bread, biscuit, flour, pease, beans/potatoes,
wheat, rice, oats, barley, and grain of any sort; such commodities
being the growth or production of the territories belonging to the
United States of America. And to export from the said island, to the
United States, in vessels of the said States, any goods or commodities whatsoever, which are now by law allowed to be exported from
his Majesty's colonies and possessions in the West Indies, to any
foreign country or place in Europe. And also, sugar, molasses, coffee, cocoa nuts, ginger, and pimento; and, also, all goods, the growth,
produce, or manufacture of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, upon the same terms, and subject to the same duties 52
[71]
only, as would affect similar articles when imported from the United||
States into Bermuda, or exported from Bermuda to the United
States, in British ships. And it is agreed, on the part of the United
States, that a similar equality shall prevail in the ports of the said
states, with regard to all British vessels trading in similar articles
between the United States and the island of Bermuda. M
Vm ARTICLE 3.
It is agreed that vessels* of the United States may resort to Turk's
Island, for the purpose of taking in cargoes of salt, for the United
States; and that the vessels, so resorting to the said islands, shall be
allowed to import tobacco and cotton wool, the produce of the said
United States, upon the same terms, and subject to the same duties
as British ships when engaged in a similar intercourse. It is agreed,
on the part of the United States, that a similar equality shall prevail
in the ports of the said States, with regard to all British vessels
trading in the same articles between the United States and the said
Turk's Island.
Si ARTICLE  4.
It is agreed that the navigation of all lakes, rivers, and water
communications, the middle of which is, or may be, the boundary between his Britannic Majesty's territories on the continent of North
America, and the United States, shall, with the exception hereinafter mentioned, at all times be free to his Majesty's vessels, and those
of the citizens of the United States.    The inhabitants of his Britannic Majesty's territories in North America, and the citizens and
subjects of the  United  States, may freely carry on trade and commerce, by land or inland navigation, as aforesaid, in goods and merchandise, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the British territories in Europe or elsewhere» or of the United States, respectively,
within the territories of the two parties  respectively,  on  the said
continent (the countries within the limits of the Hudson's Bay Company only excepted,) and no other or higher duties, or tolls, or rates
of carriage or portage, than which are, or shall be, payable by natives respectively, shall be taken or demanded  on either side.    All
goods or merchandise, whose importation into the United States shall
not be wholly prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of commerce,
abovementioned, be carried into the said United States, in the manner aforesaid, by his Britannic Majesty's subjects; and such goods or
merchandise shall be subject to no other or higher duties than would
be payable by citizens of the United States, on the importation of
the same in American vessels into the Atlantic ports of  the United
States; and, in like manner, all goods and merchandise, the growth,
produce, or manufacture, of the  United  States, whose  importation
into his Majesty's said territories in America shall not be entirely
prohibited, may freely, forlShe purposes of the commerce above mentioned, be carried into the same by land; or by means of such lakes,
-sj c 7i i
5$
rivers, and water communications, as abovementioned, by the citizens of the Untied States; and such goods and merchandise shall be
subject to no other or higher duties than would be payable by his
Majesty's subjects, on the importation of the same from Europe into
the said territories.
No duty shall be levied, by either party, on peltries or fiirs, which
may be brought, in the manner aforesaid, by land or inland navigation, from the said territories of one party into the said territories of
another; but tolls, or rates of ferriage, may be demanded and taken,
in manner above mentioned, on sucli peltries or furs.
It is further agreed, that nothing in this article contained, as to
tbe navigation of rivers, lakes, or water communications, shall extend to give a right of navigation upon or within the same, in those
ports where the middle is not the boundarj, between his Britannic
Majesty's territories and the United States of America.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Lord Castlereagh, dated
1 28 Craven-street, 2lst April, 1817.
46 The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States of America, has received the four projected articles for a supplement to the Commercial Convention of 3d
July, 1815, sent him by direction of Lord Castlereagh, and has transmitted them for the consideration of his government.
By a letter of instruction from the Secretary of State of the United States, of the 5th of February last, the undersigned is informed,'
that the negotiation between him and Mr. Bagot, in relation t<* the
fisheries on the North American Coast, had not been brought to the
desired result; that it is yet to be hoped, however, that it may be satisfactorily settled.- That, with this view, it was the President's intention to renew the negotiation as soon as he could obtain the information necessary to ascertain what arrangement would be best calculated to reconcile the interests of both parties, which he hoped to
do in the course of a few months. That, in the mean time, he relied
that no measures would be taken by his Majesty's Government, to
alter the existing state of things, and, particularly, that the order to
the naval officer commanding on that station, not to interrupt or
disturb the American fishermen during the approaching season,
would be renewed.
The undersigned has the honor of renewing to Lord Castlereagh
the assurance of his high consideration."
Extract of a letter from Lord Castlereagh to Mr. Adams, dated
Foreign Office, May 7th, 1817.
" The undersigned, his Majesty's principal Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, in reply to Mr. Adams's note of the 91st ultimo, has 54
[71 ]
the honor to acquaint him, that, as soon as the proposition which Mr.
Bagot was authorized, in July last, to make to the government of
the United States, for arranging the manner in which American citizens might be permitted to carry on the fisheries within the British
limits, had been by them declined, viz. in the month of February,
the same was immediately notified by his Majesty's Minister in
America, to the British Admiral commanding at Halifax, the effect
of which notification was to revive the orders which Mr. Bagot had
taken upon himself to suspend, in the expectation that the discussions,
in which he was then employed with the American government, would
have led to a satisfactory issue.
These discussions having failed of success, and the orders above
alluded to being consequently now in full force, the British government cannot but feel some reluctance again to suspend them, without
being in possession .of more precise grounds for expecting an adjustment. Persuaded, however, from the official communication received
from Mr. Adams, that it is not only the sincere desire of the President of the United States to come to an amicable arrangement, but,
also, that he, being already in possession of the views of Great Britain, is now led to entertain a strong expectation that a settlement,
which shall reconcile the interests of both parties, may, without any
material delay, be effectuated, tbe Prince Regent, under these impressions, is willing to give to the American government this additional proof of his earnest wish that the negotiation should proceed,
under circumstances the most favorable to a speedy and amicable conclusion, by acceding to the application of the government of the United States, as brought forward by Mr. Adams. Instructions will, accordingly, be expedited to the naval commanders on the American
station, to suspend the execution of the said orders, during the approaching season. Ample opportunity will thus be afforded for coming to an amicable arrangement, more particularly as it appears the
American Secretary, in February last, had it in contemplation to offer,
for the consideration of the British government, some specific proposition on the subject, which Mr. Bagot did not then feelv himself
authorized to take, ad referendum, but which be has since been instructed to receive, and transmit for the opinion of his court."
Mr. Rush, acting as Secretary of State, to Mr. Bagot.
Department of State,
v      May 30, 1817V|P
Sir: I had the honor to receive, and have laid before the President, your note of the 27th of this month.
In answer to it, I have the honor to state, that this government is
not yet prepared to make known, in any definite and final shape, the
nature and extent of the accommodation desired by its citizens en- [71 ]
55
gagePîn the fisheries, along the coast of his Britannic Majesty's
dominions, according to the invitation held out, by order of the
Prince Regent, in your note. At the same time, I am directed by the
President to inform you, that he recognises, in the terms of this invitation, not less than in the general scope of your note, a spirit of
friendly accommodation, which this government, not foregoing rights
which it feels itself bound to look to, will, nevertheless, be desirous,
in the fullest extent, to reciprocate.
On the return of the President from a tour through part of the
United States, which he is now upon the eve of commencing, it is
expected that this department will be enabled to offer such propositions as, taking for their basis the principles stated in your, note, it
is confidently hoped, may end in an adjustment of this important interest, upon terms reconcileable with the views of both nations, and
serve to strengthen the harmony and good understanding which it is
so desirable to cultivate and preserve between them.
I have the honor to be, &c.
RICHARD RUSIf,
The Rt. Hon. Charles Bagot.
Ml
Mr. Rush, Acting Secretary of State, to Mr. Bagot.
Department of State,
August 4, 18fÏ7.
Sir: It becomes my duty to address you upon a subject of deep interest to all those citizens of this country, who are concerned in the
fisheries.
' By representations made to this department, it appears, that, at
the commencement of the present fishing season, twenty sail of fishing vessels, of from twenty-five to forty-five tons burden, belonging
to ports of the United States, were fitted out, and sailed, for the purpose of fishing on the western bank. That, while on their way, a
number of them were compelled by a storm to put into a harbor, at
Ragged Island, near Shelburne light-house. That, while here, they
were boarded by an officer of the customs, who demanded, and received light-money from them, notwithstanding the circumstances of
compulsion and distress under which they had entered the port. That
they afterwards proceeded to the bank, where, after remaining many weeks, they completed their fares of fish, and commenced their
return to the United States. That, meeting with another severe
storm, upon their return, they were again forced to seek shelter in a
British port, a few leagues to the westward of Halifax. That in
this port they were captured by an armed barge, despatched from the
British sloop of war Dee, Captain Chambers, and the next morning
ordered for Halifax, where they all arrived on the 9th of June. That
the unfortunate crews have been exposed to peculiar inconveniences 56
[71]
and hardships, and that those who desired to return to their homes
were refused passports towards facilitating that end, from the proper
officers to whom they made application.
For further particulars connected with the above facts, I have the
honor to enclose you an extract of a letter* to this department, from
tbe Collector of Boston, dated June the 30th. It will be seen that
it is not a case involving unsettled questions between the two countries in relation to the fisheries, but which it is so confidently hoped
are in a train of satisfactory and amicable arrangement. It is, on the
other hand, distinctly said, that the boats, far from taking a fish in
any waters claimed as British waters, took them all at the distance
of many leagues from the coast, while the other'alleged facts would
seem to forbid the imputation of their having entered a British bar-
bor from any other than a lawful and necessary motive.
Should tbe facts as represented prove to be well founded, the President feels persuaded that your government will not fail to take such
measures, as well towards redressing the evil complained of, in the
present instance, as towards preventing the recurrence of one of the
like nature, as are due to justice, and the harmony and good under-
derstanding which so happily subsist between the two nations.
I pray you, sir, to accept, &c.
RICHARD RUSH.
Mr. Bagot to Mr. Rush.
Washington, Sth August, 1817*
Sir: I had yesterday the honor to receive your letter of the 4th
instant, acquainting me with the representations which had been
made to the Department of State, in relation to the seizure, by his
Majesty's ship Dee, of certain American fishing vessels, found in
the harbors of Port Negro and Ragged Island, upon the coast of
Nova Scotia; and transmitting to me the extract of a letter upon the
subject, from the Collector of the Customs at Boston.
Should the circumstances of this seizure, as they have been represented to the American government, prove to be correct; I can
have no hesitation in giving you every assurance that his Majesty's
government will, willingly, take measures for the prompt redress of
the injuries to which it may have led, and for the prevention of their
recurrence: but the representations which I have received upon the
subject from the commander in chief of his Majesty's squadron on
the Halifax station, differ so essentially in point of fact from those
which have been made to the American government, that I have every
reason to hope, that, upon a proper investigation of the transaction,
it will not be found to involve any just cause of complaint.
I have the honor to transmit to you, enclosed, the copy of a letter
from the ]Captain of his Majesty's ship Dee to the Commander of
* The letter referred to, is mislaid. [71]
57
his Majesty's squadron on the coast of Nova Scotia, reporting the
grounds upon which he had deemed it to be his duty to detain these
vessels, together with a copy of the orders under which he has acted.
By these papers, you will perceive that the vessels in question
were in the habit of occupying; and were, at the time of their seizure,
actually occupying, for the purposes of their fishery, the settled harbors of his Majesty's dominions, in violation of the orders at all
times enforced against all foreign vessels detected in making similar
encroachments, and of which it is rtot to be supposed that the masters of these vesssels could have been ignorant.
The proceedings which have been instituted upon the captured vessels, will, necessarily, lead to a complete investigation of all the circumstances under which they were detained; and there can be no
doubt that the merits of the whole case, which appear to rest altogether upon questions of fact, will be then fully ascertained.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your
most obedient humble servant, CHARLES BAGOT.
By Sir David Milne, K. C. B. and K. W. JV. Rear Admiral of the Blue,
and commander in chief of his Majesty9 s ships and vessels employed,
and to be employed, in «A orth America, and on the lakes of Canada,
Sçc. <$•(?. $c.
You are hereby required and directed to proceed, in his Majesty's
ship under your command, to Halifax, and, having received on board
a pilot at that port, you will repair and cruise between Sambro lighthouse and Cape Sable, using every mean in your power for the protection of the revenue, as also the fisheries on the coast, against the
encroachment of foreigners.
On your meeting with any foreign vessel, fishing, or at anchor, in
any of the harbors or creeks in his Majesty's North American provinces, or within our maritime jurisdiction, you will seize and send
such vessel, so trespassing, to Halifax, for adjudication, unless it
should clearly appear that they have been obliged to put in there in
consequence of distress; acquainting me with the cause of such seizure,
and every other particular, to enable me to give all information to
the lords commissioners of the admiralty. $*k
You are to come within sight pf signals from Sambro ljght-house
every fourteen days, if the wind and weather will permit, and wait
eight hours at that distance. You will continue on this service for
six weeks from your sailing from Halifax, at the expiration of which
time you will return to that port for further orders.
Given on board his Majesty's ship Leander, Bermuda, the 12th
day of May, 1817. DAVID MILNE,
Rear Admiral.
To Capt. Samuel Chambers,
His Majesty9 s ship Dee.
By command of the Rear Admiral.
8 J. P. Lamey. 58
[ 71 ]
Captain Samuel Chambers, of his Bntannic Majesty's ship Dee, to Rear
Amiral Sir David Milne, Sçc. Sçc. dated
His Majesty's ship Dee,
Off Shelburne, Zth June, 1817.
Sir: In compliance with your order of the l£th ultimo, I sailed
from Halifax on the 30th ult. but did not meet or receive any intelligence of foreign fishing vessels being within our jurisdiction, until
the 3d instant; when, being off the Isle Maten, I was informed that
the whole of the Banks to the westward, (off Cape Sable and Shelburne,) were fished by American schooners; and that they continually
resorted to the creeks on this coast in order to catch their bait, clean
their fish, wood, water^ &c; this, of course, highly detrimental to
the interest of the industrious fishermen on this coast. I was also informed, the intricate harbors of Cape Negro and the Ragged Islands
were their resort most evenings, several going in; but more particularly on Saturdays, when they remain till Monday to procure bait for
the ensuing week. At the former place they had not been well received; at the latter, I suspect, much encouragement had been given
them by an individual. I intended having our boats into Ragged
Island harbor before day-light on the 4th, but light winds prevented
our getting that length. I, therefore, in the course of the day, put
into Shelburne; and, in the evening, despatched the boats, under the
charge of Lieutenant Hooper, into Ragged-Island, with the order I
enclose, the weather preventing any boats returning until the 7fh,
when I received information that nine American fishing vessels had
been found at Ragged Island Harbor, laying with their nets set.
Lieutenant Hooper remained at this place, and despatched Lieutenant
Lechenere, with a gig and cutter, to Cape Negro, with the enclosed
order. He found two American fishing vessels in the harbor, and
seven others came in the course of Saturday. The whole joined me
this day, with two others that came into Ragged Islands. I have,
therefore, in obedience to your directions, sent them into Halifax for
adjudication; as any distress they may plead, might, with more ease,
be relieved at the regular harbor of Shelburne, which has been avoided
for two intricate harbors in its immediate neighborhood.
ft I beg further to state, that, without the use of our harbors, it appears impossible for any foreigners to carry on successful fishing on
this coast, which fishing has much injured our fishermen; and, I have
every reason to believe, that considerable smuggling of tobacco,
shoes, &c. is carried on by their boats. I beg leave to enclose a list
of the detained vessels; and, also, to inform you, that, from some of
the Americans attempting to tamper with some of our boats' crews,
and the riotous conduct of others, I have been obliged to take precautionary measures to prevent any of the vessels being runaway
with.
I have the honor to be, &c.
SAMUEL CHAMBERS, Captain.
Rear Admiral Sir David Milne, K. C. B,
Commander in Chief, $c. #c., [71]
59
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, to Mr. Rush,
Envoy, Sçc, at London, dated Department of State, November 6,
1817.
A fulljppwer to conclude a commercial treaty is furnished you,
together with your Commission and Credential Letters; and in your
earliest communications with the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, you will give him notice that you have such a power.
Should he then, or at any subsequent time, while the United States
are at peace, manifest, on the part of his government, a disposition
to enter upon the negotiation, and be provided with similar powers,
you will recur to the instructions given to the American Plenipotentiaries for the negotiation of the peace. In them, all the views of
this Government, in relation to the proper regulation of maritime
neutrality, are developed at large; and the President, still convinced that the principles there recommended, are the best adapted to
promote the great and permanent welfare of all mankind, and the
preservation of peace upon earth, is yet willing that the United States
should be bound by them, when their occasional and temporary operation may be to their disadvantage: provided they can secure the benefit of them, when they shall hereafter be under circumstances to
operate in their favor.
With regard to the strictly commercial part of the treaty, the principles for regulating the trade between the two countries during peace,
you will recur to the same instructions to the Plenipotentiaries for the
peace, to the Commercial Convention of 3d July, 1815, and to the
instructions given to your predecessor, in reference to the negotiation
of a commercial treaty; particularly, with regard to the intercourse
between the United States and the British Colonies in the West Indies, and upon this continent.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, dated Department
of State, 2lst May, 1818.
The other law to which I have called your attention, is an act concerning navigation, passed on the 18th, and published in the National
Intelligencer of the 21st of April. It meets the British prohibitive
Colonial system, by direct and countervailing prohibition, to commence from and after the 30th of September next. The vote upon
its passage, in the Senate, where h originated, was all but unanimous; and in the House of Representatives, the opposition to it amounted only to 15 or 16 votes.
Although no formal communication of this law to the British government will be necessary, it may naturally be expected that it will
be noticed in your occasional conversations with Lord Castlereagh.
He will, doubtless, remember, and may be reminded of the repeated
efforts made by this government to render it unnecessary, by an amicable arrangement, which should place on an equitable footing of re- 60
[ 71]
ciprocity, the intercourse between the United States and the British
colonies; he will remember the repeated warnings given, that, to
this result it must come, unless some relaxation of the British prohibitions should take place; and his own equally repeated admissions,
that the exercise of the prohibitive right, on the part of the United
States, would be altogether just, and would give no dissatisfaction
whatever to Great Britain; you are, nevertheless, authorized to assure him, that the President assented to this measure with great reluctance; because, however just in itself it may be, its tendencies
cannot but be of an irritating character to the interests w7hich it will
immediately affect; and because his earnest desire is to remove causes
of irritation, and to multiply those of a conciliatory nature between
the two countries.    Such has manifestly been, on both sides, the effect of the equalizing and reciprocal provisions of the convention of
July, 1815; and such, he has no doubt, would be the effect of the extension of its principles to the commercial intercourse between the
United States and the British Colonies in the West Indies and on
this continent; and you are authorized again to repeat the offer of
treating for a fair and equitable arrangement of this interest.   A further inducement for making this offer may be stated, in the expediency of looking forward, without further delay, to the expiration
of the convention of 1815, which has now little more than one year
to remain in force.    It is important that the commercial part of the
community, both here and in Great Britain, should have timely notice of the state in which the  relations between  the countries are
to stand after the termination of that convention; and, as there are
other objects of moment to be adjusted, the President desires you to
propose an immediate general negotiation of a commercial treaty; to
embrace the continuance for a further term of — vears of the con-
ventiou; and,  also, the other subjects in discussion between the
two governments: namely, the question concerning the slaves; that
relating to the fisheries;  the boundary line from the Lake  of the
Woods; and the Columbia river settlement.    The President prefers
taking this course to that of submitting to commissioners, at least
immediately, questions upon  which he thinks it probable the two
governments may thus, by a shorter process, come to a mutual understanding between themselves.
If, upon making this proposal, the British government agree to
this negotiation, the President proposes, that Mr. Gallatin and you
should be authorized, jointly, as Plenipotentiaries, to conclude the
treaty, which it is very desirable may be concluded in season to arrive here by the commencement of next Session of Congress, which
is to be on the third Monday in November. Instructions will he
transmitted immediately to Mr.   Gallatin, to hold himself in readi
ness to  répair to London, upon
receiving
notice from you, should
Plenipotentiaries be appointed to treat with you; and, besides the instructions which formed the basis of the existing convention, and
others, already in your possession, further documents will be forwarded to you as soon as possible, which may assist you in the management of the negotiation. [?1]
61
We entertain hopes, that this measure may result in a new treaty,
which will remove most, if not all, of the causes of dissention between us and Great Britain. The satisfaction with which we have
observed the avowal of the most liberal commercial principles,, by
Lord Castlereagh, in Parliament, has already been noticed in my
last letter. The opening, if not of all, at least of a great portion
of the ports of South America, to the commerce of the world, which,
under every possible course of events, must be now considered as
irrevocable; and the bill which, we perceive, was before Parliament,
for establishing free ports in the British American colonies, all tend
to convince us that Great Britain must see that a relaxation from
ber colonial restrictions has become the unequivocal dictate of her
own interest. >:^fe
Extracts of a letter from Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, to Mr. Gal-
P&* latin, dated
Department of State,
Washington, 22d May, 1818.
The present state of the relations between the United States and
Great Britain has suggested to the President the expediency of proposing to the British government the negotiation of a treaty of amity
and commerce, to embrace the continuance, for eight years longer, of
the Commercial Convention of 3d July, 1816, and to attempt the
adjustment of other objects interesting to the two countries, and upon which the governments have not yet been able to come to an
agreement. It is desirable that this negotiation should take place
in the course of the ensuing summer, and that its result should be
transmitted here for the commencement of the next session of Congress, fixed for third Monday of November; for, as the convention,
unless continued, will expire in July, 1819, and as it is due to the interests of the merchants, on both sides, affected by it, that early notice should be given, whether its provisions are to be continued, or to
cease, it appears that no time is to be lost in bringing the question of
its renewal or cessation to an immediate issue. As the motives for
taking up the subject thus early are operative alike upon both parties; and as, in the event of the expiration of the convention of July,
1815, legislative measures, preparatory to that contingency, will
doubtless be necessary, as well in Parliament as in Congress, it is expected that this proposal will be acceded to by the British government, and that plenipotentiaries on their part will be appointed to
treat with you, and Mr. Rush, to whom, jointly, the President proposes to commit the trust of this negotiation.
A copy of the instructions forwarded to Mr. Rush, relating to this
subject, is herewith enclosed, and the President desires that you
would hold yourself, accordingly, ready to repair to London immediately upon receiving the notice from Mr. Rush that the British go- 62
[71 ]
vernment agree to the proposal, and have appointed, or are ready to
appoint, plenipotentiaries to confer and conclude with you. Your
long experience, and great knowledge of the subjects to be treated
on, are the motives of the President for associating you in this commission. A full power for the negotiation is herewith enclosed; and
further instructions and documente relating to it will be transmitted
to Mr. Rush as soon as they can be prepared. Your necessary and
reasonable expenses upon this special mission, will be allowed in like
manner with those of a similar mission upon which you were employed last summer, in the Netherlands.
The President is willing that the convention of 3d July, 1815f
should be continuée for eight, or even ten years, as it stands. Its
operation has indeed been, in some respects, disadvantageous to the
United States, and favorable to Great Britain, owing to the revival
of the interdiction of access to our vessels to the British West India
and North American colonies, while our intercourse with them has
been exclusively confined to British vessels. Yet, that the injury to
our navigation and shipping interest has not been very essential, we
have many indications.
The moral effect of the equalisation of duties, on both sides, in
softening national asperities, has been unequivocal, and is an object of much importance, deserving to be cherished and improved by
both governments. The encouragement which the convention has
given to our trade with the British possessions in the East Indies, is
more questionable, as that trade operates upon us as a continual and
embarrassing drain of specie. But, as it has been a trade of profitable returns, and as it would still, to a great extent, be carried on with
the native states of India, if we should be excluded, or our intercourse
should be burthened and restricted with the British territories, the
President will be satisfied to leave it as it is, and subject to the increasing competition of the British private traders with India, which
will be likely to affect the interests of the British Company more than
ours*
The other interests which the President hopes may be adjusted by
this negotiation, are,
1. The intercourse with the British colonies in the West Indies
and North America. You are well acquainted with the failure of the
attempt to extend the convention of 1815 to this intercourse, at the
.negotiation of the convention, and at a subsequent period, when four
additional articles were proposed on the part of Great Britain, a copy
of which you have. There was reason to believe that Lord Castlereagh was personally well disposed to a more liberal expansion of the
colonial intercourse, although the cabinet was not entirely prepared
for it. The manner in which he has recently avowed a liberal commercial principle in Parliament, and the approbation with which that
-avowal was received; the obvious, though not declared, bearing which
those sentiments had, both upon the South American contest, and upon tbe relations between the United States and the British colonies;
the free port acts, which we understand have been introduced into [7*3
68
Parliament, and are even said to have passed, strongly and concurrently indicate that a change is taking place in the policy of the cabinet, on this subject; and we hope that now is precisely the favorable
time for taking advantage of it. Our own navigation act may perhaps contribute to the same effeetf and even should it operate otherwise and confirm them in their obstinate exclusion of our vessels from
those ports, as it will make their exclusion from ours to the same extent reciprocal, it leaves us the more free to agree to the renewal of
the convention of July, 1815; if nothing more can be obtained.
2. Indemnity to the owners of the slaves carried away from the
"United States by British officers, after tbe ratification of the peace of
Ghent, and contrary to a stipulation in the first article of that treaty.
Copies of the correspondence between the two governments, on
«lis subject, are in the possession of Mr. Rush. They disagreed in
their construction of the stipulation alluded to, and, each party adhering to its own view of it, a proposal was made, nearly two years
since, on our part, to refer it to the arbitration of some friendly
sovereign. This proposal, which Mr. Rush, upon his arrival in
England, renewed, has now been accepted by the British government;
but with a further proposal to refer it, and two other subjects, for
arrangement, in the first instance, to commissions like those under
the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th articles of the treaty of Ghent.
3. 4. These other subjects are, the boundary line from the northwest corner of the Lake of the Woods, westward; which you remember was all but agreed upon, and went off upon a collateral incident
at Ghent; and our title to the settlement at the mouth of Columbia
river.
The expediency of referring any of these questions to two commissioners, one belonging to each of the two countries, is very doubtful.    With regard to the slaves, and to Columbia.river, it can scarcely be expected that the commissior^r of either party would ultimately entertain an opinion different from that already pronounced by his
own government; and, if concession upon one point is to be made the
condition of corresponding concession upon the other, it may, with
more propriety, be effected by compromise between the two governments, than by judiciary powers given by them to individuals, under
allegiance to the two countries themselves.    As to the line from the
Lake of the Woods, as some dissatisfaction has already been excited
here by the expense occasioned by the two commissions already
employed in settling the boundary, another commission to draw a
line through the depth of the deserts, and to an indefinite extent,
would be still more liable to censure; besides, the apprehension which
it might raise, that the issue of the commission would be to bring the
British territory again in contact with the Mississippi.
5. The fisheries.        m?
The correspondence between the two governments, on this fsubf
ject, leaves it still in the unsettled state in which it was left at the
peace. Two proposals have been made, on the part of the British
government, neither of which proving acceptable, a counterproposal 64
r 7i ]
from us has been promised, and will be contained in the further detailed instructions which will be prepared and forwarded to Mr. Rusbj
to assist you in the conduct of the negotiation.
JAMES MONROE,
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
To all whom these Presents shall concern, Greeting:
Know ye, That, for the purpose of perpetuating, between the United
States and his Britannic Majesty, the harmony and good correspondence
happily subsisting between them, and of removing all grounds of dissatisfaction, and reposing special trust and confidence in the integrity, prudence, and abilities, of Albert Gallatin, our Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at the court of France, and of Richard Rush, our
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at the court of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, I have invested them with full
and all manner of power and authority, for and in the name of the United
States to meet and confer with any person or persons authorized by his
Royal Highness the Prince Regent, acting in the name and behalf of his
Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
being furnished with like power and authority, and with him or them to
agree, treat, consult, and negotiate, of and concerning the renewal of the
Convention concluded at London, on the 3d of July, 1815, and concerning the general commerce between the United States and Great Britain
and its dominions or dependencies, and such other matters and subjects,
interesting to the two nations, as may be given to them in charge; and to
conclude and sign a treaty or treaties, convention or conventions, touching
the premises; transmitting the same to the President of the United States
for his final ratification, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate
of the United States.
In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States to
be hereunto affixed.  Given under my hand, at the City of Wasfi-
[l. s.]    ington, the twenty-second day of May, A. D. 1818, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the forty-second.
JAMES MONROE.
By the President:
John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, dated
Department of State, 30th May, 1818.
It is not our desire to embarrass the proposed commercial negotiation
with any of the questions of maritime regulations adapted to a state of
warfare. We do not wish that blockade, contraband trade with enemies
or their colonies, or even impressment, should be drawn into the discussion, unless such a wish should be manifested on the British side.
Mr. Bagot has been informed that this negotiation will be proposed, and
that, in the event of its being agreed to, another plenipotentiary will be [71]
65
joined with you, to confer and conclude with those who may be appointed
on the part of Great Britain. He is not aware that there will be any objection to it; but, if there should be any, and the British government should
determine to keep the renewal of the commercial convention distinct from
every other subject to be arranged between the two countries, you will, of
course, not give the notice to Mr. Gallatin, to repair to London, mentioned
in my last despatclu If the British cabinet agree to negotiate, it is hoped
that the special instructions, to be prepared and forwarded to you, will
reach you as soon as Mr. Gallatin will find it convenient to meet you in
London. If the British cabinet prefer, by a single article, to renew the
convention of July, 1815, for a term of eight, ten, or even twelve years,
or any shorter period, your full power, heretofore given, will be still in
force, and will enable you to conclude such an article, subject to the ratification here, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. jj|
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams.
London, June 26, 1818.
g In my interview with Lord Castlereagh, on the eleventh of this
month, other subjects were treated than those I have, already communicated, of which it is proper that I should now give a particular account.
In the foremost rank, stands impressment. A sufficient interval having
elapsed, I asked his Lordship if any answer was made up on the proposal
I had submitted on the eighteenth of April. He replied that he had brought
it before the cabinet, where it had been considered with all the care which
it merited. He proceeded to touch upon some of the principles and arguments to which the subject always leads. He adverted first, as connected
with naturalization, to the opposite opinion which the two governments
held upon the doctrine of allegiance. I said that I was aware of no opinions entertained by the government of the United States upon that point,
except such as were sanctioned by the ancient and predominant authorities
of law, as well as the general usage of Europe. He next observed that we
gave to our ships a character of sovereignty which Great Britain did not ;
that we considered them part of our territory, clothing them with corresponding immunities. I said it was true, that we did consider our ships
quite as inviolable as the soil, in the protection which they should afford to
our seamen, whether native or naturalized ; but that never had we, as a
neutral, claimed to shield them from entry, under any of the just belligérant rights of search; that is^ whether to look for persons in the land or
naval service of a co-belligerant, articles contraband of war, or enemy's
property.*^ That these constituted the utmost limit to which the belligérant claim had ever been pushed. What we complained of, was, that Great
Britain, passing them all, should enter a new field, and set up a right to
enforce in our vessels, while navigating the high seas, her own municipal
laws. His Lordship did not view it in this light, but spoke of the claim
as one being established, and incontestible on the part of Great Britain.
He said it became his duty to add, that, on a full consideration of the proposal, it had not been found practicable to forego, under any conventional
.agreement, the execution of which was # depend upon the legislative or-
9 ^6
[71 ]
dtnances of another country, this right of looking for her subjects upon the
ocean wherever she might be-likely to find them.
From the broad ground of this decision, it became evident that there
could no longer be any possible advantage in adhering to the course marked down in my despatch of the twentieth of April. This, it will be recollected, was not to disclose, in the first instance, all my powers. I
therefore risked nothing in asking his Lordship what difference it would
make, if the United States would agree to exclude from service, on board
both of their ships of war and merchant vessels, all native born British
subjects.
He replied, that this, indeed, would be going a step further; but that it
would still leave the proposal within the principle of their objeetkra. That
the objection, in short, went to the full length of an unwillingness to con-,
cede, by treaty, the right of entering the vessels of a foreign power, to look
for their subjects, whatever its terms.
I now remarked that I heard this determination with regret; as I was
ready to accede to a stipulation, on the part of my government, bottomed
on the unqualified exclusion of all natives from both branches of our service, and I feared also, that this would exhaust all the offers which it had
to submit. I begged that he would, in fact, consider such an offer as distinctly made, and under full authority.   He promised to do so.
Every proposal which it fell within the compass of the United States to
put forward, being gone through, I asked, in turn, if it had occurred to his
Lordship to hold out any overtures on the part of the British government.
I reiterated, in forcible terms, the assurance that there prevailed:, throughout
the United States, one universal wish, with government and people, to see
removed the sources of a dispute which concerned so seriously both nations. But I found that he was prepared with none which did not assume
the right of previously entering our ships. For the judicious and safe exercise of this right, Great Britain, he said, was willing to enter into the
most effective regulations, such as restricting the boarding ofiicers to those
of a rank not below lieutenants, giving responsible receipts for the men
taken out, or any other safeguards which the American government might
propose, as better adapted to the end. That she would always be ready
to receive, and in the most friendly manner discuss, proposals of this description, under the hope of some practicable arrangement growing out of
them.
I did not hesitate to say, that the United States would never admit, by
convention, a right to enter their vessels for such a purpose as impressment. It would be to surrender principles which they held too sacred,
besides that its exercise, however attempted to be softened, must necessarily be liable, from circumstances intrinsic and insurmountable between
the two nations, to perpetual and the most fatal abuse. His Lordship, while
repeating the inability of Great Britain to abandon by compact her-ancient
right, again frankly admitted the evils of which it had been the parent, and
which he hoped never to see revived. He added that it would be her anxious desire in future, hoping that the day of necessity for its actual exercise was far distant, to free it as much as possible from abuse, and that, in
particular, it would be much the more sparingly brought into activity, if
the American government, by adopting, of its own accord, such legislative
ordinances as I had proposed, would thus inspire a confidence, that, at all
events, but few of her subjects would find their way into American ships.
It will be supposed that I alluded to the unequal ground upon which [71]
67
such a course would place the United States. If they consentedfto pass
laws of this nature, it might reasonably be expected that they must see
their way to an equivalent in some stipulation, on the part of Great Britain, of ascertained and positive value, and that no other would be stamped with that character but an agreement not to enter their ships.
Although I explicitly made the proposal of a willingness not to employ
in our service even her native subjects, I did not think it right that it
should rest upon the footing of a verbal offer. The less did I think this
would be prudent, from observing an inclination in his lordship's mind,
towards the close of our conversation, to consider what had passed as
wearing an informal, rather than any other character, inasmuch as it had
been productive of no results. I removed this impression, by new and unequivocal declarations that it was to be regarded differently. In conformity with them, I put into his hands, on the 20th of this month, the
paper marked No. 2, which accompanies tMs despatch. In delivering it,
I desired that he would consider it as altogether and strictly official. It
was true, I said, the proposal which it embraced had already been rejected; but I knew so well the anxiety of the President upon this great point,
as to feel sure that I should be more truly the organ of his will by putting
it in a shape in which it might go among the archives of this government,
and would add, in the further hope, that, possibly, other views might, in
other times, be taken of it. On receiving the paper wîlffit this remark, his
lordship said he would lay it before the cabinet on his return from Ireland,
whither he was soon to go, and that, perhaps, it might be thought advisable to put in writing the objections and counter opinions of Great Britain.
In this abortive manner has the attempt ended. I have endeavored to
recount, with all «possible accuracy, what has transpired, and trust, that,
in no material point, have I misunderstood the communications of this government. It places upon record another, and an earnest effort, to settle
this great and formidable controversy. The failure is the more to be de?
plored, as the attempt has been made during a season of profound peace,
and when the two governments seem well disposed towards each other.
The United States have again done all that they could towards allaying it.
They declare that they want not British seamen in their vessels. They
engage to exclude them by all the means that human laws can devise. In
a spirit of extreme conciliation, they go farther in their offers than the obligations of co-equal sovereignty, or the policy and habits of their internal
system, might, in the judgment of all, be thought to dictate. Whilst they
concede so much, Britain will yield nothing. She remains rigid and inexorable. She will not meet half way. She will not turn a step from her
course. To an alleged right, but which has often been demonstrated to be
utterly without support, in any one principle that the society of nations
has ever recognised—unless the dicta of English common lawyers make up
the great and universal code of public law—does she continue to cling, in
the mere ambitious and wilful reliance upon an unchecked career in her
naval supremacy. It is upon such foundations that she virtually threatens
the indefinite continuance of a practice more afflicting to humanity, as far
as the scale extends, than was ever the African slave trade, and in the
highest degree insulting to the rights and dignity of an* independent and
powerful nation.
The subject of impressment being, I fear, finally disposed of, as one of
negotiation between the two governments, Lord Castlereagh next reminded me, that it was now but little more than a twelve-month fromthe time 6.8
[71 ]
fixed for Hie expiration of the commercial convention of 1815. He asked
if I knew the views of my government, in regard to its renewal. I replied
that at present I did not, with precision.!- He requested that I would consoler his question as intended to draw my attention specially to the subject, and?%xpressed some anxiety to have information at as early a day as
convenient.
I anticipate the probability of the expression of some sentiments to me,
from the Department, in the course of the present summer, in relation to
this convention. How far our act, bearing upon their colonies, is to operate on the question of renewal, or if objectionable in its existing provisions, in what respects modifications are to be insisted upon, are points on
which I am not instructed.!? I am aware that it is already made my duty to
obtain and transmit information upon which, perhaps, a final opinion on
the merits of the convention was expected, in part, to rest. Of this duty,
I have not been unmindful. But it is proper I should state, that my efforts, for reasons that will be explained in a future despatch, do not promise as much success as I had hoped. Besides inquiries among individual
merchants, wherever it has come within my power to make them, 1 addressed, in March, a letter to each one of our Consuls within the European
dominions of this country. Answers are, from time to time, dropping in;
but neither from them, and still less from my personal inquiries, is it likely
that I shall derive information, either so full or so accurate, on the effects of
the cessation of all discriminating duties, as to be of any decisive or even
great account, in making up a judgment. In the next place, although I
will take care that what I do obtain is transmitted in time for the session of
Congress, in November, the period which my instructions seem to contemplate, it would be desirable, I am sure, to this government, to be furnished
sooner, if possible, with an intimation of the intentions of ours, in relation
to this compact.
If it is to be suffered to run out without renewal, Great Britain having
positively declined forming a treaty with us which shall include her colonies, upon what footing are the commercial relations of the two countries to
stand? Will each be left to its own regulations, as sometimes heretofore,
or is any substitute to be proposed? These are points on which I should
feel happy to receive information, whenever it may be thought fit to impart it."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the-Secretary of State, stating a
conversation between himself and Lord Castlereagh, dated
London, July 25th, 1818.
''I entered next upon the subject of the commercial relations between
the two countries. Remarking upon the change produced in them by the
prohibitory act of the last session of Congress, now soon to commence its
operation, I observed that I had it in charge to say, that the President had
yeilded his assent to that act with reluctance; for that, however just, its
tendencies might be of an irritating nature to the individual interests that
it would affect on both sides, whilst it was his constant desire to give efficacy to measures, mutually more beneficial and conciliatorv. It was, therefore, that I was once more authorized and instructed to propose to this [71]
69
government the negotiation of a general treaty of commerce. That the
President had, besides, agreed that there should be comprehended in the
negotiation other matters heretofore desired to be treated of, by this go -
vernment, as well as points in which the government of the United States
took a particular interest; being in the whole, 1. The question respecting the slaves carried off from the Unit id States, in contravention, as alleged, of the treaty of Ghent. 2. The question of title to the settlement
at the mouth of Columbia river. 3. The question of the northwestern
boundary line, from the Lake of the Woods; and, 4th, That of the fisheries. Upon these topics, the President, I added, preferred treating in a
direct way, in the first instance, in the hope that the two governments
might arrive at a just understanding, without resorting to Commissioners;,
and that, if this government was prepared to go into all of them, including, especially, a general treaty of commerce, another Plenipotentiary
had been contingently appointed on the part of the United States, to meet,
with me, any two that might be designated on the part of Great Britain.
His Lordship asked what he was to understand by a general treaty of
commerce. I replied, a treaty that should lay open not a temporary, or
precarious, but a permanent intercourse with their West India Islands and
North American colonies, to the shipping of the United States, as often before proposed, but which, after the recent refusals, it might seem almost
unnecessary again to bring into view, were it not that other objects, of interest to both nations, were now associated with it in a way to clothe the
proposition with a new aspect.
He answered that th e British government would certainly be willing to
enter upon a negotiation on the commercial relations of the two countries,
but that he had no authority to say that the colonial system could be essentially altered; broken down it could not be, I said, that if it was not
to be departed from, or in no further degree than the four articles had imported, as those articles had already been rejected, it did not appear to
me that any advantage would be likely to arise from going into the negotiation. He replied that he was not prepared to answer, definitively,
upon all, or any of the points, but would lay them before the Cabinet, and
let me know the result. He professed, earnestly, in the course of the conversation, the desire which this government had to see the commerce of
the two countries stand upon the best footing of intercourse, the stake to
each being so great, and promising, with the growth of the United States,
to be so much greater.
In the event of a negotiation, upon the grounds I had explained, not
being opened, he asked if I could inform him what the intentions of my
government were relative to the commercial intercourse between the countries; it being, for obvious reasons, desirable soon to know.
Here I did not hesitate to announce that, in such an event, which I still
hoped would not be the case, it was willing simply to renew the existihg
convention of 1815, thus keeping this instrument distinct from all other
questions of a commercial nature, if the British government preferred it.
This communication, I thought, he received with evident satisfaction.
He remarked, that it would rescue the commercial relations from all danger of a chasm, and made known, in immediate reply, the readiness of his
government to acquiesce in such a course.
On the 22d I received a note from him, requesting fo see me again at
the Foreign Office on the 23d. I was there accordingly. Mr. Robinson,
.who is now a mèmher of the cabinet, as well as president of the board of 70
[71]
trade, was present. It was the first occasion upon which any third person
had .been- associated with lord Castlereagh, at any of our official interviews.
His lordship commenced by saying that he had laid my proposals before
the cabinet, and that it had been agreed to enter upon the general negotiation; that is, one which should embrace all the points I had stated. In
relation to the great commercial question, he begged I would understand,
that the British government did not pledge itself beforehand to a departure from its colonial system, in a degree beyond what it had already offered; but that it was sincerely desirous to make the attempt, and unequivocally wished to bring the whole commercial relations of the two countries into view, willing to hope, though abstaining from promises, that
some modification of that system, mutually beneficial, might be the result
of frank and full discussions renewed at the present juncture. I replied,
that I knew my government would hear this determination with great satisfaction. That it would cordially join in the hope, that the new effort
might be productive of advantage to both countries, and strengthen the
ties of good intercourse that should unite them.
I now informed him that Mr. Gallatin, the present minister from the
United States at Paris, would take part in the negotiation, and come over
to London as soon as it would be convenient to say that plenipotentiaries
would be appointed on the part of Great Britain. He said, the sooner the
better; and that Mr. Robinson and Mr. Goulburn would be named to treat
with us. His lordship said, that he himself would be obliged to set out for
the continent, to attend the European Congress, by the 20th or 25th of
next month, but that the negotiation could go on in his absence. He intimated a wish, however, that it might open, if practicable, before he went
away. I answered, that all the necessary powers and instructions, from
our government, had not yet reached us, but that we were in daily expectation of them.
He next asked whether, in order to guard against all possible delays that
might be incident to the general negotiation, which was to embrace so
many points, I was prepared to agree, at once, to a renewal of the conven-
^©n of 1815, for a term of years to be agreed on; declaring that the British
government was ready, at any moment, to concur in such agreement.
I answered, without reserve, that I was already in possession of a full
power to this effect, which, independently of other objects, might be carried into execution.
I wroie, yesterday, to Mr, Gallatin, to apprise him of the necessity of
coming over, the contingency which was to bring him having happened.
From the answer I have received to my letter to him of the second of this
month, I think it probable that he will be here in three weeks, or sooner,
so that, if our full powers arrive, the negotiation may be opened before Lord
Castlereagh's departure. Should Mr. Gallatin concur, we Will make the
renewal of the convention for eight, ten, or twelve years, our first act.
This, I hope, the President will approve. Tne reasons that operate with;
me, are, 1. It will not only provide against delays, but all uncertainties in
the result, of the possibility of which we are forewarned simultaneously
éûÛi the desire expressed to enter the field of negotiation. It is not only
important that there should be no chasm in the commercial relations between the countries, but equally so, that our merchants should have timely
notice that there will be none. 2. Every inquiry that I have made among
merchants from the United States, with whom I have been able to confer, E71 ]
îl
in this city, has produced the most unequivocal opinions, that this convention is working well for us, which entirely falls in with the communications
I have received from the Department. 3. Taking this for the fact, it seems
naturally to follow, that it is our part to consent to the renewal the moment
Britain says she will, lest the day should go by. On this head, I will just
state, that I have heard, through a respectable source, that there are already
some British ship owners, in Liverpool, who talk of petitioning their government against its renewal. Lastly, my power to renew, seems to me,
from your despatch of the thirtieth of May, to be complete, nor will its
exercise thwart, in any degree, our prospects of a more enlarged treaty
under the general negotiation."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Messrs. Gailatin and Rush,
dated Department of State, 2Sth July, 1818.
igj In the expectation that the government of Great Britain have
accepted the proposal which Mr.. Rush was instructed to make, for
negotiating a treaty of commerce, embracing the continuance of the
convention of 3d July, 1815, for an additional term of years, and
including other objects of interest to the two nations, I have now
the honor of transmitting to you the President's instructions to you
for the conduct of the negotiation.
With regard to the commercial convention of 3d July, 1815, you
have already been informed that the President is willing that it should
be continued without alteration for a further term of eight or ten
years. We had flattered ourselves, from the liberal sentiments expressed by Lord Castlereagh in Parliament, and from various other
indications, that the British Cabinet would have been now prepared
te extend tbe principles of the convention fo our commercial intercourse with their colonies in the West Indies and North America;
but, from the report of two conferences between Mr. Rush.and Lord
Castlereagh, since received, it appears that our anticipations had
been too sanguine, and that, with regard to our admission into their
colonies, they still cling to the system of exclusive colonial monopoOur navigation act, passed at the last session of Congress, is
Well calculated to bring this system to a test by which it has not hitherto been tried; and if the experiment must be made complete, so
that the event shall prove to demonstration which of the two coCfj^;
tries can best stand this opposition of counter exclusions, the United
States are prepared to abide by the result. Still, we should prefer to
remove them at once, if for no other reason than that it would have a
tendency to promote good humour between the two countries. We
wish you to urge this argument upon the British Cabinet; to remind
them of the principles avowed by Lord Castlereagh in Parliament, to
Which I have before referred, and of their precise bearing upon this
question. It may also be proper to suggest, that, while Great Britain
is pressing upon Spain the abandonment of her commercial mono- 72
[71]
poly, throughout the Continent of South America, her recommendation must necessarily gain great additional weight by setting the example with her own colonies, while at the same time her own interest
in her monopoly must be reduced to an object too trifling for national
consideration, when the Spanish colonies shall be open to the commerce of the world. Finally, it may be observed, that the free-port
act, passed at the late session of Parliament, goes already so far towards the abandonment of their system, that it can scarcely be perceived why they should adhere to the remnant of it any longer. Other
arguments may occur to your own reflections, and result from your
thorough knowledge of the subject; you will urge them with earnestness, though giving it always to be understood that we shall acquiesce in their ultimate determination. t||
Whenever this subject has been presented to tbe British cabinet,
since the peace, their only objection to the proposals and arguments
of the United States, has been, that their system has been long established. Lord Castlereagh has invariably acknowledged his own
doubts whether it was wise, or really advantageous to Great Britain;
but placed the determination to preserve it upon the single ground
of its having long existed. Whatever weight there is in this reasoning, it would bear in favor of all those other exclusions which he
congratulated Parliament and the country at having been abolished,
as much as in support of this. It is tbe argument of all existing
abuse against reformation; of mere fact against reason and justice.
The commercial intercourse between the United States and the West
Indies is founded upon mutual wants and upon mutual convenience;
upon their relative geographical position; upon the nature of their
respective productions; upon the necessities of the climate; and upon
the convulsions of nature. When the British ministry say—against
all this our ancestors established a system, and therefore we must
maintain it; we may reply, if your ancestors established a system in
defiance of the laws of nature, it is your interest and your duty to
abolish it. But who can overlook or be blind to the changes of circumstances since the establishment of the system—to the irresistible
consequences of the establishment and growth of the United States
as an independent power—to the expulsion of the French from St.
Domingo—to the revolution in progress in the South American provinces? Every system established upon a condition of things essentially transient and temporary, must be accommodated to the changes
produced by time.
Besides the Free-port Act, a printed copy of which has now been
received from Mr. Rush, and which, we find, is limited to ports specially to be appointed by the Crown, in the Provinces of Nuva Scotia
and New Brunswick, we have seen in the public journals a bill for
permitting a certain trade between the British West Indies and any
colony or possession in the West Indies, or on the continent àf America,
under thet dominion of any foreign European sovereign or state. This
measure appears intended to counteract the effects of our late Navigation Act, and gives further manifestation of the adherence of the Bri- C 71 ]
78
tish government to their colonial exclusions. It is the Presidents-
desire that nothing should be omitted which can have the tendency
to, convince them that a change would promote the best interests of
both countries, as weli as the harmony between them* Should your
efforts prove ineffectual, we can onjij' wait the result of the counter-*
acting measures to which we have resorted, or which may be found
necessary hereafter.
In carrying the convention of 3d July, 1815, into execution, the
British government have sanctioned the practice, with regard to some
of the foreign tonnage duties, first, to levy them, as if the convention were not in force; and then, upon petition of the persons inte-
rested, to have them returned. If this practice cannot be given up
altogether, it will he necessary that some regulation should be adopted, by which the extra duties shall be returned, of course; and without putting the parties to the trouble, and expense,^and delay, of obtaining it by petition. At present, unless the petition is presented, the duties are not returned. It happens sometimes, that
masters of vessels pay the duties, without knowing that they are entitled to have them returned^ in which case, they are lost to them,
or their owners. It will beproper, therefore, to require the adoption
of some general regulation, in ^virtue of which, it shall be made j
the duty of the officers of the customs to repay the extra duties, in
all cases in which they shall have been levied, without exposing the
individual to lose his right by his own ignorance, or by the negli-*
gence or infidelity of his consignee.
2. Slaves.
The British government have accepted the proposal of referring to
the decision of some friendly Sovereign, or State, the question concerning the slaves carried away from the United States, by British
ofiicers, after the ratification of the peace. They propose, however,
a previous reference of it to two commissioners, appointed like those
under the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th articles of the treaty of Ghent, and
to proceed with similar powers; and committing to the same commissioners the power of fixing, definitively, the boundary betwreen the United States and the possessions of Great Britain, westward, from the
northwest corner of the Lake of the Woods; and of pronouncing up*
on the right of the United States to the settlement on the shores of
the Pacific Ocean, at the mouth of Columbia river. These objects
t are so entirely different from one another; the principles, the character of the evidence, and the reasoning, which must lead to the re*
suit, are so disconnected and incongruous, that, if submitted at all
to commissioners, it is obviously proper to refer them to different
commissions. The question concerning the slaves, is a question of
construction upon the terms of the first article of the treaty; and the
two governments having already discussed it, each, after discussion,
adhering to its own opinion, there is little prospect that either of the
commissioners will come to a conclusion different from that of his
ioIF 74
[71 J
own government. The present offer of the British government, connecting it with another question of boundary, bears the appearance
of a disposition to make it an affair of compromise, and that they
are willing to concede something to us on one of the points, upon
condition of a concession from us upon the other. If this be their object, these mutual concessions may be made with more convenience
by direct and immediate agreement between the two governments,
and by an article of the treaty, than by the means of commissioners,
whose functions are rather of the judicial than the ministerial character, and whose duties are to decide, and not to compromise.
3,
Boundary, from the Lake of the Woods, westwardi
By thejsecond article of the treaty of peace, of 1783, the boundaries
of the United States, after having been-traced from the northwest
angle of Nova Scotia to the most northwestern point of the Lake of
tbe Woods, are.pursued "from thence, on a due west course, to the
" river Mississippi; thence, by a line to be drawn along the middle
(t of the said river Mississippi, until it shall intersect the northern-
" most part of the thirty-first degree of north latitude."
By the fourth article of the treaty of 17941 it was declared to be
\uncertain whether the river Mississippi extended so far to the north-
Ward as to be intersected by a line due west from the Lake of the
Woods; and a joint survey of the river, from one degree below the
Falls of St. Anthony to the principal sources of the said river, and
ofithe parts adjacent thereto, was stipulated; and if, on the result of
the survey, it appeared that the river would not be intersected by the
line, the parties were to regulate the boundary line by amicable negotiation, according to justice and mutual convenience, and in conformity to the intent of the treaty. This joint survey never took effect.
By a convention, signed on the 12th of May, 1803, by Mr. King
and Lord Hawkesbury, but which was not ratified, it was agreed
that the boundary should be by a line from the northwest corner of
the Lake of the Woods, by the shortest line, until it touched the river
Mississippi. Until then, the Mississippi river had been the western
boundary of the United States. The cession of Louisiana gave them
a new and extensive territory westward of that river.
In tlie negotiation of 1807, between Messrs. Monroe and W. Pink-
ney, and the Lords Holland and Auckland, there were three successive
draughts of articles for the settlement of this boundary. The first proposed, on the British side, (.art. 5, page 198, documents,) was a line
due west from the Lake of the Woods, along the 49th parallel of north
latitude, as faifas the territories of the United States extend in that
quarter, and the'Iine, to that extent, was to form the boundary; with
a proviso, that the article should not be construed to extend to the
northwest coast of America, oj» to territories westward of the Stoney
Mountains.
The second proposed, on the part of the United States, (page 202,) mm
75
took a line due north or south, as the case might be, from the most
northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods, until it shall intersect
the49th parallel of north latitude, and then, due west, along that parallel, for the boundary between the-territories of the parties; with the
proviso, excluding the northwest coast, and all territories westward
of the Stonev Mountains. Up
The third was agreed to by both parties; and varied from the second only by an additional clause, purporting that this should be the
boundary, as far as the respective territories of the parties extend in that
quarter.
That convention was not ultimately concluded. At the negotiation of the peace of Ghent, the 8th article of the first projet presented
by the American Plenipotentiaries, was a transcript from this article last above mentioned; and the article proposed by the British
Plenipotentiaries on returning the projet, was the same as that which
bad been first proposed by Lords Holland and Auckland; With an additional paragraph, stipulating free access to British subjects, through
the territories of the United States, to the Mississippi, and the free
navigation of that river. In the conferences that ensued, the substance of the article, so far as it regarded the boundary, was agreed
to on both sides; but, as the American Plenipotentiaries could not a^4
cede to the additional paragraph, the article was, finally, altogether
omitted.
From the earnestness with which the British government now return to the object of fixing this boundary, there is reason to believe
that they have some other purpose connected with it, w h ich they do
not avow, but which, in their estimation, gives it an importance not
belonging toit, considered in itself. An attempt was at first made by
them, at the negotiation of Ghent, to draw the boundary line from
Lake Superior to the Mississippi. But, as they afterwards not only
abandoned that pretension, but gave up even the pretension to an article renewing their right to the navigation of the Mississippi, if: was
to have been expected they would thenceforth have considered this
western boundary of no importance to them. The new pretension,
however, of disputing our title to the settlement at the mouth of Columbia river, either indicates a design, on|their part, to" encroach, by
new establishments of their own, upon the forty-ninth parallel of latitude, south of which they can have no valid claim upon this continent, or it manifests a jealousy of the United States; a desire to check
the progress of our settlements, of which it might have been supposed
that experience would, before this day, have relieved them. Their
projects for the line, both in the negotiation of Messrs. Monroe and
Pinkney, in 1806, and at Ghent, in 1814, were to take the 49th
parallel of latitude, from the Lake of the. Woods, west, as far as the
territories of the United States extend in that direction, with a caveat
against its extension to the South Sea, or beyond the Stoney Mountains, upon which two observations are to be made: first, that it is
uncertain whether any part of the Lake of the Woods is in latitude
49; and, secondly, that they always affected to apply the indefinite 76
in ]
limit of extension ft as far as the territories extend,99 to the territories of the United States, and not to those of Great Britain, leaving
a nest e^ for future pretensions, on their part, south of latitude 49.
The counter projects for the line, on our part, therefore, at both those
negotiations, were, from the northwest corner of the Lake of the
Woods, the point already fixed and undisputed, a line due north or
south, as the case may be, to the 49th parallel of latitude, and thence,
along that parallel, due west, as far as the territories of bothjparties
extend ip that direction, and adopting the caveat against extension to
the Pacific, or beyond the Stoney Mountains.
4. Settlement at the Mouth of Columbia River.
From the late^orrcspondence with the Spanish Minister Onis, it
appears that the claim of Spain, upon the shores of the South Sea,
extends to the 56th degree of north latitude: but, there is a Russian
settlement in 55, besides a temporary lodgment connected with it as
far south as 42. The pretensions of the British Government may,
pn this occasion, be disclosed. We know not precisely what they
are; nor have they explained the grounds or the motives upon which
they contest our right to the settlement called Astoria, formed before
tbe late war, and broken up by the British sloop of war Racoon in
the course of it. ;i The papers enclosed, marked from A to I, contain
all the information material to the subject, possessed by this Department.1> It appears that, at the time when the American settlement
was broken up during the war, the property was purchased by certain agents of the British Northwest Company: this, however,
could in no manner divest the United States of their jurisdiction.
As the British Government admit, explicitly, their obligation, under
the first article of the Treaty of Ghent, to restore the post, there can
be no question with regard to the right of the United States to resume it. We do not perceive how or why this question should be referred to two commissioners of the respective nations; and, as Russia herself has pretensions on that Coast, it deserves the consideration of both parties, wrhether the ultimate determination, in the almost unavoidable case of a difference between the Commissioners,
could, with propriety, be referred to her Sovereign. Mr. Rush
bas been instructed, in the event of a final difference between the
Commissioners, under the existing commissions, to propose the Emperor of Russia as the Sovereign to whose decision the reference,
stipulated on that contingency in the treaty, should be made. It
cannot be doubted, that he was the Sovereign contemplated by both
parties, at the time when the treaty, was concluded; and it might be
difficult to designate any other in whom the confidence of both parties would be so strong and clear, as to secure their cordial acquiescence in his decision.
The expedient itself, of submitting questions of territorial rights
and boundaries, in discussion between two nations, to the decision of
a third, was unusual, if notêentirely new| and, should tbe contingency [71]
77
occur, will probably encounter difficulties of execution, not foreseen
at the time when the stipulation was made of resorting to it. The
subjects in controversy are of a nature too intricate and complicated,
requiring on the part of the arbitrator a patience of investigation
and research, historical, political, legal, geographical, and astronomical, for which it is impossible to conceive that the sovereign of a
great empire could personally bestow the time.
These ideas are suggested with a view to recommend the attempt
rather to come to an agreement between the parties themselves, upon
all objects whieh have not been thoroughly discussed between them,
than to cast their difficulties upon commissioners wTho can scarcely
be expected to agree concerning them, and then upon a foreign sovereign, of whose personal integrity no doubt can be entertained, but,
who cannot have leisure to sift the subjects in dispute to the bottom.
On the whole, the President will be well satisfied if these three
objects: of indemnity for the slaves carried away; of the western
boundary from the Lake of the Woods; and of the settlement at the
mouth of Columbia River, can be adjusted by this negotiation, rather
than referred to commissioners, which must be expensive, and so
constituted as to make it at least probable that they will decide
nothing, and then to a friendly sovereign, still at great expense,
and other inconveniences to both parties. With regard to the slaves,
the question which it was proposed should be submitted to the decision of an impartial arbitrator, wTas merely on the construction
of one paragraph, in an article of the treaty of Ghent. This was so
simple, and requiring so little research or investigation of any kind,
that it might have been decided immediately by the sovereign himself, upon an inspection of the article, and a short statement of the
facts to which both parties would have agreed. But the delineation
of an unsettled boundary, across the western deserts of this continent;
the title to establishments on the Pacific Ocean, where the arbitrator
himself is not without his pretensions; and where, save pretensions,
there is no object to any party worth contending for; to create burdensome commissions, and make solemn references to a foreign sovereign, for these, appears scarcely to be necessary, if altogether justifiable. As to the line from the Lake of the Woods, you are authorized to agree to that which was agreed upon by the Plenipotentiaries on both sides, in 1807; but not to any line which would bring
the British in contact with the Mississippi; nor to any thing which
would authorize the British to trade with Indians within the boundaries of the United States. Of the inconveniences of allowing such
trade, even by licences, a recent instance has occurred, copies of the
papers relating to which are transmitted to you.
5. Fisheries.
The proceedings, deliberations, and communications, upon this
subject, which took place at the negotiation of Ghent, will be fresh
in the remembrance of Mr, Gallatin. f<Mr. Rush possesses copies of 78
[71]
the correspondence with the British government, relating to it, after
the conclusion of the peace, and of that which has passed here between- Mr. Bagot and this government. Copies of several 4etters ÉÉP
ceived by members of Congress during the late session, from the
parts of the country most deeply interested in the fisheries, are now
transmitted.
The President authorizes you to agree to an article, whereby the
United States will desist from the liberty of fishing and curing and
drying fish within the: British jurisdiction generally, upon condition
that it shall be secured as a permanent right, not liable to be impaired
by any future war, from Cape Ray to the Ramian Islands, and from
Mount Joli, on the Labrador coast, through the Strait of Belle Isle,
indefinitely, north, along the coast; the right to extend as well to
curing and drying the fish, as to fishing.
By the decree of the Judge of the Vice Admiralty Court at Halifax, on the 29th of August last, in the case of several American fishing vessels which had been captured and sent into that port, a copy
of which is also now transmitted to you, it appears that all those captures have been illegal. An appeal from this decree was entered by
the captors to the Appellate Court in England, and the owners of
the captured vessels were obliged to give bonds to stand the issue of
the appeal. Mr. Rush was instructed to employ suitable counsel for
these cases, if the appeals should be entered, and, as we have been informed bv him, has accordingly q'one so.    If you do not succeed in
» mt      '«DCs. <J   * . **
agreeing upon an article on this subject, it will be desirable that the
Question upon the right, should be solemnly argued before the Lords
of Appeals; and that counsel of the first eminence should be employed
in it. Judge Wallace agreed with tbe Advocate General, that the
late war completely dissolved every right of the people of the United
States acquired by the treaty of 1783. But it does not appear that
this question had been argued before him, and the contrary opinion
is not to be surrendered on the part of the United States, upon the dictum of a Vice Admiralty Court. Besides this, we claim the rights
in question not as acquired by the treaty of 1783, but as having always before enjoyed them, and as only recognised as belonging to us
by that treaty, and therefore never to be divested from us but by our
own consent. Judge Wallace, however, explicitly says, that he does
not see how he can condemn these vessels, without an act of Parliament. And whoever knows any thing of the English Constitution,
must see that on this point he is unquestionably right. He says, indeed, something about an order in council, but it is very clear that
would not answer.Çlt is a question of forfeiture for a violated territorial jurisdiction; which forfeiture can be incurred, not by tbe law
of nations, but only by the law of the land—there is obviously no
such law.
The argument which has been so long and so ably maintained by Mr.
Reeves, that the rights of antenati Americans, as British subjects, even
within the kingdom of Great Britain, have never been divested from
them, because there has been no act of Parliament to declare it, applies,
9te fullest force, to this case; and, connected with the article in the L71]
79
treaty of 1783, by which this particular right was recognised, confirmed, and placed out of the reach of an act of Parliament, corroborates the argument in our favor. How far it may be proper and
advisable to use these suggestions in your negotiation, must be left to
your sound discretion; but, they are thrown out with the hope, that
you will pursue the investigation of the important questions of British law, involved in this interest; and that exevy possible advantage
may be taken of them, preparatory for the trial before the Lords of
Appeal, if the case should ultimately come to their decision. The
British government may be well assured, that not a particle of these
rights will be finally yielded by the United States without a struggle, which/will cost Great Britain more than the worth of the prize.
These are the subjects to which the President is willing that your
negotiation should be confined. With regard to the others of a general
^nature, and relating to the respective rights of the two nations in
times of maritime war, you are authorized to treat of them, and to
conclude concerning them, conformably to the instructions already
in possession of Mr. Rush; or, if the difficulty of agreeing upon the
j principles should continue as great as it has been hitherto, you may
omit them altogether.
You will not fail to transmit, by duplicates, the result of your conferences, at as early a period as may be found practicable.5
99
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Gallatin, dated Department
of State, 29th July, 1818.
*' This letter is merely to request you, in case the British government should have accepted the proposal for that negotiation, and if
you should be still in Paris when you receive it, to repair, without
delay, to London, for the purpose of entering upon the negotiation.
It is hoped you will be able to finish it, and to transmit the result here
for the meeting of Congress on the third Monday in November."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State, dated
London, August 13, 1818.
g On the day before yesterday I received a letter from Mr. Gallatin, dated the 6th of this month. He informs me that the full pow-
^  ejs have got to hand, and that he expects to be here on the sixteenth.
"The prospect of opening the negotiation before the departure of
Lord Castlereagh, seems therefore now to be good. I went yesterday to the Foreign Office to request that the proper orders may be
expedited to Dover, for the entrance of Mr. Gallatin, his family,
and baggage, into the kingdom, without molestation or delay." 80
[71]
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the. Secretary of State, dated
M London, August 15,  1818.
P On the evening of the 13th, I received a note from Lord Castlereagh, requesting me to call at the Foreign Office vesterday at four
o'clock. 1 went accordingly, when a conversation took place, which
I proceed to relate:
The ostensible object of the interview wTas to say to me, that
some circumstances would prevent the Congress assembling at Aix-
la-Chapelle earlier than the 20th of September, which would make
it unnecessary for him to go away quite as soon as he had originally
contemplated. He was glad of this, he added, as it would insure to
him an opportunity of being present here when the negotiation, so
soon to take place, between the two countries, commenced. I informed him of our full powers having been received, and of the expecta- J
tion I now had of Mr. Gallatin's arrival in a day or two. He subjoined a few'words as to the formal manner in which it appeared to
him best that the negotiation should move along, and also to apprise mè, that, although he expected to go into the country to-morrow,
he would be in town again on the 25th. Here, this part of the con- j
vernation closed.
He next surprised me agreeably by reviving the subject of impressment, which 1 thought had been blotted out from our conferences.
He began by premising that what he was going to say was confidential, and, for the present, without the knowledge of his colleagues in the
administration. That he had reflected much, and anxiously, upon my
late proposals, which, it was true, had, as they now' stood, been*
rejected. But feeling anew the importance of this subject to the fu^O
ture harmony of the two countries, and willing, if possible, not to
let it be shut out from the general negotiation upon the eve of open-*
ing, it had occurred to him to offer some suggestions in relation to it,
barely to see how they struck my mind, and know if there would be
a motive to pursue them. He went on to say, that his own impression was, protesting that, as yet, he was not authorized to say it was
that of his government, that the proposals might be rendered acceptable by some modifications very important to Great Britain, and not
at all so, as he supposed, to the primary object in view by the
United States.    The modifications were these:
1. That any treaty or convention, built up Upon the proposals as I
bad submitted them, should be limited in duration; say to eight, ten,
or twelve years, with liberty to each party to be absolved from its
stipulations, on a notice of three or six months; as in the late arrangement respecting the reciprocal dismantlement of naval armaments»
upon the lakes.
2. That the British boarding officer, entering American ships at
sea, for a purpose justified under the laws of nations, should have the
Hperty of calling for the list of the crew; and, if he saw a seaman
known to him, or on good grounds suspected to be an Englishman,
that he should have the further privilege of making a record, or pro- [71]
81
ces verbal, of the fact, in such way as to have the case distinctly
brought under the notice of our government, though by no means
withdrawing the man from the ship.  ;||j
The latter regulation, his lordship observed, would operate as a
further incentive to the faithful execution of our home prohibitions for
excluding British subjects from our vessels; and the former, guard
against any irrevocable relinquishments by Great Britain, which
the opinions, or even prejudices of the country might not, upon trial,
be found to bear.
I naturally infer that this government, reviewing its late decision,
and seeing, at last, the unexceptionable and perfect fairness of the offers of the United States, has made up its mind to abandon, in effect,
the great principle, or, at least, practice, to which, with an injustice
so tenacious, it has long clung: that of forcing the man from under
the sacred cover of our flag; and that ground has been broken in the
above interview, to the consummation of a change so auspicious in
the councils of this nation. The first modification seems to me unobjectionable. The second is open to considerations which I do not at
all like; yet it comes as a first suggestion, and we may therefore hope
to get rid of it altogether. As Mr. Gallatin will be here so soon, I
forebore to offer to his lordship any opinion, not feeling myself now
at liberty to speak upon the subject singly; but joining, nevertheless,
in the renewed anxiety to see it brought within the pale of our approaching discussions, and stating that I thought fair ground was
laid for its admission. I take leave of the subject, therefore, until
my endeavors, jointly with those of Mr. Gallatin, shall be resumed
upon it, having been first led to this communication for the President's early information on a question of so much interest. My
despatch of the 26th of June will show that some intimation was
thrown out, at that time, of an intention on the part of this government, to give, in waiting, its objections to our propositions; instead
of which more just views of them would happily seem to have risen
up."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State, dated
London, August Z&th, 1818.
"Mr. Gallatin got here on the 16th of this month. On the following day, I addressed a note to Lord Castlereagh, announcing his arrival. His Lordship was at his country seat, thirteen miles from
London, but invited us to an informal conference there oiTthe 22d.
We went accordingly, and remained all night. Nothing could have
been more cordial than the reception given to us. Mr. Robinson and
Mr. Goulburn were present. The several subjects of the negotiation were talked over in general terms, and in a spirit which, we
think, promises well for the friendly manner in which, at all events,
it will be conductedc
11 82
[ 71 ]
The full powers of Mr. Robinson and Mr. Goulburn having, in
tbe mean time, been made out, our first official meeting took place
yesterday, at the Office of the Board of Trade. Nothing of importance passed, beyond a recapitulation of the points which the two
governments desire to brings into discussion, and some attempts to
settle the order in which the negotiation should proceed. The points
consist of all such as have been given in charge to us, and which have
been heretofore mentioned in my despatches, including impressment,
and other maritime questions incident to a state of war.
I content myself at present, with stating, thus generally, for the
President's information, that the negotiation has opened. What relates to its progress, will, I presume, no longer be expected from me
singly, but in joint communications with Mr. Gallatin.
I ought not to omit to mention, that the point of impressment was
brought forward by Lord Castlereagh, at the first interview, held at
bis house on the 22d.    The next meeting takes place to-morrow.
There are some of the points which must stand still until we are
in possession of our further instructions.3
99
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State, dated
London, October 12th, 1818.
"At the joint meeting which took place on the ninth, nothing decisive wras determined upon. Premising that no opinion which I
give at this stage of the negotiation must be taken as at all binding,
I will barely say, that I think the prospect of coming to any agreement on an article regulating our trade with the West Indies, grows
more and more faint.    We are to have another conference to-mor
row.
»
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State, dated
London, October 19th, 1818.
" I hasten to communicate to you, for the information of the President, that, at a conference we have this day bad with the British
Plenipotentiaries, from which I have just returned j it has been agreed
to conclude a treaty, comprehending an arrangement of the following
points:
1st. The fisheries. 2d. The northwestern boundary line. 3d. That
about Columbia river. 4th. The question of slaves; and 5th. A renewal, for ten years, of the present commercial convention.
The treaty will probably be reduced to form and signed to-morrow." P      * [71 J . -      88
Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State.
London, October 27, 1818.
Sir: I had the honor to write you a few lines on the 19th instant,
and immediately forwarded them in triplicate to the Consul at Liverpool, to be sent off by the earliest ships, to say that we had on that
day agreed to sign a treaty with the British plenipotentiaries on the
points which I enumerated. It was signed on the 20th. The joint
despatch from Mr. Gallatin and myself bearing date on the same
day, giving an account of the whole progress of the negotiation,
was, together with the convention itself, and all the accompanying
documents, forwarded from hence to Liverpool on the 24th.
After consulting with Mr. Gallatin, I did not feel at liberty to
employ a special messenger to be the bearer of the convention, trusting to the ordinary opportunities by our merchant vessels, which are
so constant, and in general so safe. I accompanied the packet with
a special letter to Mr. Maury, apprizing him of the importance of
committing it to hands that were trust-worthy, and-with directions
that it should be delivered to the post-master àt NewYork, or
wherever else the ship may arrive, without any delay. It will thus,
I hope, reach Washington with all expedition and safety. On the
side of the British plenipotentiaries, a special Secretary was employed for the business of this negotiation. On ours, Mr. Smith has
acted; a circumstance which is alluded to, only that 1 may add, how
unremitting has been his attention, and how* useful his services. Mr.
Gallatin set out on his return to Paris, on the morning of the 22d.
Duplicates of the convention, the despatch, and all the other papers,
will be transmitted at the earliest moment that they can be copied.
After what is said iq your despatch of the 28th of July, to the
joint mission, respecting Judge Wallace's decree, on the 29th of August, 1817, at Halifax, in the cases of the captured fishing vessels,
it is proper I should state, that I have been informed, by Mr. Slade,
in a note of the 14th of this month, that no appeal has been entered,
by the captors, from the sentences of restitution; and that, the time
having now gone by, allowed by the practice of the Admiralty for entering appeals, none can be entered. He adds, that as the owners of
the vessels were obliged to give bail, at Halifax, to answer the appeals, it is possible that they may also have been made to place counter security in the hands of the bail; in which case, the bail may
refuse to part with such security, without a desertion from the Appellate Court here; that is, a decree that the Appeals had not been prosecuted, and that the orignal sentence should be carried into effect.
But as such a decree would he attended with expense, he does not advise it, for the present. In the event of its becoming necessary to
the owners, they should be informed that they cannot have the benefit of it, until oifice copies of the decrees of restitution, at Halifax,
are first forwarded. Mr. Slade is the proctor whom I employed, contingently, to give attention to these cases, as mentioned in my despatch of the 21st of March. 84
[71]
From the instÉtetions of the 28th of July, I infer, that government contemplated becoming instrumental to the solemn argument of
the great qdestion of right under the treaty of '83, only in the event
of no article respecting the fisheries being agreed upon. As one
has been signed, I design to take no further steps On this head, should
the convention be ratified, without further instructions from the Department. I mention this, perceiving, from the newspapers, that
there have been fresh captures of our fishing vessels during the last
season, followed by sentences of condemnation, from which, appeals,
on the part of tbe claimants, may, I take it for granted, be anticipated.
With very great respect,
I have the honor to be, &c.
M RICHARD RUSH.
Mr. Adams to Messrs. Gallatin and Rush.
Department oe State,
Washington, 2d November, 1818.
Gentlemen: From the despatches which, since I last had the
honor of writing to you, have been received at this Department, from
Mr. Rush, dated the 24th and 26th of June, and the 15th of August,
it appears that there are two subjects likely to be brought under consideration in your conferences with the British plenipotentiaries, which were not contemplated by the President, at the time when
your former instructions were prepared—impressment, and the slave
trade.
Impressment.
In the notes No. 1 and 2, delivered by Mr. Rush to Lord Castlereagh, the first on the 18th of April, and the second on the 20th of
June, both the offers had been made to the British government, vvar-
rantedby his former instructions, of legislative measures for excluding British seamen from the naval and merchant service of the United States, on condition of a formal stipulation on the part of Great
Britain, that the impressment of men from the vessels of the United
States shall henceforth cease.
Both these proposals, at the time when they were offered, or shortly afterwards, had been rejected, with an intimation from Lord Castlereagh to Mr. Rush, in the latter instance, that the objections of
the British cabinet against them would be presented in writing.
Afterwards, however, on the. 14th of August, he expressed his willingness that the subject should be taken up in the proposed negotiation of a commercial treatv, and avowed, as an opinion of his own,
upon which he had indeed not consulted with his colleagues in the
cabinet, that these proposals might, with certain modifications, which
be thought very important to Great Britain, and of little moment to [ 71 ]
85
the essential object of the United States, be rendered acceptable.
These were: I. That the treaty containing the stipffction should be
limited to a duration of ten or twelve years, with liberty to each party to be absolved from its stipulations, on a notice of three or six
mouths. 2. That the; British boarding officer, entering American
ships at sea, for a purpose justified under the laws of nations, should
have the liberty of calling for a list of the crew, and, if he saw a man
whom he knew, or suspected of being an Englishman, he should, without taking the man, have the privilege of making a record, or procès
verbal of the fact, to be presented to the consideration of the American government. £jf
These suggestions have received the fullest and most deliberate
consideration of the President, with the earnest disposition, on his
part, to view them in the most favorable light. He welcomes them,
especially, as the first indications of a consciousnessjn the British
cabinet that the permanency of peace between the two countries is
utterly incompatible with the resumption of the practice of impressing men from our vessels on the high seas: JpA conviction so profoundly impressed upon his own mind, that he scarcely thinks any discouragement could justify a remission of our efforts to remove this
inevitable cause of future collisions, so long as the practice hitherto
persevered in shall continue to exist.
It is readily agreed that the treaty to contain the stipulation shall
be limited in duration, to eight, ten, or twelve years; but that either
party should have the liberty of putting an end to the whole treaty,
by a notice of three or six months, would seem to place the whole
commercial relations between the two countries, upon too precarious
a foundation. Some of the stipulations proposed in your negotiation
are, in their nature, intended to be permanent, even in the event of a
war; others would require legislative regulations to protect interests,
which would be deeply affected by the sudden termination of the treaty. The President, nevertheless, authorizes you to agree, that, besides the general limitation of the temporary articles of the treaty to
eight, ten, or twelve years, either party shall be at liberty to dissolve them after a notice of two years given to, and received by, the
other; or, if preferable to the British government, the article relative to impressment may be made a separate article, distinct from
the rest of the treatv, and limited to a term of four years. This
course would, indeed', be most convenient, as it would give us the opportunity of taking the sense of the Senate upon it, without implicating it with the other parts of the treaty. Our intention and expectation is, that, the practice of taking men from our ships being once formally renounced by Great Britain, she will,  in point of fact, never
recur to it again. \
If the intention of Lord Castlereagh was, that this right of dissolving the compact, by a notice of three or six months, should apply only to the, article against impressment, its acceptance is objectionable on other grounds. The engagement to exclude all British
seamen from our sea service, will operate, immediately from its com- 86
[71]
mencement, with some inconvenience to our merchants. Since the
peace, and the dispersion of the vast number of seamen, disbanded
from the British navy, there are, no doubt, considerable numbers of
them who have found employment on board of our vessels; and their
exclusion from them will not be accomplished without some inconvenience. The effect of the stipulation of Great Britain, to take no
men from our vessels, is remote, and contingent upon the event of
her being engaged in a maritime war with other powers. The onerous part of the engagement, is, therefore, to us, immediate and certain; the benefit to be derived from it, distant and eventual. If to
this apparent inequality should be added, a power reserved by Great
Britain, to cancel the bargain by a simple notice of three or six
months, we could scarcely consider it as a contract. It would be a
positive concession and sacrifice, on our part, for the mere chance of
a future equivalent for it, altogether dependant upon the will of the
other party. The alternatives now proposed, it is hoped, will answer the purposes intended, by the expedient suggested by Lord Castlereagh, without being equally liable to the difficulties which arrest
our assent to it, otherwise than as thus modified. It would also be
desirable, that the commencement of the engagement to exclude British seamen should be postponed for some time, say to the 1st of
October, 1820, that a sufficient notice may be given to the merchants
and mariners whose interests will be affected by it.
The second proposal, that British officers, entering our merchant
vessels, for purposes warranted by the law of nations, shall be authorized to call for the list of the crew, and if they should find, or
suspect, an Englishman to be on board, make a record of the fact,
for the purpose,of remonstrance to the government of the United
States, is, in the view of the President, still more objectionable. In
the first place, the distrust which it implies, that the laws for excluding British seamen will, though stipulated, not be faithfully executed, is not warranted by any experience; nor can this government give countenance to it, by assenting to any stipulation which
would be considered as resulting fom it. If the United States bind
themselves to this exclusion, they will sincerely and faithfully carry
it into execution. It was not expressly asked by Lord Castlereagh,
in his proposal, as reported by Mr. Rush, that the officer, in calling
for the shipping paper, should also have the power of mustering the
crew, to examine them by comparison with the list; but as the mere
view of the list would be useless, unless coupled with that power, we
consider it as having been intended to be included in the proposal;
and this very inspection of the crews of our vessels, by a foreign offi- -
cer, has been found among the most insulting and grievous aggravations of the practice of impressment. Besides this, the tendency of
such an examination, in every single instance, would he, to produce
altercation between the British officer and the commander of the A-
merican vessel. If the officer should be authorized to make a record
of ids suspicions, the master, on his side, and the suspected seamen,
must, of course, have the privilege of making their counter record; I 71 ]
87
and as there would be no tribunal to judge between them, the probable ultimate result could be no other than that of exciting irritation
between the two nations, and fractious discussions between the governments^
If the engagement to exclude British seamen from our service
should fail of being executed to an extent worthy of the slightest attention of the British government, they could not avoid having notice of it, by proofs more effectual and more abundant than could be
furnished by this sort of scrutiny; a failure of execution on our part
to any such extent, would give them not only the right of remonstrating to ours, but even of cancelling their obligation within a lapse of
time, which must guard them against the danger of any material
national injury. We have the fullest confidence that, if the engagement on both sides be once contracted, Great Britain will thenceforward have no lawful or even plausible motive, either for wishing it
cancelled, or for inspecting the crews of our vessels in search of
men. ÏP
Slave Trade.
The President desires that you would make known to the British
government his sensibility to the friendly spirit of confidence with
which the treaties lately contracted by Great Britain with Spain,
Portugal, and the Netherlands, and the legislative measures of
Parliament founded upon them, have been communicated to this government, and the invitation-to the United States to join in the same,
or similar arrangments, has been given. He wishes you also to give
the strongest assurances that the solicitude of the United States for
the accomplishment of the common object—the total and final abolition of that odious traffic, continues with all the earnestness which
has so long and So steadily distinguished the course of their policy,
in relation to it. As an evidence of this earnestness, he requests you
to communicate to them a copy of the act of Congress of the last
Session, in addition to the act of 1807, to prohibit the importation
of Slaves into the United States: (nets of the last Session, chap. 86,
p. 81,) and to declare the readiness of this government, within their
constitutional powers, to adopt any further measures which experience may prove to be necessary for the purpose of obtaining so desirable an end.
But you will observe, that in, examining the provisions of the treaties communicated by Lord Castlereagh, all their essential articles
appear to be of a character not adaptable to the institutions or to
the circumstances of the United States.
The power agreed to be reciprocally given to officers of the ships
of war of either party to enter, search, capture, and carry into port,
for adjudication, the merchant vessels of the other, however qualified and restricted, is most essentially connected with the institution,
by each treaty, of two mixed courts, one of which to reside in the 88
[71]
external or colonial possessions of each of the two parties respectively. This part of the system is indispensable to give it that character
of reciprocity without which the right granted to the armed ships
of one nation, to search the merchant vessels of another, would be
rather a mark of vassalage than of independence. But to this part
of the system, the United States, having no colonies either on the coast
of Africa or in the West Indies, cannot give effect.
You will add, that, by the constitution of the United States, it is
provided, the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in a
supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may, from
time to time, ordain and establish. It provides that the judges Bf
these courts shall hold their offices during good behaviour; and -that
they shall be removable by impeachment and conviction of crimes or
misdemeanors. There may be some doubt whether the power of the
government of the United States is competent to institute a court, for
carrying into execution their penal statutes beyond the territories of
the United States, a court consisting partly of foreign judges, not
aminable to impeachment "for corruption, and deciding upon the statutes of the United States without appeal.
That the disposal of the negroes found on board the slave trading
vessels which might be condemned by the sentence of these mixed
courts, cannot be carried into effect by the United States; for, if the
slaves of a vessel condemned by the mixed court should be delivered
over to the government of the United States as freemen, they could
not, but by their own consent, be employed as servants, or free laborers. The condition of the blacks being, in this union, regulated
by the municipal laws of the separate states, the government of the
United states can neither guaranty their liberty in the states where
they could only be received as slaves, nor control them in the states
where they would be recognised as free.
That the admission of a right in the officers of foreign ships of war
toenter and search the vessels of the United States in time of peace,
under any circumstances whatever, would meet with universal repugnance in the public opinion of this country. That there would be
no prospect of a ratification by advice and consent of*the Senate, to
any stipulation of that nature. That the search by. foreign officers,
even in time of war, is so obnoxious to the feelings and recollections
of this country, that nothing could reconcile them to the extension of
it, however qualified, or restricted to a time of peace. And that it
wTould be viewed in a still more aggravated light, if, as in the treaty
with the Netherlands, connected with a formal admission that even
vessels under convoy of ships of war of their own nation should be
liable to search by the ships of war of another.
You will, therefore, express the regret of the President, that the
stipulations in the treaties communicated by Lord Castlereagh are
of a character to which the peculiar situation and institutions of the
United States do not permit them to accede. The constitutional objection may be the more readily understood by the British Cabinet,
if they are reminded that it was an  obstacle proceeding from the [71]
89
same principle which prevented Great Britain from becoming, formally, a party to the Holy Alliance: neither can they be at a loss to
perceive the embarrassment under which wTe should be placed, by receiving cargoes of African negroes, and be bound at once to guaranty their liberty, and to employ them as servants. Whether they will
be as ready to enter into our feelings, with regard to the search, by
foreign navy lieutenants, of vessels under convoy of our own naval
commanders, is, perhaps, of no material importance.#The other
reasons are presumed to be amply sufficient to convince them that
the motives for declining this overture are compatible with an earnest wish that the measures, concerted by these treaties, may prove
successful in extirpating that Toot of numberless evils, the traffic in
human blood; and with the determination to co-operate, to the utmost extent of our powers, in this great vindication of the sacred
lights of humanity.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State, dated
London, December 8i«, 1818.
" The despatch of the second of November, addressed to Mr.
Gallatin and myself, arrived here on the 6th instant.
Of the subjects to which it relates, viz. impressment and the slave
trade, the Department will have been long since informed, by our
joint communications, that only the former had a place in the late
negotiation. As we came to no agreement on it, I am happy to
think that none of the expectations of the President will have been
departed from. It will also have been seen, that, bad this despatch
reached us before the negotiation closed, although it would have affected our conduct on one of the points, the result would have been
the same. I design to transmit a copy of it to Paris, for Mr. Gallatin's information."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, dated
Department of State,
Washington, 1st December, 1818.
Your despatches, to No. 36, inclusive, have been received at this
office. Of the various subjects to which they relate, and which ap*
pear to require particular notice, I propose now to take a review,
according to the successive order of their dates.
The first is No. 22, dated J 9th June, and enclosing your correspondence with Lord Castlereagh, relative to a passage in a printed
report of a Committee of the House of Representatives of the United States, to that body, mentioning the rejection, by the President, of du
[71:]
the four articles wlftch had been proposed by the British government
as additions to the Commercial Convention of 3d July, 1815, and
approving that rejection, upon an idea, entertained by the Committee, that the fourth of those articles would have interfered with tbe
settled policy of the United States in relation to the Indians within
their limits. This remark of the Committee, appears to have affected the sensibility of the British cabinet, upon two grounds: first, as
they considered that the rejection of those articles had not been previously communicated to them; and, secondly, because they thought
the article in question did not bear the construction, and they explicitly disclaimed tbe intention that it should bearisuch a construction,
as the committee of Congress had thought applicable to it.
With regard to the first point, the explanation which ensued between you and Lord Castlereagh, appears to #have placed it in the
proper point of view.    The articles had been presented to your predecessor as embracing the utmost extent which the  British government would consent to give to our commercial intercourse with their
colonial possessions in this hemisphere.   Before your departure from
this country, the President had made up his mind not to accept them,
and your instructions bad authorized you to make this determination
known to the British government in the manner which it was supposed Would be most friendly  and conciliatory.    The articles had
been delivered without any accompanying document, note, or commentary, and as it was not believed here that they could, under any
modification, be made the basis of an arrangement between the two
governments, upon the subject to which they relate, and as it was
given us explicitly to understand that Great Britain could concede
nothing more of relaxations to her colonial and navigation system,
it was thought useless to enter into discussion, of which there was no
prospect that it would terminate in agreement,  and which might tend
to irritation, and that the most inoffensive manner of communicating
the non-acceptance of the articles, would be, verbally, in a personal
interview betweenyourself and Lord Castlereagh.    On reference to
your report of your first conference with him, on the third of January, it appears that the part of your instructions to which I allude,
was then executed; and that, without using the unaccommodating
term of rejection, you communicated  to him the disposition of the
President, with regard to they four articles, in a manner altogether
congenial to the spirit of that formula of the British constitution, by
which the dissent of the crown is signified to an act which has passed
both Houses of Parliament.   Le Roy s'avisera.   There was, indeed,
so little of ambiguity in the intimations given by you at that time,
that when, before the receipt of your despatch, No. 22, Mr. Bagot
came to me with a copy of Lord  Castlereagh's note to you of 29th
May, which had been sent to him, I recurred immediately to the file
of your despatches, and read to him that part of your report of what
passed between you and Lord Castlereagh, at your conference on the
third of January, observing to him, that I had little imagined, after
that disclosure of the President's sentiments concerning tbe four articles, that the British government would have expected any further
reference to them on the part of the United States. W [71] 91
A copy of the four articles was furnished to the committee of the
House of Representatives, charged with the duty of reporting to the
ÎJbuse upon the state of the commercial relations between the United
States and the British West Indies. That committee drew their own
conclusions upon the probable operation of the articles, and particularly of the fourth. They were communicated to them without comment, on the part of the Executive. They knew the articles had not
been accepted, but the reasons of the non-acceptance had not been
stated to them. It is true, that the article was the same, which, at
the negotiation of the commercial convention of July, 1815, had
been offered by the British plenipotentiaries; that the objection to it,
now suggested by thé committee, had, at that time, been avowed by
those of the United States; that the British Plenipotentiaries did then
disclaim the intention llf giving it a construction which would import
the admission of British traders tor any intercourse with Indians
within the territories of the United States; and did offer to introduce into the article any words which might be necessary to guard
it against that construction; and that the article was then finally declined upon another ground. But the same reason for declining it
still subsists, and is now as operative as it was in 1815; and, if it
did not occur to the committee, it was because the other, being more
obvious upon the face of the article, as presented to them, doubtless
struck them more forcibly, as of itself decisive, and needing no further notice of objections less important, though not less insuperable.
In the negotiation with which you are now occupied, for the renewal and extension of that compact, we have not altogether abandoned the hope, that the British cabinet will, ultimately, concede something further of principle; and, if this article should be discussed in
your conferences, that they will consent to remove the other feature
of exclusion from it, which still renders it inadmissible. Your powers
will enable you to agree to it with such modifications as may divest
it both of the exceptionable construction disclaimed, and of the restrictive exclusion yet adhered to by Great Britain.
The Secretary of State to Mr. Ruslu
Department of State,
Washington, 7th May, 1819.
Sir: From the documents transmitted by Mr. Gallatin and you, relating to the negotiation of the commercial convention of 20th October last,
it appears—
That, at the third conference, a draught of two articles was proposed by the
American Plenipotentiaries, for regulating the commercial intercourse between the United States, and, 1, the British Islands in the West Indies,
and, 2, the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, in North A-
merica. ipPj
That at the fifth conference, the British Plenipotentiaries offered the 92
[71]
counter projet of an article for the intercourse between the United States
and Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; and at the eighth conference, an article for that between the United States and the British West Indies.
That, in presenting this last article, they stated that they could not consent to sign an article upon that subject, unless the American Plenipotentiaries would accede, in substance, to the article proposed at the fifth conference concerning Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and to an article
proposed by the British government, on the 19th of March, 1817, concerning the trade between the United States and the Island of Bermuda.
And that the American Plenipotentiaries, not feeling themselves authorized by their instructions to sign the West India article as proposed by the
British Plenipotentiaries, agreed to take the whole question, ad referendum, to their government.   •
In comparing the West India article, proposed by the American Plenipotentiaries, at the third conference, with that offered by the British
Plenipotentiaries, at the 8th, it appears:
1. That, in the American projet, the ports in the West Indies, proposed
to be opened to American snipping, are specifically named; while in the
British projet, they are only designated as the ports which shall be open
to the vessels of any other foreign power or state. It is observed, in your
joint letter of 20th October, that these ports are the same as those proposed by the American projet, with the exception of St. Christophers', St.
Lucia, Demerara, Essiquibo and Berbice; but the difference between the
two draughts is otherwise material. For, ifthe ports were specifically named,
the privilege of admission to them would be positive, and not revocable at
the pleasure of Great Britain. But, if, passing under the general description, it might at any time be revoked merely by prohibiting the admission
to anv other foreign vessels. \àMé
2. That, in the x\merican projet, the articles of naval stores, provisions,
and lumber, in general terms, are among those stipulated for admission,
while in the British counter-projet, the naval stores are restricted to pitch,
tar, and turpentine; the lumber, to staves, headings, and shingles; and
from the article of provisions, are excepted salted provisions of every
description. The American article provides for the liberty of importing
other articles, of growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States,
and the importation of which shall not be entirely prohibited from every
other place whatever. The British article narrows the limitation to articles not prohibited from every other foreign place, so that it would reject articles whieh might, at the same time, be imported from the British
colonies in North America. .   |fe
3. That the American projet provides for the liberty of exporting mo-?
lasses and salt (omitting rum) and sugar and coffee, to the amount of one-
fourth part of the tonnage of the vessel, and other articles, the exportation of which to other foreign countries, is not entirely prohibited. The
British projet, adding the article of rum, denies those of coffee and sugar,
and allows only the exportation of other articles, not prohibited to be exported to other foreign countries in foreign vessels; so that articles allowed
to be exported to other foreign countries, in British vessels, would still
be prohibited from exportation in vessels of the United States.
These differences, so important in themselves, became still further aggravated by a comparison between the two articles for regulating the intercourse between the United States and the British North American provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, respectively connected with
the West India trade article.   The American proposal is, that the vessels [71 ]
93
of both nations should be allowed to export from the United States, into
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, the same articles, the importation of
which should be allowable by the West India article, into the West Indies,
in American vessels, and any other articles,'the importation of which from
every other country, should not be prohibited; and that the vessels of
both nations should have liberty to import from Nova Scotia and Newr
Brunswick, into the United States, gypsum and grindstones, and any other
article the growth, produce, or manufacture of those provinces, the importation of which, into the United States, from every other foreign country,
shall not be prohibited.
The British proposal is, that the vessels of both nations should be allowed to export from the United States, into Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, not only the same articles to be admitted by the direct trade to the
West Indies, but the additional articles of scantling, planks, hoop's, fruits,
and seeds, with a specific enumeration of grain and bread stuffs, instead
of provisions.
And that the vessels of both nations should be allowed to import from
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, into the United States, not only gypsum, grindstones, and any other articles, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the said provinces, but also any produce or manufacture of any
part of his Britannic Majesty9s dominions, the importation of which, into
the United States, shall not be entirely prohibited.
To complete this review* we are to compare the proposals of the two
parties, in relation to the trade between the United States and the island
of Bermuda.
The American proposal is, to include it in the West India trade article,
and thereby place it on precisely the same footing as the West India
islands.
The British article, of 19th March, 1817, proposed that the vessels of
both nations should be allowed to import, from the United States, into the
island of Bermuda, not only the articles proposed by the British West India article to be admissible in the West Indies, but hemp, flax, masts,
yards, bowsprits, plank, timber, and lumber of any sort, bread stuffs enumerated, and grain of any sort, of the growth or production of the United
States; and that they should be allowed to export, from Bermuda to the
United States, any goods or commodities whatsoever, exportable by law
from the British West Indies to any foreign country in Europe; and, also,
sugar, molasses, coffee, cocoa nuts, ginger, and pimento; and all goods of
British growth, produce, or manufacture.
The views of the British government, in these connected proposals, are
elucidated by the right which, in the West India trade article, they insist
upon reserving, to impose higher duties upon ail articles so importable from
tne United States to the West Indies, than upon all similar articles, when
imported from any of his Majesty's dominions, and being of the growth,
produce, or manufacture, of his Majesty's possessions.
And, by the statement of the British plenipotentiaries, at the eighth conference, as entered upon the protocol, that they could not sign any article
concerning the direct trade between the United States and the West Indies, unless with their proposed articles concerning the intercourse of the
United States with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and with the island
of Bermuda.
No objection will, on our part, be made to the exception of the articles
proposed by the British projet to be excluded entirely from the trade,
namely, salted provisions, of every description; although their probable 94
[ 71]
value is equal to one-third of^fie whole mass of Hie exportât» the West
Indies; but it cannot be disguised, that, if the three articles, taken togeÔfc
er, would not, in their immediate operation, secure the carrying of the
whole trade in British shipping, to the exclusion of that of the United
States, they would, at least, leave the ultimate operation entirely at the
discretion of the British government, who, by proportioning the difference
of duties upon the articles of our growth, produce, or manufacture, and
upon the like articles, of the produce, growth, or manufacture of the British dominions, to the experience of their own interest, may annul entirely
the direct importations, and secure the conveyance of the whole to their own
ships. They agreed, indeed, to stipulate that the duties upon the direct, shall
not be omer or higher than upon the indirect importations; but all the effect olf
this engagement is demolished by the right reserved of imposing higher duties on articles of our growth, produce, or manufactures, than upon like articles of their own; for, as the indirect importations would be exclusively
in British vessels, it must he expected that all articles imported from British colonies would be received as British produce, without scrutiny with
regard to their origin; and thus the produce or manufactures of the United
States, imported, indirectly,through Halifax, St. John's, or Bermuda, would
be received as of British produce or manufacture, and less imposed than
the same articles imported directly from the United States. And the reserved right of aggravating the duty upon the direct importation being unlimited, might, at any time, at the pleasure%f the British government, be
made equivalent to a total prohibition; while, at the same time, our power
of countervailing legislation would be locked up by the terms of the compact.
With the convention of 20th October, all the documents transmitted by
you, relating to the negotiation, were submitted to the Senate. Those relating to the subject of this suspended article, were referred to the committee of foreign relations of that body, by whom, towards the close of the
session, a confidential report was made, a copy of which is herewith enclosed. The shortness of the time not having admitted of a discussion of
the report, it was referred to this Department; and, as it is probable that,
unless an amicable arrangement of the subject can be effected before the
next winter, by negotiation, the measures suggested at the close of the report, as essential for completing the experiment of our counteracting system, will be brought forward in Congress, the President, always preferring
the principle of arrangement by amicable compromise to the conflict of adversary laws, wishes to make another effort to prevail upon the British
Cabinet to adjust this concenrby mutual concession, and upon terms of
practical reciprocity. njjjj
You are, therefore, authorized to agree to two additional articles as supplementary to the convention, accepting the restricted list of articles, as
proposed by the article which the British Plenipotentiaries offered at the
8th conference, and submitting to the exclusion of salted provisions, and
to the confined list of naval stores and lumber, among the importable, and
to the exclusion of sugar and coffee from the list of the exportable articles,
in American vessels, in the direct trade wiin the West Indies; but with
the condition that the list of importablearticles, to the West Indies, shall
be the same as that to Bermuda and to the North American colonies; and
that the exportable articles shall be confined to such as are of the growth,
produce, or manufacture of the British West India and North American
colonies; and that no other or higher duties shall be payable on importa- [71]
95
lions from thê United States, directly or indirectly, than on similar arti-
clesimported from any foreign country, or from any of the British colo-
niesSthemselve s.
.Ajdraught of two articles, to this effect, and forming a compromise between
the articles proposed by you at the third, and those offered by the British
plenipotentiaries at the fifth and eighth conferences, is herewith enclosed.
We consent, by this proposal, to restrict the list of articles to be admitted
in the trade, even as the British cabinet itself desires; but we adhere to
the principle that, of this traffic, thus limited, our shipping shall have the
chance of carrying its fair proportion, and shall stand upon equal terms of
competition with the British. It is not intended that you should be confined
to the letter of this draught. It may be modified in regard to the expression,
as you think proper, and if desired by the British government, the two
passages included within brackets in the draughlofthe first article* may be
jp^àitted. But you will candidly state to LorcFjCastlereagh, that our ultimate object of participating in the navigation of this necessary trade,
having been explicitly avowed, must be steadily pursued. That we deem
it more for our interest to leave it on the footing of reciprocal mutual re-
<|piJa!tion, than to bind ourselves by any. compact, the result of which must
be to disappoint us of that object. That we think the effect of the three
articles, declared to be inseparable, by the British plenipotentiaries, would
be to deprive us even of the portion of the carrying which we have already secured by our existing laws, and which we believe we can further secure, and that it is far better, for the harmony of the two nations, to avoid
any bargain, in which either party, after agreeing to it, shall have, by the
experience of its effect, the sentiment of having been over-readied, brought
borne to its councils. We ask for no such engagement, on the part of
Great Britain. We have too much confidence in the wisdom and liberality
of her cabinet, to believe that they would wish to obtain such an engagement from us. | At every step of counteracting regulation that we have
taken, or shall take, in this concern, we proceed with reluctance, because
we are convinced it might be adjusted more to the mutual interest, and
mutual understanding, by amicable arrangement, than by countervailing
legislation. But, to whatever arrangement we may subscribe, we are convinced it can answer no useful purpose, unless it shall prove to be founded
on the reciprocity of real effects, instead of hinging upon that of words.
Your power, heretofore given, is considered sufficient to authorize you
to sign two additional articles, of the substance of those enclosed, with
any person or persons duly authorized by the British government. If
agreed to, they may be declared supplementary to those of the convention
of the 20th of October, and to be of the same duration. They must, of
course, be submitted to the sanction of the Senate for ratification here.
&yi*V   I am, very respectfully, Sir, &c.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
ARTICLE   1.
The vessels of the United States and British vessels shall have
liberty to import, from any of the ports of the United States to which
any foreign vessels are permitted to come, into any of the following
ports, namely, Kingston, Savannah Le Mar, Montego Bay, Santa
Lucia, Antonio, Saint Ann, Falmouth, and Porta Maria in the*
Island of Jamaica, San Joseph in the Island of Trinidad, Scarbo- 96
[ 71 ]
rough in the Island of Tobago, Saint George in the Island of Grenada, Kingston in the Island of Saint Vincent, Bridgetown in the
Island of Barbadoes, Rosscau in the Island of Dominica, Saint
John's in the Island of Antigua, Road Harbor in the Island of
Tortola, the principal port of Turks Island, Nassau in the Island
of New Providence, Pitt's Town in Crooked Island, and the
principal port of the Island of Bermuda, tobacco, pitch, tar, turpentine, staves, headings, shingles, horses, mules, poultry, live stock,
and provisions of all sorts, (except salted provisions of any description, whether meat, fish, or butter,) such articles being the growth,
produce, or manufacture of the United States, [and any other articles
of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the Uuited States, the
importation of which, into the above-mentioned ports, shall not be
entirely prohibited from every other foreign country, or place.] And
the vessels of the United States and British vessels shall have liberty to export, from any of the said ports of his Britanic Majesty's
dominions, to any of the aforesaid ports of the United States, rum,
molases, and salt, being of the growth, produce, or manufacture of
any of the above-mentioned dominions, [and any other articles of the
said growth, produce, or manufacture, the exportation of which, to
any other foreign country, or place, shall not be entirely prohibited.]
The vessels of either party, employed in the trade provided for
by this article, shall be admitted in the ports of the other, as above-
mentioned, without paying any other, or higher duties, or charges,
than those payable in the same ports, by the vessels of such other
party; and they shall have liberty, respectively, to touch, during the
same voyage, at one or more of the above-mentioned ports of the other
party, for the purpose of disposing of their inward, and of taking
on board their outward cargoes.
No other or higher duties shall be paid, on the importation from
the United States, into the above-mentioned ports of the British colonies, or from the said ports into the United States, of any of the
articles importable, by virtue of this convention, when imported in
the vessels of eithef^of the two nations, than when imported in the
vessels of the other; nor when imported directly between the United
States and the said ports, or vice versa; and when imported in a
circuitous manner. No other or higher duties shall be charged upon
any of the above-mentioned articles, when imported by virtue of this
convention, into the United States, or into any of the ports aforesaid, than may be charged on similar articles, when imported from
any foreign country into the United States, or from any other country or place whatsoever into the said ports. The same duties shall be
paid, and the same bounties shall be allowed, on the exportation of
anv articles which may, by virtue of this article, be exported from
the said British ports, to the United States, or from the United
States to the said ports, whether exported in vessels of the United
States, or in British vessels. [71]
97
ARTICLE 2.
The vessels of the United States and British vessels shall have
liberty to export, from any of the ports of the United States to which
any foreign vessels are permitted to come, to the ports of Halifax, in
Nova Scotia, and of St. John's, in New Brunswick, and to any other
port within the said provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick,
to which vessels of any other foreign nation shall be admitted, any article, of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States,
which, by virtue of the preceding article, is importable from the
United States into the British colonial ports therein named; and upon the same terms, in regard to the payment of duties and charges;
and they shall have liberty to import, from any of the aforesaid ports
within the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, into any
of the aforesaid ports of the United States, gypsum and grindstones,
the produce or manufacture of the said provinces, and any other article of the said produce or manufacture, the exportation of which from
the said provinces, and the importation of which into the United
States, to or from any other foreign country, shall not be altogether
prohibited. The vessels of either party, employed in this trade, shall
pay no other or higher duties or charges, than those of the other.
The same duties of importation and of exportation shall be paid on the
articles imported or exported, by virtue of this article, and the same
bounties allowed on their exportation, whether in vessels of the United States, or in British vessels.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Rush, Envoy, Sçe. at London, to Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, dated London, June 14, 1819.
*< I was honored, on the 8th instant, with your despatch, number
seventeen, of the 7th of May.
m On the 9th I addressed a note to Lord Castlereagh, to request an
interview, that I might proceed to lay before this government, without losing any time, the determinations to which the President had
come on the important subject of the commercial intercourse between
the United States and the West Indies. His lordship appointed yesterday for me to wait apon him*
" I commenced with calling to mind the point at which the discussions had left off, upon this branch of the negotiation, last autumn, and
gave a new assurance of the President's earnest desire to see this
trade opened upon a footing of entire and liberal reciprocity, rather
than stand any longer upon the conflict of arbitrary laws. In
this spirit I was instructed to offer a projet, which had been carefully
drawn up, upon the basis of a compromise between the pretensions of
the two parties, and which, indeed, would be found to fall in so entirely with the propositions of Great Britain, in some respects, and
to make such an approximation to them in others, that a hope was
cherished of its proving acceptable.
13 98
[ 71 A
u That, in particular, it would be found to adopt the description of
naval stores, and of lumber, as articles to be exported from the United States, upon which the British plenipotentiaries baa^themselves
insisted—confining the former to pitch, tar, and turpentine; and the
latter to staves, heading, and shingles; contrary to the more enlarged
signification which it had been the desire of the American plenipotentiaries to give to them. That it acquiesced, also, in the exclusion
of all salted provisions, including the important article offish. That
it, moreover, came wholly into the British views, in consenting to the
exclusion of sugar and coffee, as articles to be imported into the United States from the British West Indies, it being understood that the
above traffic was to be open upon equal terms, in all respects, to American and British vessels.
If In return for such a*n accommodation to the colonial views of
Great Britain, the projet asked, on the other hand, that the list of articles exportable from the United States to the West Indies, should
be the same as to Bermuda, and to the British North American colonies; that the articles exportable to the United States should be confined to such as were of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the
above islands or colonies; and that the same duties, and no more,
should be payable on importations from the United States into the
West Indies, whether the articles were brought directly or indirectly,
as on similar articles imported into the West Indies from any foreign
country or from any of the British colonies.
P With this outline of its contents, I handed a copy of the projet
which came.enclosed in your despatch, to his Lordship. The discussions between the plenipotentiaries of the two governments having
recently been so ample on the matters which it embraces, I thought
that nothing was likely to be gained by my leaving room for the possible hope that any of its essential provisions would be departed from.
Accordingly, I deemed it best to say with candor, in the first instance,
that, as it was offered, so was it to be taken; for that my present instructions would admit of no deviations, unless on points verbal, or
otherwise immaterial. I shall bear in mind that the parts within
crotchets may be omitted. His lordship received it with an assurance that a full and candid consideration would be given to it. The
pressure of parliamentary business might, he said, delay an attention
to it for some weeks; but that, at as early a day as was practicable,
it would be taken up. I replied that I believed that the great object
would be attained on our side, if a decision were communicated to
me in full time to be made known to the President before the next
session of Congress. Should our propositions prove acceptable, I
was empowered,' I added, to make them supplementary to the convention of the twentieth of October, subject always to the ratification
of the Senate. I here closed, having endeavored, in the course of my
remarks, to convey to his lordship's mind, those general reasonings
applicable to our propositions, which are unfolded in your despatch,
and to which I shall again advert on future occasions, should it become necessary.   The confidential report of the nineteenth of Feb- [ 71 ]
99
ruary, by*the Committee of Foreign Relations, in the Senate, was
safely received, under cover of your despatch."
Extracts of a letter from Mr. Rush to the Secretary of State, dated
London, September 17, 1819.
*' Lord Castlereagh came to town on the 15th instant, and granted me an interview yesterday on the business of the West India
trade.
Holding in his hands the proposals I had submitted, his Lordship
premised, that he thought it would perhaps be best for him to answer
them in the same general way that the British articles, submitted
through my predecessor, in 1817, had been answered; that is, not
in any formal manner, but merely by a word of conversation with
me. I said that I was sure that the form of the answer would make
no difference; its transmission to my government, in whatever mode
his Lordship might be pleased to convey it to me, would doubtless effect every substantial purpose.
In the answer there was no hesitation. Our proposals, he said,
were not of a nature to form the basis of any agreement between
the two countries. They would effect an entire subversion of the
British colonial system. From this system they were not prepared
to depart. Their colonies were, in many respects, burdensome, and
even liable to involve the country in wars. Garrisons, and other establishments, were constantly maintained in them, at a heavy charge:
In return, it was just that they should be encumbered with regulations, the operation of which might help to'meet, in part, the expenses which they created. The great principle of these regulations
was known to be the reservation of an exclusive right to the benefit
of all their trade; a principle, of which the free-port acts had, it was
true, produced some relaxation; but, it had never been the intention
of this government to do any thing more than offer to us a participation in these acts. Some modifications of them would have been acquiesced in, suggested by local causes, and an anxious desire that
our two countries might come to an understanding on this part of
their intercourse. But, to breakdown the system, was no part of
their pian. Our proposals, therefore, could not be accepted. Such
were his remarks.
I observed, that to break down the system was not our aim. AH
that we desired was, that the trade, as far as it was gone into at all,
should be open to the vessels of both nations j upon precisely equal
terms. If the system fell by such an arrangement, it was as an incident; and only showed how difficult it seemed to render its long
continuance consistent with a proper measure of commercial justice
towards us.
So broad and unequivocal was his Lordship's refusal, that it seem- 100
[71]
ed almost superfluous to ask him to be more particular; yet, perceiving ini|e a wish to be made acquainted rather more specifically
with the objections, he said that he would not scruple to mention
them, without, however, entering into details, for which he was not
prepared, and which had been amply unfolded on both sides during
the negotiation thjs time twelve-month. The objections were threefold. First, W«? asked an enumeration, by name, of all the ports in
the West Indies that we desired should be open to our vessels. Secondly, That the trade between the United States and the British colonies on the continent of America, and with Bermuda, should be
confined within the same limits as that between the United States
and the West India Islands direct; aud, thirdly, we asked, That the
duties on articles imported from the United States into the Islands,
in American ships, should be no higher than on the same articles
when imported in British ships, from the United States, or from any
other country, without saying foreign country. These three provisions, particularly the second and third, would form insurmountable
obstacles to the conclusion of any convention which should purport
to embrace them.
I contented myself with replies as general. The communications
from the joint mission, last year, as well as some separate ones from
this legation, after it was over, will have informed the President how
fully the views of our government, on the injustice of this system, in
all its past effects upon us, have heretofore been stated. On this occasion I remarked, as to the first objection, that it was plain, that, if
the ports were not specially named, the privilege of admission to
them would, at any time, be revokable, whenever Great Britain
thought fit to exclude from them any other foreign vessels. It would
be, in short, a privilegejwkh nothing positive or certain in its character. As to the second, I said, that, should an indirect trade be
opened with the Islands in any greater extent than the direct trade,
nothing was more clear, than that the greater part, or whole, would
soon be made to flow in the channel of the former, to the manifest
advantage of British bottoms. On the third objection, I said that
an explanatory remark or two was all that I should add, (it would be
but repetition,) to what had often been urged before. That we should
deny to Gieat Britain the common right of protecting the industry
of a part of her own dominions, by laying discriminating duties in
its favor, might be thought, at first blush, to wear an appearance
not defensible; but, it would be found, on a moment's examination,
to be strictly so. The system, built up by Britain, must be looked at
altogether. It was in itself so inverted and artificial, that principles,
not disputed in the abstract, ceased to be just when applied to it*.
Though one and all of these colonies were, indeed, of her dominion,
yet were they made to stand, with respect to us, in the light of separate and independent countries. This >vas the key-stone of the colonial doctrine. Why should we not, in turn, adopt and apply it to
Great Britain? If we stipulated not to impose, upon articles imported into the United States from  the British West Indies, any [71 ]
101
higher duties than upon the same articles coming from any other foreign country, a similar provision by Great Britain, to impose, on
articles exported from the United States to her islands,no higher duties
than on the same articles when brought from any other foreign country,
would obviously be one of but nominal reciprocity; since, after her
own dominions on the continent of America, there was no other place
whence such exportations to her islands would ever be made. Thus
it was that this third provision, combined with the two others, became
necessary to enable the United States, whilst prosecuting a trade
with the British West Indies, to place their navigation upon a footing, not of verbal merely, but of real equality. It was the latter
alone that could lay the foundations of a compact between the two
nations that could ever be satisfactory or lasting.
His Lordship did not hold to such views, and the conversation was
not prolonged. It is proper for me to add, that he requested it to be
understood, that, whilst our proposals were declined, it was altogether in a friendly spirit, and that no complaint would be Ipade, as
had frequently been intimated, at our resorting to any just and rightful regulations of our own, which we might deem necessary to meet
theirs, in relation to these islands. I rejoined, that I thought it probable that some such regulations would, before long, in addition to
those existing, be adopted.
Having earnestly endeavored to fulfil all my instructions, in their
full spirit of anxiety for a different result upon this subject^ my duty
appears now to have arrived at its close."
Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, to Mr. Rush,
Envoy, Sçc. at London, dated Department of State, 27th May, 1820.
"I have the honor of transmitting herewith, a copy of the laws
passed at the last Session of Congress, which closed on the 15th inst.;
among which you will find one/page ll6> entitled "An act supplementary to an act concerning navigation," which has an important bearing upon our commercial relations with Great Britain.
| The subject to which that act relates, has so recently, and so
fully been discussed, between the two governments, that it may be
superfluous, though it cannot be unseasonable, to assure the British
Cabinet, as you are authorized to do, that it was adopted with a spirit, in no wise unfriendly to great Britain; and that, if at any time
the disposition should be felt there, to meet this country by arrangements, founded on principles of reciprocity, it will be met, on the
part of the United States, with an earnest wish to substitute a system of the most liberal intercourse, instead of that of counter prohibitions, which this act has only rendered complete."  t 71]
103
:
C. £> American.
d- .m
E.J
F.    British.
G.
H.J
~1
I
y American.
LIST OF PAPERS.
Messrs. Gallatin and Rush to Mr. Adams, dated London, October
20, 1818.—Extracts.
No. 1. Protocol first conference, 27th August.  .
2. Do.    second    do.        29th August.
6.       Do.    third      do.       17th September.
Articles, fisheries, A
Do.     boundary, B
Do.     West Indies, ")
Do.     Nova Scotia, J
Do.     slaves,
Explanatory memorandum,
Projet on impressment,
iS! JSeven  articles,   maritime 1
rights, marked a. to g. J
Three articles, miscellane-1
ous, marked h. to k.      J
4. Protocol fourth conference, 25th September.
Amendments to the projet!     A    American,  i
of impressment, J
5. Protocol fifth conference, 6th October.
Article, fisheries, A.^
Do.     boundary, »'I. British counter pro-
Do.      Mississippi, Lf. >    . . r
Do.     Nova Scotia, D.       jei#
Do.     slaves, E.^
6. Unofficial note and memorandum, 7th October, American.
7. Protocol 6th conference, 9th October.
Amendments to boundary ar-        "1
tide, A. V American.
Amendments to slaves article    B.J
3. Unofficial note and memorandum, 12th October, American.'
9. Protocol seventh conference, 13th October»
Articles, fisheries,
Do.    boundary,
New projet of impressment,
Six articles, maritime rights 1
S-J
A.1
B. |
C.
D.
E.
and miscellaneous, a. to
Memorandum respecting do.
Slaves
10. Amendment to boundary article,       American
11. Protocol eighth conference.
West India article, F. ^British.
12. Protocol ninth conference.
I British second counter projet. 104
[71]
Extracts of a letter from Messrs. Gallatin and Rush to the Secretary
of State, dated London, October 20, 1818.
" Webave the honor to transmita convention, which we concluded this day with the British Plenipotentiaries.
Lord Castlereagh having expressed a wish that the negotiations
might be opened before his departure for Aix-la-Chapelle, Mr. Gallatin left Paris as soon as he had received our full powers, and arrived here on the 16th of August. Our joint instructions, contained
in your despatch of the 28th of July, did not, however, reach us till
the 3d of September. We had long conversations with Lord Castlereagh, at his country seat, on the 22d and 23d of August, but could
not, owing to our instructions not having arrived, discuss with him
the questions of the fisheries, and of the West India intercourse. He
left London on the 1st of September. The official conferences had
begun on the 27th of August, and for the progress of the negotiation,
we beg leave to refer to the enclosed copies of the protocol, and documents annexed to it, and of two unofficial notes sent by us to the
British plenipotentiaries. We will add some observations on the
several objects embraced by the convention:
1. Fisheries.
Wre succeeded in securing, besides the rights of taking, and curing fish, within the limits designated by our instructions, as a sine
qua non, the liberty of fishing on the coasts of the Magdalen Islands,
and of the western coast of Newfoundland, and the privilege of entering for shelter, wood, and water, in all the British harbors of
North America. Both were suggested as important to our fishermen, in the communications on that subject, which were transmitted
to us with our instructions. To the exception of the exclusive rights
of the Hudson's Bay Company, we did not object, as it was virtually
implied in tbe treaty of 1783, and we had never, any more than the
British subjects, enjoyed any right there, the charter of that
company having been granted in the year 1670. The exception applies only to the coasts and their harbors, and does not affect the
right of fishing in Hudson's Bay, beyond three miles from the shores,
a right which could not exclusively belong to, or be granted by, any
nation.
The most difficult part of the negotiation related to the permanence of the right. To obtain the insertion in the body of the convention of a provision declaring expressly that that right should not be
abrogated by wTar, was impracticable. AH that could be done was to
express the article in such manner as would not render the right liable to be thus abrogated. The words "forever" were inserted for
that purpose, and we also made the declaration, annexed to the protocol of the third conference, the principal object of which was to
provide in any event for the revival of all our prior rights. The insertion of the wTords" forever" was strenuously resisted. The British Plenipotentiaries urged that, in case of war, the only effect of [71]
ioè
those words being omitted, or of the article being considered as abrogated, would be the necessity of inserting in the treaty of peace it
new article renewing the present one, and that after all that had
passed, it would certainly be deemed expedient to do it, in whatever
manner the condition was now expressed. We declared that we would
not agree to any article on the subject, unless the words were preserved, or in case they should enter on the protocol a declaration impairing their effect.
It will, also, be perceived that we insisted on the clause by which
the United States renounce their right to the fisheries relinquished
by the convention, that clause having been omitted in the first British counter-projet. We insisted on it with the view, 1st: Of preventing any implication that the fisheries secured to us were a new
grant, and of placing the permanence of the rights secured, and of
those renounced, precisely on the same footing. 2d. Of its being expressly stated that our renunciation extended only to the distance of
three miles from the coasts. This last point was the more important,
as, with the exception of the fishery in open boats, within certain
harbors, it appeared, from the communications abovementioned, that
the fishing ground on the whole coast of Nova Scotia is more than
three miles from the shores; whilst, on the contrary, it is almost universally close to the shore, on the coasts of Labrador. It is in that
point of view, that the privilege of entering the ports for shelter is
useful, and it is hoped, that, with that provision, a considerable portion of the actual fisheries on that coast (of Nova Scotia) will, notwithstanding the renunciation, be preserved.
2. Boundary Line.
This being definitively fixed at the 49th degree of north latitude,
from the Lake of the Woods to the Stoney Mountains, it is unnecessary to repeat the arguments which wrere urged on that subject. The
attempt was again made to connect with it an article, securing to the
British, access to the Mississippi, and the right to its navigation.
We'declared, and entered the declaration in the protocol, that we
could not agree to the article, nor to any that would bring the British in contact with that river. The British Plenipotentiaries having,
by the protocol of the seventh conference, agreed to the omission of
the article, that point is also definitively settled. And it may be observed, with reference to the treaty of 1783, that, if the United States
have not secured to themselves the whole of the fisheries heretofore
enjoyed within the jurisdiction of Great Britain, they have obtained
the liberty of curing fish on a part of the southern coast of Newfoundland, and the abandonment of an inconvenient privilege within their
own territory.
3. Columbia river.
This subject was, during the whole negotiation, connected by the British Plenipotentiaries with that of the boundary line. They appeared
14 106
[71]
altogether unwilling to agree to this in any shape, unless some arrangement was made with respect to the country westward of the Stoney
Mountains. This induced us to propose an extension of the boundary
line, due west, to the Pacific Ocean. We did not assert that the United States bad a perfect right to that country, but insisted that their
claim was at least good against Great Britain. The 49th degree of
north latitude had, in pursuance of the treaty of Utrecht, been fixed,
indefinitely, as the line between the northern British possessions, and
those of France, including Louisiana, now a part of our territories.
There was n» reason why, if the two countries extended their claims
westward, the same line should not be continued to the Pacific Ocean.
So far as discovery gave a claim, ours, to the whole country on the
waters of the Columbia river, was indisputable. It had derived its
name from that of the American ship, commanded by Captain Gray,
who had first discovered and entered its mouth. It was first explored, from its sources to the ocean, by Lewis and Clarke, and before the
British traders from Canada had reached any of its waters: for it
was now ascertained, that the river Tucoutche Tesse, discovered by
McKenzie, and which he had mistaken for the Columbia, was not a
branch of this river, but fell into the sound called " the Gulph of
Georgia. The settlement at the place called Astoria, was also the
first permanent establishment made in that quarter. The British
Plenipotentiaries asserted, that former voyages, and principally that
of Captain Cook, gave to Great Britain the rights derived from discovery, and they alluded to purchases from the natives south of the
river Columbia, which they alleged to have been made prior to the
American Revolution. They did not make any formal proposition
for a boundary, but intimated, that the river itself Was the most convenient that could be adopted, and that they would not agree to any
that did not give them the harbor at the mouth of the river, in common with the United States. We stated that we could not agree to
this, but expressed our readiness and our wish to insert, in the
boundary article, a proviso similar to what had been proposed on
former occasions, and which would leave that subject open for arrangement hereafter. To this they would not consent, and offered
the article annexed to the protocol of the fifth conference. We declared, that we preferred not signing any article for the boundary
line, eastward of the Stoney Mountains, to acquiescing in that arrangement. We did not know with precision what value our government set on the country to the westward of those mountains, but we
were not authorized to enter into any agreement which would be tantamount to an abandonment of the claim to it. It was at last agreed,
but, as we thought, with some reluctance on the part of the British
Plenipotentiaries* that the country on the northwest coast, claimed
by either party, should, without prejudice to the claims of either, and
for a limited time, be opened for the purposes of trade, to the inhabitants of both countries. The importance which seems to have been
attached to that subject by Great Britain, induces a belief that it
will again be brought forward, at some future occasion, with a view
to a definitive arrangement. [71]
107
4. Slaves.
After having referred to what had already passed on that subject,
we insisted that Lord Castlereagh, having, in his letter to Mr.
Adams, of April 10th, 1816, declared that I the British government
would not resist the claim of the United States to indemnification for
slaves, or private property belonging to their citizens, which could
be proved to have been in places directed to be restored by the treaty of Ghent, at the date of the ratifications, and to have been afterwards removed;" and it being in proof, by the correspondence of Captain Clavelle, and of Admiral Cockburn, that slaves had been removed from Tangier Island, and from Cumberland Island, subsequent to
the ratifications, the claim for indemnification, to that extent, had
thus been already fully admitted by the British government. With
respect to slaves, removed on ship board previous to the ratifications,
and for which Lord Castlereagh denied that our claim to indemnity
could, with justice, extend; we urged, that such of our harbors and
waters as were in the possession of the British, at the date of the
ratifications, were strictly within tbe meaning of places to be restored; that they were accordingly actually restored; and it necessarily
followed, that, according to Lord Castlereagh's construction, tbe British were bound not to have carried away any slaves, who were then
on board British vessels, lying within any such harbors or waters.
The British Plenipotentiaries offered as a substitute to the article
we had proposed, one to refer the subject to a friendly sovereign.
This we could not reject, as the proposal had originated with the
United States, and was now unconnected with the questions respecting the boundary line, and the Columbia river. We proposed, that
the Emperor of Russia should be designated, in the article, as the
umpire. This was rejected, on the ground, that, if he should refuse
to act, the agreement would become null, and that it would he inexpedient, if at all practicable, to provide by the article for that contingency, so as to secure the object in view. It was added, that the
sovereign could be fixed upon at a future day by the two governments,
through Mr. Rush and Lord Castlereagh.
5. Commercial Intercourse»
The subject of the intercourse with the West Indies was fully discussed, and not thinking ourselves authorized to accede to the last
proposals of the British Plenipotentiaries, which are annexed to the
protocol of the 8th conference, an entry was made, that we had taken
them, ad referendum, to our government. The negotiation being
kept open, in that respect, we agreed, in conformity with our instructions, to an article, continuing in force, for ten years, the commercial convention of 1815. It was fully understood, on both sides,
that if no agreement should be ultimately concluded, with respectto the
colonial intercourse, no ground of complaint would arise on account
of any restrictive measures whatever, that the United States might loi
[ 71 ]
adopt on that subject; and we stated, expressly, that such measures
would, in all probability, be extended to the intercourse with Bermuda, and with the British northern colonies; that, if the direct trade
with the West Indies was not allowed, the United States would not
be disposed to suffer it to be carried on through any other interme-
diate British port.
It appeared evident to us, both from our instructions and from the
act of Congress, that a perfect reciprocity and equality must be the
basis, as well as a sine qua non, of any arrangement of the intercourse
with the West Indies. And we understood this basis to embrace the
following objects.
1. British vessels to be permitted to import from the British West
Indies into the United States, and to export from the United States to
tbe British West Indies, only such articles of the produce of the said
West Indies, and of the United States, respectively, as American
vessels should be permitted to export from, and to import into the
British West Indies.
2. The duties on the vessels, and on the cargoes, to be reciprocally
the same, whether the vessels were American or British.
3. The duties on the importation of American produce, into the
British West Indies, not to be higher when the produce was imported directly from the United States, than when imported in a circuitous manner; with a reciprocal condition for the importation of West
India produce into the United States.
4. The intercourse in British vessels to be allowed only with such
West India ports, as would be opened to the American vessels.
5. The British vessels, allowed to carry on that trade, to be only
of the same description with the American vessels admitted in the
British West Indies.
To that basis, as thus stated, the British plenipotentiaries acceded.
But when the further details of the proposed arrangement were taken
into consideration, several important points occurred which had notv
been contemplated in our instructions, and on which we were not
suinciently acquainted with the intentions of our government.
The basis of reciprocity once established, was it proper to agree
to a direct intercourse, limited on both sides, to certain articles of the
produce, either of the United States, or of the West Indies? And
if such limitation was admissible, to what extent? And, wiiat articles might we consent to except?
If the direct intercourse w7as thus limited to certain articles, would
an indirect intercourse be admissible, between the United States and
Bermuda, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, embracing articles of West
India produce, or of the produce of the United States, destined for
the West Indies, other than were admitted to be imported, or exported in a direct manner?
As the British government would retain the power of laying duties
on the produce of the United States, imported into the West Indies,
and would not lay any on similar articles imported therein, from any
part of the British dominions, ought we to assent, without any condition or exception, to the clause annexed to the first article, formerly mm
109
proposed by that government, and by which no higher duties should
be laid, respectively, on the produce of either country, than on similar articles imported from any other foreign country?
We thought it safer to err on our own side of the question, and to
ask for more than, perhaps, under all circumstances, we expected to
obtain, rather than to limit our demands to less than might be intended by our government. The articles which we proposed at the third
conference, were drawn with that view; and the British plenipotentiaries immediately stated, that they were inadmissible, and amounted to a much greater departure from the" colonial policy of Great
Britain than she wras prepared to allow. They did not enter into
any abstract defence of that policy, but they strongly urged the impossibility of breaking down, at once, a system still favoured by public opinion, and supported by various interests, which could not be
disregarded. The fish and lumber of the northern colonies; the
salted provisions, and even the flour, of Ireland; the shipping
interest, and that of non-residing West India planters, were all
alluded to. Having once admitted the basis of perfect reciprocity
with respect to the direct intercourse, they thought that the United
States ought, for the present, to be satisfied with an arrangement
which would admit a considerable number of articles to be carried
directly, that they should not insist on the exclusion, in the intercourse with Halifax, St. Johns, and Bermuda, of those articles which
might not be included in the list of those admitted in the direct intercourse with the West Indies; and that we ought not to object to the
natural right of Great Britain to lay protecting duties in favor of
the produce of her own possessions.
We admitted that the last principle, as an abstract proposition,
was unexceptionable, but observed, that the practical effect of the
condition on which they insisted, was altogether partialtf Since they
persevered in making a distinction between the intercourse with
England, and that with her colonies, and even between that with her
northern American colonies, and that with the West Indies, the
United States must, in a commercial view, consider them as so many
distinct countries. As no other foreign country could supply the
West Indies with the articles which were the produce of the United
States, a condition wilich would prevent Great Britain from laying
higher duties on that produce, than on similar articles, the produce
of other foreign countries,' was nugatory, and to us, perfectly useless.
There was, in that respect, no competition but with the produce of
the British possessions. We found, in that condition, no compensation for the restriction which it would impose on the United States,
to lay no higher duties on the colonial produce of the British possessions, than on that of other countries. The propriety of limiting the
number of articles to be carried directly, would in a great measure
depend on the list which might be proposed. To extend it to other
articles, in the circuitous intercourse through Halifax and Bermuda,
would give to the British the exclusive carriage of those articles from
those ports to the West Indies, and vice versa, and be inconsistent
X 110
[71]
with tbe avowed object of the United States, that of an equal participation in the navigation necessary for the transportation of the articles, of which their trade with the West Indies, as allowed by Great
Britain, actually consisted. Yet we were disposed to pay due regard
to the various considerations which had been presented by Great
Britain, and to listen to any specific proposals she might be prepared
to make. No part of the articles we had offered was, with the exception of the basis of perfect reciprocity, to be considered as an ultimatum. We would, however, say, that we could not assent to any article which did not admit on the one hand, naval stores, and the whole
of our lumber, and on the other, salt, molasses, and, besides rum, a
limited quantity of sugar and coffee, amongst the articles of the direct
trade.
With respect to duties, after having suggested without success that
a maximum of those intended for the protection of the produce of the
British dominions, might be agreed on, we stated that there were at
least two provisions which could not be objected to, viz: That the
United States should remain at liberty to lay higher duties on the
colonial produce of the British possessions, than on that of those
countries where we were, or might be received on better terms, than
in the British West Indies; and that the condition which would preclude, generally, such higher duties being laid, should not apply to
the West India articles, not admitted to be exported directly therefrom in American vessels to the United States.
The result of several free conversations was, that, as it was altogether improbable that we could, at this time, come to a definitive arrangement, the British Plenipotentiaries should offer an article with
the intention of its being referred to our government.
It will be perceived by this, that they admit the principle of reciprocity; that they make no exception with respect to the description
of vessels; that, giving up the article formerly proposed for Turk's
Island, they also admit that vessels employed in the trade may touch
from one port to another, and that to the list of articles formerly proposed are added naval stores, shingles, and staves, and a more general description of provisions. They continue to except, altogether, on
the one hand, sugar and coffee, and on the other salted fish and provisions, and every other species of lumber but shingles and staves.
The only essential difference between this list of articles and that
proposed for the intercourse with Bermuda and the northern colonies,
consists, as far as relates to the produce of the United States, in the
lumber not admitted in the direct intercourse; for salted fish and
provisions are equally excluded from both: but it is proposed that
not only sugar and coffee, but also all articles of the produce or manufacture of any of the British dominions should beadmitted, through
that indirect channel, into the United States. We stated, when* we
received the article, that it ought to embrace only American products,
and that the proposal was certainly inadmissible, so far as related to
East India articles.
With respect to the ports they offer in the West Indies, they are
the same with  those proposed by  us, with the exception of St. L Yi 3
ni
Christopher's, St. Lucia, Demarara, Esequibo, and Berbice. The
three last, had been at first intended to be included, but were ultimately omitted by the British Plenipotentiaries, for reasons, connected, as they said, with their engagements with Holland.
We cannot state, what may be considered as an ultimatum in that
proposal. We are, however, induced to believe, that they will persevere in excluding sugar, and some species of lumber, from the direct, and salted fish and provisions from both the direct and indirect
intercourse; that they will insist on having some articles admitted in
that indirect, which shall be excluded from the direct intercourse;
and that they will be tenacious on being placed on the footing of the
most favored nation. They will also certainly insist, that vessels
from Great Britain may touch at any port in the United States, and
takecargoes for the West Indies, of such articles as maybe admitted
in the direct trade. Without such provision, (which would be made
reciprocal, although only nominally so,) it is supposed here, that,
considering our proximity, to admit our vessels to a participation
on an equal footing, in the trade between the United States and the
West Indies, would, in fact, give the latter the whole navigation
connected with that trade. It must, at the same time, be observed,
that the proposal being intended for reference, and not for immediate
discussion, the British Plenipotentiaries may have been cautious not
to go too far. Upon the whole, we hope, that if our negotiation
does not pave the way for a definitive arrangement, it will, at least,
have served to make our government better acquainted with the dispositions of this, and may afford some assistance with respect to the
further proceedings which may be thought expedient.
It having been ascertained, that the British government would not
assent to any article on the subject of the intercourse by land, and
inland navigation, with Canada, which would substantially differ
from that already twice rejected, and that they would not even agree
to a provision, securing to us the right of taking our produce, in our
own boats or vessels, down the St. Lawrence, as far as Montreal,
and down the river Chambly, as far as the river St. Lawrence; we
thought it altogether unnecessary to make any proposal on that subject, on which, indeed, we were not particularly instructed."
No. 1.
Protocol of the first Conference, between the American and British Plenipotentiaries, held at Whitehall, on the 27 th of August, 1818.
Present—Mr. Gallatin,") »
Mr. Rush,    '}Ame™an-
Mr. Robinson, 1 x, ... ,
Mr. Goulburn^iBr,t,sh-|
The Plenipotentiaries presented and exchanged their respective
full powers. ,412
[71]
It was agreed, that the discussions should be carried on by conference and protocol, with the insertion in the protocol of such written documents, as either party might deem necessary, for the purpose
of recording their sentiments in detail.
The British plenipotentiaries stated, that they were ready to proceed at once to the signature of a treaty, renewing the commercial
convention of 1815 as it stands; or that if the American Plenipotentiaries should prefer to delay the signature of such a treaty of renewal, till more progress should have been made in the discussion of
the other topics which it is the object of the two governments to arrange, no objection would be made to tbe adoption of that course.
But it was explicitly stated, by the British plenipotentiaries, that,
with respect to all those other topics of discussion, whether purely
commercial, or partaking more of a political character, they were
instructed not to consent to any partial or separate consideration of
them, nor to select any one, in particular, as an appendage to a renewal of the existing commercial convention.
The American plenipotentiaries acquiesced in the division of the
subject, represented by the British plenipotentiaries to be essential,
but stated it to be their desire not to sign the treaty of renewal for
the present. It was, however, agreed, that the eventual signature of
that instrument should not be made contingent upon a settlement of
the other points, and both parties declined bringing forward any proposed modification of it.
It wTas agreed to meet again on Saturday at two o'clock.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON.
HENRY GOULBURN.
No. 2.
Protocol of the second conference held between the American and British
Plenipotentiaries at Whitehall, on the 29th of August, 1818.
Present-
•Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush,
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Goulburn.
The Plenipotentiaries agreed upon, and signed the protocol of the
preceding conference. Some general conversation then ensued upon
some of the different topics of discussion.
The American Plenipotentiaries stated, that, whenever the British
Plenipotentiaries were prepared to submit their project on the Impressment Question, they (the American Plenipotentiaries,) would
bring forward their proposition respecting the other maritime points;
but that they did not intend to bring those topics before the confer- [?1]
113
erices at all, unless the impressment of seamen was to be discusse
on the part of Great Britain.
It was agreed that the next conference should take place on September the 4th.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN.
No. 3.
Protocol of the third conference held between the American and British
Plenipotentiaries, at Whitehall, on the 17th day of September^ 1818.
present—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush,
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Goulburn.
The conference fixed for the 4th instant, having been adjourned by
mutual consent, it was held this day.
The protocol of the preceding conference was agreed upon and
signed.
The American Plenipotentiaries, after some previous explanation
of the nature of the propositions which they were about to make, submitted the fiveannexed articles, (A, B, C, D,) upon the fisheries, the
boundary line, the West India intercourse, that of Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick, and the captured slaves; the two first articles they
stated to be drawn as permanent, and they accompanied that respecting the fisheries with the annexed explanatory memorandum, (E.)
The British Plenipotentiaries submitted the annexed projet of
articles respecting the impressment of seamen, (F,) and they expressed their conviction that a consideration of these articles would, under
all the circumstances of difficulty with which the question is involved, satisfy the American Plenipotentiaries of the sincere and earnest
disposition of the British government, to go every practicable length
in a joint effort to remove all existing causes of difference, and to
connect the two countries in the firmest ties of harmony and good
understanding.
The American Plenipotentiaries declared, that they received the
proposition entirely in the same spirit, and then brought forward the
annexed articles, (Q,) relating to other maritime points which at the
former conferenjf they had announced their intention of producing.
They also submitted three other articles as annexed, respecting
wrecks, &<v &c. (H.)
It was agreed to meet on Fridav, the 25th instant.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
15 HENRY GOULBURN. 114
[71]
ARTICLE A.
Whereas, differences have arisen respecting the liberty claimed by
tbe United States, for the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry, and cure
fish, on certain coasts, bays, harbors, and creeks, of his Britannic
Majesty's dominions in America: It is agreed, between the high
contracting parties, that the inhabitants of the said United States shall
continue to enjoy, unmolested, forever, the liberty to take fish, of
every kind, on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland,
which extends from Cape Ray to the Ramian Islands, and the western and northern coast of Newfoundland, from the said Cape Ray.
to Quirpon Island, on the Magdalen Islands; and, also, on the coasts,
bays, harbors, and creeks, from Mount Joly, on the southern coast
of Labrador, to, and through, the streights of Belleisle, and thence
northwardly, indefinitely along tbe coast; and that the American fishermen shall also have liberty, forever, to dry and cure fish in any
of the unsettled bays, harbors, and creeks, of the southern part of the
coast of Newfoundland hereabove described, of the Magdalen Islands,
and of Labrador, as hereabove described: but so soon as the Same, or
either of them, shall be settled, it shall not be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure fish at such settlement, without previous agreement
for that purpose, with the inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the
ground; and the United States hereby renounce any liberty heretofore enjoyed, or claimed by the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry, or
cure fish on, or within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays,
creeks, and harbors, of his Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, not included within the above-mentioned limits. Provided,
however, that the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such
bays and harbors, for the purpose only of obtaining shelter, wood,
water, and bait; but under such restrictions, as may be necessary
to prevent their drying or curing fish therein, or in any other manner abusing the privilege hereby reserved to them.
ARTICLE B.
It is agreed that a line, drawn due north or south, as the case may
require, from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods,
until it shall intersect the.49th parallel of north latitude, and from the
point of such intersection, due west, along and with the said parallel,
shall be the line of demarcation between the territories of the United States and those of his Britannic Majesty, to the westward of the
said lake, and that the said line shall form the northern boundary of
the said territories of the United States, and the southern boundary
of his Britannic Majesty's said territories, from the said lake to the
Pacific Ocean: it being, however, distinctly understood, that, with
respect to the territories situated on the northwest coast 6f America,
or westward of the Stoney Mountains, the two high contracting parties intend hereby to define the extent of their respective claims, so
far only as relates to the two parties, and without reference to the
claims of an v other nation. [71]
115
The inhabitants of the^two" countries, respectively, shall have liberty freely to come with their ships and cargoes to all such places,
ports, and rivers, on the northwest coast of America, as belong to,
or may be in the possession of either of the two high contracting parties, and shall be admitted and treated, with respect to their said
ships and cargoes, and to trade, generally, on the same terms, and
in the same manner, as the inhabitants, vessels, and cargoes, of the
country owning or having possession of such places, ports, or rivers. The navigation of the rivers that fall into the Pacific Ocean,
and which may be intersected by the line of demarcation, aforesaid,
shall, from the sources of such branches as may be thus intersected,
to the ocean, remain free and open to the citizens of the United States,
and to the subjects of Great Britain. But both parties reserve to
themselves the power of regulating, each within their respective territories, the right to the navigation of the rivers thatjillteither into
the Gulf of Mexico or into Hudson's Bay.
ARTICLE C.
It is agreed that vessels of the United States shall have liberty to
import from any of the ports of the United States, to which any foreign Vessels are permitted to come, into any of the following ports
of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in the West Indies, and on the
continent of South America, viz: the ports of Kingston, Savannah
La Mar, Montego  Bay,  Santa Lucia, Antonio, Saint Ann, Falmouth, and Porto Maria, in the island of Jamaica; the port of San
Joseph, in the island of Trinidad; the port of Scarborough, in the
island of Tobago; the port of St. George, in the island of Grenada;
the port of Kingston, in the island of St. Vincent; the port of Bridgetown, in the island of Barbadoes; the principal port of the island of
St. Lucia; the port of Rosseau, in the island of Dominica; the port of
St. John's, in the island of Antigua; the port of Basseterre, in the
island of St. Christopher's; the port of Road Harbor, in the island
of Tortola; the principal port of Turk's Island; the port of Nassau,
in the island of New Providence; the port of Pitt's Town, in Crooked Island; the principal port of the island of Bermuda; the principal
port in the colony of Demarara, and the principal port in the colony
or Berbice, tobacco, naval stores, live stock, and every species of
provisions, and lumber, being of the growth, produce, or manufacture
of the United States; and the said vessels shall also have liberty to
import, in the same manner, every other article of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States, the importation of which,
into the abovementioned British islands and colonies, shall not be
entirely prohibited from every other   place whatever, if of tbe
growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States, and from
every other foreign country or place, if of the growth, produce, or
manufacture of any other foreign country or place. The said vessels, 116
[71]
coming directly from any of the aforesaid ports of the United States,
shall, likewise, have liberty to export from any of the aforesaid ports
of His Britannic Majesty's dominions, to any of the aforesaid ports
of the United States, sugar, coffee molasses, and salt, being of
the growth, produce, or manufacture, of any of the abovementioned
British islands andlbolonies: And the said vessels shall also have jl»
berty to export, in the same manner, any other article of the said
growth, produce, or manufacture, the exportation of which,
from the said British islands and colonies, to every other foreign country or place, shall not bè entirely prohibited: Provided,
however, that the quantity of sugar and coffee, which may be thus
exported, shall not, for each vessel, exceed the rate of use hundred
weight of both together, for each ton of the burthen of such vessel.
British vessels shall, in the same manner, have liberty to import
from any of the aforesaid ports of his Britannic Majesty's dominions, into any of the aforesaid ports of the United States, sugar, coffee, molasses, and salt, being of the growth, produce, or manufacture
of the above mentioned British islands and colonies: and the said
vessels shall also have liberty to import, in the same manner, any
other article of the said growth, produce, 01* manufacture, the exportation of which, from the said islands and colonies, to the United
States, shall be allowed in vessels of the United States, and the importation of which, into the said United States from every foreign country
or place, shall not be entirely prohibited. Provided, however, That
the quantity of sugar and coffee, which may be thus imported, shall
not exceed, for each vessel, the rate of five hundred weight of both
together, for each ton of the burthen of such vessel. The said vessels, coming directly from any of the aforesaid ports of his Britannic
Majesty's dominions, shall likewise have liberty to export from any
of the aforesaid ports of the United States, to any of the aforesaid
ports of his Britannic Majesty's dominions, tobacco^ naval stores,
live stock, and every species of provisions and lumber, being of the
growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States; and the said
vessels shall also have liberty to export, in the same manner, every
other article, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United
States, the importation of which, into the said British ports from the
said United States, shall be allowed in vessels of the United States,
and the exportation of which, from the said United States, to every
foreign country or place, shall not be entirely prohibited.
The vessels of either of the two parties, employed in the trade provided for by this article, shall be admitted in the ports of the other
party, as above mentioned, without paying any other or higher duties or charges than those payable in the same ports by the vessels
of such other party; and they shall have liberty, respectively, to
touch, during the same voyage, at one or more of the ports above
mentioned, of the other party, for the purpose of disposing of their
inward, or of taking on board their outward cargoes.
No other or higher duties shall be paid on the importation into the
United States, of any of the articles which may be imported there- [ 71 ]
117
in by virtue of this article, when imported in British vessels, than
when imported in vessels of the United States, nor when imported
directly from the above mentioned ports of his Britannic Majesty's dominions, than when imported in a circuitous manner. And no other
or higher duties shall be paid, on the importation into the above mentioned ports of his Britannic Majesty's dominions, of any of the articles which may be imported therein by virtue of this article, when
imported in vessels of the United States, than when imported in British vessels, nor when imported directly from the United States, than
when imported in a circuitous manner.
The same duties shall be paid, and the same bounties shall be allowed on the exportation of any articles which may, by virtue of this
article, be exported either from the above mentioned British islands
and colonies, to the United States, or from the said UnitepV States,
to the said islands and colonies, whether such exportation shall be in
vessels of the United States, or in British vessels. And the articles thus exported, shall, in the dominions of both parties, respectively* Pay the same duties, and be allowed the same bounties, on the exportation thereof, as when exported to any other foreign country or
place whatever.
article.
British vessels shall have liberty to export from any of the ports
of the United States, to which any foreign vessels are permitted to
come, to the ports of Halifax, in His Britannic Majesty's province
of Nova Scotia; to the Port of St. John's, in His Britannic Majesty's province of New Brunswick; and to any other port within the
said provinces of Nova Scotia or New Brunswick, to which vessels
of any other foreign nation shall be admitted, any article of the
growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States, the importation of which, from the said United States into His Britannic Majesty's dominions in the West Indies, and on the continent of South
America, shall be allowed in vessels of the United States, by virtue
of the next preceding article of this treaty, and the exportation of
which, from the United States to every other foreign country, or place,
shall not be entirely prohibited; and vessels of the United States shall,
in like manner, have liberty to import from any of the aforesaid
ports of the United States, into any of the aforesaid ports within the
said provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, any of the articles, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the said United States,
the exportation of which, from the said United States to the said
provinces, shall be allowed in British vessels, and the importation of
which into the said provinces, from every other foreign country, or
place, shall not be entirely prohibited.
British vessels shall also have liberty to import from any of the
aforesaid ports, within the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, into any of the aforesaid ports of the United States, gypsum
and grindstones, the produce or manufacture of the said provinces,
and they shall likewise have liberty to import in the same manner
any other article of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the said 118
[ 71 ]
provinces, the exportation of which from the said provinces to the
United States,*shall be allowed in vessels of the United States, and
the importation of which into the said United States from every other
foreign country, shall not be altogether prohibited. And vessels of
the United States shall have liberty to export from the said provinces to the said United States, gypsum and grindstones, the produce
or manufacture of the said provinces; and they shall likewise have
liberty to export, in the same manner, any.other article of the growth,
produce, or "manufacture of the said provinces, the exportation of
which to every other foreign country shall not be entirely prohibited.
The vessels of either of the two parties employed in the trade provided for by this article, shall be admitted in the ports of the other
party, as above mentioned, without.paying any other or higher duties or charges, than those payable in the same ports by the vessels
of such other party. The same duties shall also be paid, respectively, in the dominions of both parties, on the importation and on the
exportation of the articles which may be imported or exported by
virtue of this article, and the same bounties shall also be allowed on
the exportation thereof, whether such importation or exportation
shall be in vessels of the United States, or in British vessels.
j article D.
Whereas complaints have been made by divers inhabitants of the
United States, that several slavis, their private property, were carded away from the United States contrary to the intentions of the
first article of the treaty of peace and amity, concluded at Ghent, between the two high contracting parties, on the 24th day of December,
one thousand eight hundred and fourteen: it is agreed that full compensation shall be made by the British government to the said complainants, for ail slaves, their private property, who, at the date of
the exchange of the ratifications of the said treatj^jere in any territory, places, or possessions, whatsoever, directed by the said treaty
to be restored to the United States, but then still occupied by the British forces, and who were afterwards removed or carried away by
the said forces, whether such slaves, as aforesaid, were, at the date
aforesaid, on shore, or on board any vessels lying in waters which,
being within the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, were
to be restored to them. And, for the purpose of truly ascertaining the
number and value of the said slaves, three commissioners shall be appointed and authorized to meet and act in manner following, that is
to say; one shall be appointed by the President of the United States,
by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and one by
his Britannic Majesty; and the said two commissioners shall agree
on the choice of a third; or, if they cannot so agree, they shall each
propose one person, and, of the two names so proposed, one shall be
drawn by lot, in the presence of the two original commissioners. The
three commissioners, thus appointed, shall first meet at the city of
Washington, but shall have power to adjourn from place to place, as
they shall see cause. They shall have power to appoint a secretary,
and, before proceeding to act, shall respectively take the following [71]
119
oath or affirmation, in the presence of each other; which oath, or affirmation, being duly taken and attested, shall be entered on the record of their proceedings; that is to say: jj I, A. B. one of the commissioners appointed in pursuance of the article of the treaty
of , between the United States of America and his Britannic Majesty, do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will diligently, impartially, and carefully, examine, and, to the best of my judgment,
according to justice and equity, decide, all such complaints or applications as, under the said article, shall be preferred to the said commissioners." Two of the said commissioners shall constitute a board,
provided they be those named by the respective governments; and
vacancies, caused by death, or otherwise, shall be filled up in the
manner of the original appointments; and the new commissioners
shall take the same oath, or affirmation, and do the same duties.
Twelve months from the day on which the said commissioners shall
form a board, are assigned for receiving complaints and applications;
but they are, nevertheless, authorized, in any particular cases in
which it shall appear to them reasonable and just to extend the said
term for any term not exceeding six months after the expiration
thereof. In examining the complaints and applications preferred to
them by the owners of slaves, or Iheir lawful attorneys or representatives, the said commissioners are empowered and required, in
pursuance of the true intent and meaning of this article, to examine,
on oath or affirmation, all such persons as shall come before them»
touching the real number and value of the slaves alleged to have been
carried away, as aforesaid; and, also, to receive in evidence, according as they may think consistent with equity and justice, written depositions, being duly authenticated, either according to existing legal
forms, or in such other manner as the said commissioners shall see
cause to require or allow.
The award of the said commissioners, or of any two of them, shall
in all cases be final and conclusive, whether as to the number, the
value, or the ownership of the slaves carried away as aforesaid. And
his Britannic Majesty undertakes to cause the sum awarded to each
and every owner, in lieu of his slave or slaves, as above described, to
be paid without deduction, at such time or times, and at such place or
places as shall be awarded by the said commissioners, and on condi-
tfon of such releases being given as they shall direct; provided that
no such payments shall be fixed to take place sooner than twelve
months from the day of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty.
It is further agreed, that the said commissioners shall be respectively
paid in such manner as shall be agreed between the two parties, such
agreement to be settled at the time of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty. And all other expenses attending the execution
of the commission, shall be defrayed jointly by the two parties, the
same being previously ascertained and allowed by the majority of
the commissioners, 120
[71]
E. H
Explanatory Memorandum.
The American Plenipotentiaries presented, for consideration, an
article on the subject of certain fisheries. They stated, at the same
time, that, as the United States considered the liberty of taking,
drying, and curing fish, secured to them by the treaty of peace of
1783, as being unimpaired, and still in full force for the whole extent
of the fisheries in question, whilst Great Britain considered that liberty as having been abrogated by war; and as, by the article now
proposed, the United States offered to desist from their claim to a
certain portion of the said fisheries; that offer was made with the understanding that the article now proposed, or any other on the same
subject, which might be agreed on, should be considered as permanent, and, like one for fixing boundaries between the territories of
the two parties, not to be abrogated by the mere fact of a war between
them; or that, if vacated by any event whatever, the rights of both j
parties should revive, and be in full force, as if such an article had
not been agreed to.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, &c. &c. and the President of the United States of America, being animated with an equal desire to remove, by amicable regulations, the inconveniences which have arisen from the difficulty of
discriminating between the subjects of the two powers, respectively,
have determined to proceed, without prejudice to the rights of either
power, to frame such conventional arrangements as may obviate the
evils which might hereafter again result from the circumstances above
stated, to the public service, the commerce, or the subjects of either
of the contracting parties. In pursuance of so desirable an object,
bis said Majesty and the President of the United States have nominated Plenipotentiaries, to discuss and sign a treaty to this effect.
His Majesty the King of the United. Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, has nominated the Right Hon. Frederick John Robinson, &c. &c. &c. and Henry Goulburn, Esq. &c. &c. &c; and the
President of the United States has nominated Albert Gallatin,
Esq. &c. &c. &c. and Richard Rush, Esq. wrho, having exchanged
their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon the .
following articles:
article 1.
The high contracting parties engage and bind! themselves to adopt,
without delay, and in the manner that may best correspond with
their respective laws, such measures as may be most effectual for ex- [71]
121
eluding the natural born subjects of either party from serving in the
public or private marine of the other: Provided always, that nothing
contained in this article shall be understood to apply to such natural
born subjects of either power, as may have been naturalized by their
respective laws, previous to the signature of the present treaty. And
such measures, wrhen adopted, shall be immediately communicated to
each party, respectively.
JH    ARTICLE g<
For the better ascertaining the number of persons on either side
that may fall within the exception contained in the preceding article,
the high contracting parties engage to deliver, each to the other, within twelve months from the ratification of the present treaty, a list of
all persons falling within the said exception, specifying the places of
their birth, with the date of their becoming naturalized. And it is
farther agreed, that none other than the persons whose names shall
be included in the said lists, shall be deemed to fall within the said
exception.
ARTICLE
Q
The high contracting parties, however, reserve tù themselves the
power to authorize and permit, by proclamation, their respective
subjects or citizens tu serve in the public or private marine of the
other country. And it is hereby expressly understood, that, So long
as such permission shall remain in force, it shall be competent for the
government of the other power, notwithstanding the engagement set
forth in the first article of this treaty, to admit the performance of
the said service. Provided, always, That, whenever the power so
granting permission to the said subjects or citizens to serve in the
marine of the other, shall withdraw the same, notification thereof
shall forthwith be made to the other contracting party, and, on receipt of such notification, the power receiving the same shall, forthwith, notify it in the most public and official manner, and shall use
its utmost endeavors to restrain the said subjects of the other party
from further serving in its public or private marine, and shall en-*
force the exclusion of such of the said subjects of the other power*
as may then be in its service, as if no such permission had been promulgated.
AfiTÎCLÉ 4.
In consideration of the stipulations contained in the preceding
articles, it is agreed, by the high contracting parties, that, during the
continuance of the present treaty, neither power shall impress or
forcibly withdraw, or cause to be impressed or forcibly withdrawn*
any person or persons from the vessels of the other power, when met
upon the high seas, on any plea or pretext whatsoever. Provided ah
Ways, That nothing contained in this article shall be construed to
apply to the vessels of either power, which may be within the porfg
ifi 122
[71 ]
or within the maritime jurisdiction of the other, and also provided
that nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair or affect
the established right of search, as authorized in time of war, by the
law of nations.
ARTICLE 5.
The high contracting parties have agreed to extend the duration of
the present treaty to ten years, and they reserve to themselves to
concert, as to its renewal, at such convenient period, previous fo its
expiration, as may ensure to their respective subjects the uninterrupted benefit which they expect from its provisions: Provided always, that either Power may, if it deem it expedient, upon giving six
months previous notice to the other, wholly abrogate and annul the
present treaty.
ARTICLE 6#
It is agreed that nothing contained in the preceding articles
shall be understood to affect the rights and principles on which the
high contracting parties have heretofore acted, in respect to any of
the matters to which these stipulations refer, except so far as the
same shall have been modified, restrained, or suspended, by the said
articles. And, whenever the present treaty shall cease to be in operation, either by the expiration of the terra for which it is enacted,
without any renewal of the same, or by the abrogation thereof, by
either of the contracting parties, as hereinbefore provided, or (which
God forbid) by any war between the high contracting parties; each of
the said high contracting parties shall stand, with respect to the
other, as to its said rights and principles, as if no such treaty had
ever been made. -U,
G.—(a.)
Whenever one of the high contracting parties shall be at war, any
vessel of the other party, sailing for a port, or place, belonging to an
enemy of the first party, without knowing that the same is either besieged, blockaded, or invested, may be turned away from such port
or place; but she shall not be detained, nor her'carge, if not contraband, be confiscated, unless, after such notice, she shall again attempt
to enter: but she shall be permitted to go to any other port or place
she may think proper. No vessel, or cargo, shall be condemned for
breach of a blockade, unless captured by one of the blockading ships;
or unless she shall attempt to enter, after notice as aforesaid. Nor
shall any vessel or goods of either party, that may have entered into such port or place, before tbe same was besieged, blockaded, or
invested by the other, and be found therein, after the reduction or surrender of such place, be liable to confiscation; but shall be restored [ 71 ]
123
to the owners, or proprietors thereof. And, in order to determine
what characterises a blockade, it is agreed that denomination shall
apply to a port where there is, by the disposition of the power which
blockades it, with ships stationary, or sufficiently near, an evident
danger in entering.
■'■•'■; "'".■■•'' .-.,■' <»•):"     ' '"';?'■ ".'■'.'.'■' .
Whereas differences have heretofore arisen, concerning the trading
with the colonies of His Britannic Majesty's enemies, and the instructions given by His Majesty to his cruizers, in regard thereto; it
is agreed that, whenever His Britannic Majesty shall be at war, all
articles, not being contraband of war, may be freely carried from
the ports of the United States to the ports of any colony, not blockaded, belonging to His Majesty's enemies; provided, such goods as
are not of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States,
shall previously have been entered and landed in the United States,
and the ordinary duties, on such articles, so imported for home consumption, shall have been paid, or secured to be paid, and the said
goods, on re-exportation, shall, after the drawback, remain subject
to a duty equivalent to not less than one per cent, ad valorem; and
that the said goods and the vessels, conveying the same, shall, from
the time of their clearance from the port of the United States, be bona
fide the sole property of citizens of the United States; and, in like
manner, that all articles, not being contraband of war, and being
the growth or produce of the colonies of His Britannic Majesty's enemies, may be brought to the United States, and, after having been
there landed, may be freely carried from thence to any foreign port,
not blockaded; provided such goods shall previously have been entered and landed in the United States, and the ordinary duties on colonial articles so imported, for home consumption, shall have been
paid, or secured to be paid; and that the said goods, except only mahogany and fustic, shall, on re-exportation, after the drawback, remain subject to a duty equivalent to not less than two per cent, ad
valorem; and provided that the said goods, and the vessels conveying the same, be bona fide the sole property of citizens of the United
States:
Provided, always, that this article, or any thing contained therein, shall not affect any question now, or hereafter, judicially pending,, touching the legality, or illegality, of a direct trade from Europe, or other foreign countries, by citizens of the United States,
with the colonies or possessions of His Britannic Majesty's enemies
beyond the Cape of Good Hope, nor operate to the prejudice of any
right belonging to either party; but that, after the expiration of the
time limited for this treaty, the rights on both sides shall revive and
be in full force. ^
'.•■". -:!' -■■ ..    '  ■'■ .     (c,) • v  •'.'■ '■%-'■'
In order to regulate what is in future to be esteemed contraband of
war, it is agreed, that, under the said denomination, shall be com- prised all arms and implements serving for the purposes of war, by
land or by sea, such as cannon, mortars, muskets, pistols, and other
fire arms, petards, bombs, grenades, carcasses, saucisses, rockets,
carriages for cannon, firelocks, musket rests, bandoliers, gunpowder,
saltpetre, sulphur, matches, balls, and bullets, helmets, or head pieces, cuirasses, swords, pikes, halberts, lances, javelins, saddles, bridles, and other horse furniture, holsters, pouches, belts, and generally
all other implements of war; excepting however, the quantity of the
said articles* which may be necessary for the defence of the ship, and
of those who compose the crew; but all such articles are hereby declared to be just objects of confiscation, whenever they are attempted
to be carried to an enemy. But no vessel shall be detained on pretence of carrying contraband of war, unless some of the abovemenr-
tioned articles are found on board of the said vessels at the time it is
searched.
In all cases where one of tbe high contracting parties shall be at
war, the armed vessels belonging to such party shall not station themselves, nor rove, or hover, nor stop, search, or disturb the vessels of
the other party, or the unarmed vessels of other nations, within the
chambers formed by head lands, or within five marine miles from the
shore belonging to the other party, or from a right line from one
head land to another.
Whenever one of the high contracting parties shall be at war, and
where vessels of tbe other party shall be captured or detained by the
ships of war or privateers of the belligérant, for any lawful cause, the
said vessels shall be brought to the nearest or most convenient port;
and such part only of the articles on board, as are subject to condemnation by the law of nations, shall be made prize; and the vessels,
unless by that law also subject to condemnation, shall be at liberty
to proceed with the remainder of the cargo, without any impediment.
In all cases of unfounded detention, or other contravention of the
regulations stipulated by the present treaty, the owners of the vessel
and cargo so detained, shall be allowed damages proportioned to the
loss occasioned thereby, together with tbe costs and charges of the
trial. All proper measures shall be taken to prevent delay in deciding the cases of ships or cargoes so brought in for adjudication,
and in the payment or recovery of any indemnification adjudged or
agreed to be paid to the masters or owners of such ships or cargoes.
And, whenever sentence shall be pronounced against any vessel thus
captured or detained, or against her cargo, or part thereof, the sentence or decree shall mention the reasons or motives on which the
same shall have been founded,, and a duly authenticated copy of all
the proceedings in the cause, and of the said sentence, shall, if required; he delivered; without the smallest delay, to the commander of [71 ]
125
the said vessel, or to the owner thereof, or to the agent of either, on
the payment of all legal fees and demands for the same.
The commanders of ships of war and privateers of the belligérant
party shall, in searching of merchant ships of the other party, conduct themselves according to the acknowledged principles and rules
of the law of nations, and as favorably, moreover, as towards the
most friendly power that may remain neuter. The said commanders, their ofiicers, and crewTs, shall forbear doing any damage to the
subjects or citizens of the other party, or committing any outrage
' against them; and, if they act to the contrary, they shall be punished, and shall also be bound, in their persons and estates, to make satisfaction and reparation for all damages, and the interest thereof,
of whatever nature the said damages may be.
For this cause, all commanders of privateers, before they receive
their commissions, shall be compelled to give, before a competent
judge, sufficient security, by at least two responsible sureties, who
have no interest in the said privateer; each of whom, together with
the said commander, shall be jointly and severally bound in the sum
of two thousand two hundred and fifty pounds sterling, or of ten
thousand dollars; or if such ship be provided with above one hundred
and fifty seamen, or soldiers, in the sum of four thousand ûve hundred pounds sterling, or of twenty thousand dollars, to satisfy all
damages and injuries which the said privateers, or ofiicers, or men, or
any of them, may do or commit during their cruise, contrary to the
tenor of this treaty, or to the laws and instructions for regulating
their conduct; and further, that in all cases of unlawful aggressions,
the said commissions shall be revoked and annulled.
The ships of war and privateers of the two nations, as well as their
prizes, shall be treated, in their respective ports, as those of the most
favored nation.
It shall not be lawful for any foreign privateers, who have commissions from any power or state at war with either of the two na-
, tions, to arm their ships in the ports of either of the said parties, nor
to sell what they have taken, nor in any other manner to exchange
the same; nor shall they be allowed to purchase more provisions than
shall be necessary for their going to the nearest port of that power
or state from whom they obtained their commissions.
It is likewise agreed that the subjects of the two nations shall not
do any acts of hostility or violence against each other, nor accept
commissions so to act, from any foreign power or state, enemies
to the other party; nor shall the enemies of one of the parties be permitted to invite, or endeavor to enlist, in the military service, any of
the subjects or citizens of the other party. The laws against all
such offences and aggressions shall be punctually executed; and if 126
[71]
any subject or citizen of the said parties, respectively, shall accept
any foreign commission or letters of marque, for arming any vessel
to act as a privateer against tbe other party, it is hereby declared to
lie lawful for the said party to treat and punish the said subject or citizen having such commission or letter of marque, as a pirate.
In the event of a shipwreck happening In a place belonging to
either of the fiigh contracting parties, not only every assistance shall
be given to the unfortunate persons, and no violence done to them,
-but also the effects belonging to them, and which may be saved either
from on board the ship, or in any other manner whatever, shall not
be concealed, nor detained, nor damaged, under any pretext whatever. On the contrary, the abovementioned effects and merchandise
Shall be preserved and restored to them, upon a suitable recompense
being given to those who shall have assisted in saving their persons,
vessels, or effects.
' ; 1 ,'.'■'.'•   .":'-' :"■.. .' W     ' '"'.'-..   '''  -   I I
It is expressly stipulated, that neither of the said contracting parties will order or authorize any acts of reprisal against the other, on
complaints of injuries and damages, until the said party shall first have
presented to the other a statement thereof, verified by competent proof
and evidence, and demanded justice and satisfaction, and the same
shall have been either refused or unreasonably delayed.
If at any time a rupture should take place, (which God forbid,) between the United States and his Britannic Majesty, neither tbe vessels and cargoes, nor other property of any kind, belonging to the
individuals of each of the two nations, which may at the time be in
the harbors, ports, or dominions, of the other party, nor the debts
due from individuals of one of the two nations to individuals of the
other, nor shares or moneys which they may have in the public funds,
or in tbe public or private banks, shall be sequestered or confiscated.
And the merchants and others of each of the two nations, residing in
the dominions of the other, shall, in no case, be detained as prisoners
of war, but they shall be permitted to remove, with their families, effects, and property; each government having, nevertheless, the right,
during their remaining in its dominions, to make such regulations,
and to take such precautions, as it may deem necessary, with respect
to such persons. [71 ]
*27
No. 4.
Protocol of the Fourth Conference between the American and British
Plenipotentiaries, held at Whitehall, on Friday, the 25 th of September,
1818.
Present,—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush,
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Goulburn.
Explanations were asked, and given, respecting some of the
articles presented by the American Plenipotentiaries at the last conference.
The American Plenipotentiaries,'after observing that the measures
already adopted, and the proposals formerly made, by the United
States, could leave no doubt of their constant and anxious desire to
arrange, by amicable regulations, the subject of impressment, de-*
clared their readiness to agree, with some amendments, which they
submitted,(A.) to the projet proposed by the British Plenipotentiaries,
under a full expectation that an arrangement, thus founded on mutual confidence, could not fail to have a happy effect, both as regarding its immediate object, and in confirming the amicable relations so
happily subsisting between the two countries.
It was agreed to meet again on Tuesday, the 6th of October.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN.
Â.
Amendments proposed.
All words between crotchets to be
struck out.
1. - ./
2. settle
3. differences
4. employment by either, of the
two powers of the subjects or citizens of the other, in their public or
private marine, and from the practice of impressment,
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, &c. &c. &c. and [the President of]1 the United States of
America, being animated with an
equal desire to [remove,]2 by amicable regulations, the 3[inconveniences] which have arisen from the
4[difficulty of discriminating between the subjects of the two powers, respectively,] have determined
to proceed, without prejudice to the
rights of either power, to frame such
conventional arrangements as may
obviate the evils which might hereafter again result from the [circum- 128
[71 ]
5. causes
1. respectively from serving in
their public or private marine, the
natural born subjects or citizens of
the other party,
2. or citizens
J| shall
4. with their own consent
5. the
6. of either power
7. exchange of ratifications
stances]5 above stated, [to the public service, the commerce, or the
subjects, Of either of the contracting
parties.]6 In pursuance of so desirable an object, his said Majesty
and the President of the United
States, have nominated Plenipotentiaries to discuss and sign a Treaty
to this effect.
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, has nominated the Right
Honorable Frederick John Robinson,
&c. &c. &c. and Henry Goulburn,
Esquire, &c. &c. &c; and the President of the United States has nominated Albert Gallatin, Esquire,
&c. &c. &c. and Richard Rush, Esquire, who, having exchanged their
full powers, found in good and due
form, have agreed upon the following articles:
ARTICLE 1.
The high contracting parties engage and bind themselves to adopt*
without delay, and in the manner
that may best correspond with their
respective laws, such measures as
may be most effectual for excluding
1 [the natural born subjects of either
party from serving in the public or
private marine of the other;] provided, always, that nothing contained in this article shall be understood
fo apply to such natural born subjects 2 of either power, as [may]3
have been naturalized 4 by 5 [their]
respective laws, 6 previous to the
^[signature] of the present treaty.
And such measures, when adopted,
shall be immediately communicated
to each party, respectively.
ARTICLE 2.
1. eighteen
For the better ascertaining the
number of persons, on either side,
that may fall within the exception
contained in the preceding article,
the high contracting parties engage
to deliver, each to the other, withm
[twelve]1 months from the ratifica- [ 71 ]
129
2. as far as it may be found practicable to obtain it, of the seamen
3. no natural born subject or citizen of either power, whose name
shall not
4. unless he shall produce proof
of his having been duly naturalized
prior to the exchange of ratifications
of this treaty.
tion of the present treaty, a list
* [of all persons] falling within the
said exception, specifying the places
of their birth, with the date of their
becoming naturalized. And it is
further agreed, that 3[none other
than the persons whose names shall]
be included in the said lists, shall be
deemed to fall within the said exception.4
1. by law
2. or otherwise, either generally
sr in special eases,
3. or citizens
4. or citizens
5. on their return to port, from
the voyages or service in which they
may then be engaged, or sooner, if
practicable,
1.
17
ARTICLE 3.
The high contracting parties, however, reserve to themselves the power to authorize and permit,1 by proclamation,3 their respective subjects or citizens to serve in the pub~
lie or private marine of the other
country. And it is hereby expressly understood, that, so long as such
permission shall remain in force, it
shall be competent for the government of the other power, notwithstanding the engagement set forth
in the first article of this treaty, to
admit the performance of the said
service: Provided, always, that,
whenever the power so granting
permission to the said subjects or
citizens to serve in the marine of
the other, shall withdraw the same,
notification thereof shall forthwith
be made to the other contracting
party, and on receipt of such notification, the power receiving the
same shall forthwith notify it m the
most public and official manner, and
shall use its utmost endeavors to re-^
strain the said subjects 3 ofthe other
party from further serving in its
public or private marine, and shall
enforce the exclusion of such of the
said subjects 4 of the other power,
as may then be in its service,5 as if
no such permission had been promulgated,
article 4.
*[In consideration of the stipulations contained in the preceding ar- 13*
[71 ]
■2. or any where without the ordinary jurisdiction of either of the two
powers, as acknowledged by the law
of nations,
3. impair or affect the right of
either power, to withdraw its natu
ral born subjects or citizens, not
falling within the exception mentioned in the preceding articles,
from any vessel lying within its ports
or within its ordinary maritime jurisdiction, as acknowledged by the
law of nations.
4. (a.)
(a.) See 6th article, 2.
1. or citizens
1. impair, or
2. nor any of the belligérant or
neutral rights of either party, as acknowledged by the law of nations,
tides,] it is agreed by tbe high contracting parties, that, during the
continuance of the present treaty;
neither power shall impress or forcibly withdraw, or cause to be impressed or forcibly withdrawn, any person
or persons, from the vessels of the
other power, when met upon the high
seas, s on any plea or pretext whatsoever: Provided, always, that nothing contained in this article shall
be construed to 3 [apply to the vessels of either power which may be
within the ports or within the maritime jurisdiction of the other:] 4[and
also, provided, that nothing herein
contained shall be construed to impair or affect the established right of
search, as authorized in time of war
by the law of nations.]
ARTICLE 5.
The high contracting parties have
agreed to extend the duration of the
present treaty to ten years, and they
reserve to themselves to concert as
to its renewal, at such convenient
period, previous to its expiration, as
may insure to their respective subjects ! the uninterrupted benefit
which they expect from its provisions: Provided, always, that either
power may, if it deem it expedient,
upon giving six months' previous notice to the other, wholly abrogate
and annul the present treaty.
article 6.
It is agreed that nothing contained in the preceding articles, shall be
understood to 1 affect the rights and
principles on which the high contracting parties have heretofore acted in respect to any of the matters
to which these stipulations refer,2
except so far as the same shall have
been modified, restrained, or suspended, by the said articles. And
whenever the present treaty shall t 71]
131
cease to be in operation, either by
the expiration of the term for which
it is enacted, without any renewal
of the same, or by the abrogation
thereof, by either of the contracting^
parties, as herein before provided,
or (which God forbid,) by any war
between the high contracting parties, each of the said high contracting parties shall stand, with respect
to the other, as toits said rights and
principles, as if no such treaty had
ever been made,
No. 5.
Protocol of the fifth Conference held between the American and British
Plenipotentiaries, at Whitehall, on the 6th of October.
Present—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush,
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Goulburn.
The protocol of the preceding conference was agreed upon and
signed.
The British plenipotentiaries gave in the five annexed articles, on
the fisheries, the boundary, the Mississippi, the intercourse between
Nova Scotia and the United States, and the captured slaves. (A, B,
C,D,E.)
It was agreed to meet again on the 9th instant.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN.
article A.
ït is agreed that the inhabitants of the United States shall have
liberty to take fish, of every kind, on that part of the western coast of
Newfoundland which extendsfrom Cape Ray to the Quinpon islands,
and on that part of the southern and eastern coasts of Labrador which
extends from Mount Joly to Huntingdon Island; and it is further
agreed that the fishermen of the United States shall have liberty to
dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbors, andcreeks, of
the ««aid south and east coasts of Labrador, so long as the same shall
"remain unsettled; but, as soon as the same, or any part of them, shall 132
[74]
be settled, it shall not be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure
fish, without a previous agreement for that purpose with the inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the ground.
And it is further agreed, that nothing contained in this article shall
be construed to give to the inhabitants of the United Stales any liberty to take fish within the rivers of his Britannic Majesty's territories, as above described; and it is agreed, on the part of the United
States, that the fishermen of the United States resorting to the mouths
of such rivers, shall not obstruct the navigation thereof, nor wilfully
injure nor destroy the fish within the same, either by setting nets
across the mouths of such rivers, or by any other means whatever.   *
His Britannic Majesty further agrees, that the vessels of the Unit-
States, bona fide engaged in such fishery, shall have liberty to enter
tbe bays and harbors of any of his Britannic Majesty's dominions in
North America, for the purpose of shelter, or of repairing damages
therein, and of purchasing wood and obtaining water, and for no other
purpose; and all vessels so resorting to the said bays and harbors,
shall be under such restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their
taking, drying,' or curing fish therein.
It is further well understood, that the liberty of taking, drying,
and curing fish, granted in the preceding part of this article, shall
not be construed to extend to any privilege of carrying on trade with
any of his Britannic Majesty's subjects, residing within the limits
hereinbefore assigned for the use of the fishermen of the United
States, for any of the purposes aforesaid.
And in order the more effectually to guard against smuggling, it
snail not be lawful for the vessels of the United States, engaged in the
said fishery, to have on board any goods, wares, or merchandise,
whatever, except such as mav be necessary for the prosecution of the
fishery, or the support of the fishermen whilst engaged therein, or in
the prosecution of their voyages to and from the said fishing grounds.
And any vessel of the United States which shall contravene this regulation may be seized, condemned, and confiscated, together with
her cargo.
ARTICLE B.
It is agreed that a line drawn from the most northwestern point of
the Lake of the Woods, along the forty-ninth parallel of latitude, or
if the said point shall not be in the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, then, that aline, drawn due north or south, as the case may be,
until it shall intersect the said parallel of north latitude, and from
the point of such intersection, due west, along, and with, the said parallel, shall be the line of demarcation between the territories of his
Britannic Majesty and those of the United States, and that the said
line shall form the southern boundary of the said territories of his
Brtannic Majesty, and the northern boundary of the territories of the
United States, from the said Lake of the Woods to the Stoney Moun- [71]
îas
tains; and, in order to prevent any disputes as to the territorial rights
of either of the contracting parties, on the northwest coast of America, or any where to the westward of the Stoney Mountains, it is
agreed, that so much of the said country as lies between the forty-
fifth and forty-ninth parallels of latitude,-together with its harbors,
bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same,,
shall be free and open to the subjects and citizens of the two states,
respectively, for the purpose of trade and commerce; it being well
understood that, although by virtue of this arrangement, the two high
contracting parties agree not to exercise as against each, any other
sovereign or territorial authority within the above mentioned country,
lying between the forty-fifth and forty-ninth parallels of latitude,
this agreement is not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim
which either of the two high contracting parties may have to any
territorial authority in any part of the country lying within the said
limits: nor shall it be taken to affect the claim of any other power
or state to any part of the said country—the only object of the two
high contracting parties being to prevent disputes and differences
between themselves.
ARTICLE  C.
It is further agreed, that the subjects of his Britannic Majesty,
shall have and enjoy the free navigation of the river Mississippi,
from its source to tbe ocean, and shall at all times have free access
from such place, as may be selected for that purpose, in his Britannic Majesty's territories, to the river Mississippi, with their goods,
wares, and merchandise, the importation of which, into the United
States, shall not be entirely prohibited, on the payment of the same
duties as would be payable on the importation of the same article
into the Atlantic ports of the United States.
ARTICLE D.
British vessels shall have liberty to export, from any of the ports
of the United States to which any foreign vessels are permitted to
come, to the ports of Halifax, in his Britannie majesty's province of
Nova Scotia, to the port of St. John's, in his Britannic majesty's province of New Brunswick, and to any other port within the said provinces of Nova Scotia or New Brunswick, to which vessels of any
other foreign nation shall be admitted, the following articles, being
of the growth, product, or manufacture, of the United States, viz:
scantling, planks, staves, heading-boards, shingles, hoops, horses,
neat cattle, sheep, hogs, poultry, or live stock of any sort, bread,
biscuit, flour, peas, beans, potatoes, wheat, rice, oats, barley, or
grain of any sort, pitch, tar, turpentine, fruits, seeds, and tobacco.
And vessels of the United States shall, in like manner, have liber- 134
[71]
ty to import, from any of the aforesaid ports of the United States,
into any of the aforesaid ports within the said provinces of Nova
Scotia and New Brunswick, the abovementioned articles, being of
the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States.
British vessels shall also have liberty to import, from any of the
aforesaid ports, within the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, into any of the aforesaid ports of the United States, gypsum
and grindstones, or any other articles, being of tbe growth, produce,
or manufacture, of the said provinces, and, also, any produce or manufacture of any part of his Britannic majesty's dominions, the importation of which, into the United States, shall not be entirely prohibited.
And vessels of the United States shall have liberty to import from
the said provinces, to the said United States, slates, gypsum, and
grindstones, or any other article, being of the growth, produce, or
manufacture, of any part of his Britannic majesty's dominions, the
importation of which into the United States, from any other place,
Shall not be entirely prohibited.
The vessels of either of the two parties, employed'm the trade provided for by this article, shall be admitted in the ports of the other
party, as abovementioned, without paying any other or higher duties, or charges, than those payable in the same ports by the vessels
of such other party. The same duties shall also be paid, respectively, in the dominions of both parties, on the importation and on
the exportation of the articles which may be imported or exported,
by virtue of this article, and the same bounties shall also be allowed
on the exportation thereof, whether such importation or exportation
shall be in vessels of the United States or in British vessels.
article E.
Whereas it was agreed by the first article of the treaty of Ghent,
that " all territory, places, and possessions, whatsoever, taken by
either party from the other during the war, or which may be taken
after the signing of this treaty, excepting only the islands hereinafter
mentioned, shall be restored without delay, and without causing any
destruction, or carrying away any of the artillery, or other public
property, originally captured in the said forts or places, and which
shall remain therein upon the exchange of the ratifications of this
treaty, or any slaves or other private property:" And whereas
doubts have arisen wbether certain slaves, originally captured in
certain forts and places, belonging to the United States, and removed therefrom, but remaining within the territories of the United States, or on board the ships of his Britannic Majesty, lying within the harbors of the United States at the time of the exchange of
the ratifications of the said treaty, are to extend under the above rented provisions of the said treaty:   Tbe high contracting parties do [71]
135
hereby agree to refer the said doubts to some friendly sovereign or
state, to be named for that purpose; and the high contracting parties
engage to consider the decision of such friendly sovereign or state to
be final and conclusive on all the matters so referred.
No. 6.
London, October 7th, 1818.
Mr. Gallatin and Mr. Rush present their compliments to Mr. Robinson and Mr. Goulburn, and beg leave to send them tbe enclosed
paper, containing some remarks on the articles handed to them at
the conference yesterday. They are to be considered as unofficial,
according to the intimation given yesterday, when they were promised, and have been drawn up merely under the hope that, by possessing the British Plenipotentiaries of some of the views of the American Plenipotentiaries, before the next meeting On the 9th, the progress of the negotiation may be accelerated.
Observations, fyc.—Fisheries.
The American Plenipotentiaries are not authorized by their instructions to assent to any article on that subject, which shall not
secure to the inhabitants of the United States the liberty of taking fish
of every kind on the southern coast of Newfoundland, from Cape
Ray to the Ramian Islands, and en the coasts, bays, harbors, and
creeks, from Mount Joly, on the southern coast of Labrador, to and
through the Straits of Belle Isle; and thence, northwardly, indefinitely,
along the coast: and, also, the liberty of drying and curing fish in
any of the unsettled bays, harbors, and creeks, of Labrador, and of
the southern coast of Newfoundland, as above described; with the
proviso respecting such of the said bays, harbors, and creeks, as may
be settled.
The liberty of taking fish within^ rivers is not asked. A positive
clause to except them is unnecessary, unless it be intended to comprehend, under that name, waters which might, otherwise, be considered
as bays or creeks. Whatever extent of fishing ground may be secured to American fishermen, the American Plenipotentiaries are not
prepared to accept it on a tenure, or on conditions different from those
on which the whole has heretofore been held. Their instructions did not
anticipate that any new terms or restrictions would be annexed, as
none were suggested in the proposals made by Mr. Bagot to the American government. The clauses forbidding the spreading of nets, and
making vessels liable to confiscation, in case any articles not wanted
for carrying on the fishery should be found on board, are of that description, and would expose the fishermen to endless vexations. 136
r*7i]
Mississippi.
Tbe American Plenipotentiaries are not authorized to agree to any
condition that would bring the British in contact with the Mississippi.
The right to the navigation of that river could only be derived from
the treaty of 1783; and, if viewed as a matter of compromise, that
right is much less valuable and important than the portion of the fisheries which the United States would lose by the agreement, even on
the terms proposed by them.
Boundary.
That portion of the article which relates to the country west of thé
Stoney Mountains, cannot be agreed to in its present shape. The
American Plenipotentiaries cannot consent to throw in a common
stock that part only of the country to which the United States deny
the claim of Great Britain, and which lies within the same latitudes
as their own territories east of the Stoney Mountains; thus, also, implying the exclusion of their citizens from the trade on the Northwest
Coast of America, (north of 49°,) which they have enjoyed without
interruption for a number of years, and as early as the British.
Nor are they authorized to agree to expressions implying a renunciation of territorial sovereignty, although perfectly disposed not to
insist on an extension of the line of demarcation to that country.
They will propose either that the whole of the article relating to that
subject, and immediately following the words, to tne Stoney Mountains,
should be omitted, inserting in lieu thereof a proviso similar to what
had, on former occasions, been agreed to, viz: " But nothing in the
jj present article shall be construed to extend to the Northwest
" Coast of America, or to territories belonging to or claimed by
*f either party on the continent of America westward of the Stoney
Mountains." Or, that the proposed article should be amended in the
manner stated in the enclosed copy. ^ _
Slaves.
The American Plenipotentiaries had hoped that this subject might
have been arranged without a reference to a friendly power. If this
cannot be done, they will agree to the reference; observing, however,
that a change in the phraseology will be necessary, so as to bring the
whole claim before the foreign sovereign. They are also authorized
to agree that the Emperor of Russia should, by the article, be designated as the umpire. [71]
137
No. r.
Protocol of the sixth Conference between the American and British
flenipotentaries, held at Whitehall, on the 9th of October, 1818.
Present—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush,
Mr. Robinson.
The American Plenipotentiaries   declared that they could  not
agree to the article upon the fisheries brought forward by the British
Plenipotentiaries at the preceding conference, nor to that respecting
the navigation of the Mississippi, nor to any article that would bring
"the British in contact with that river.
They also stated that they could not take into consideration the
article respecting the intercourse with Nova Scotia and "Vew Brunswick, unconnected with the subject of the British West indies.
- They presented several amendments (A, B,) to the articles respecting the boundary line and slaves carried away, proposed at the last
sonference by the British Plenipotentiaries.
It was agreed to meet again on Tuesday, the iSth instant.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN.
ARTICLE.
It is agreed that a line, drawn
from the most northwestern point
of the Lake of the Woods, along
the forty-ninth parallel of latitude, or if the said point shall
not be in tbe 49th parallel of
north latitude, then that a line,
drawn1 due north or south, as the
ease may be, until2 [it] shall intersect the said parallel of north
latitude, and from the point of
such intersection, due west, along
and with the said parallel, shall
be the line of demarcation between the territories of his Britannic Majesty and those of the
United States, and that the said
line shall form the southern boundary of the said territories of his
Britannic Majesty, and the northern boundary of the territories of
the United States, from the said
Lake of the Woods to the Stoney
18
A.
1 From the said point.
* Tbe said line. 138
171]
Mountains,* and3 [in order to
prêt ent any disputes as to the
territorial rights of either of the
contracting parties on the Northwest Coast of America, or any
where to the westward of the
Stoney Mountains, it is agreed
that so much of the said country
as lies between the 45th and 49th
parallels of latitude,] together
With its harbors, bays, and creeks,
and the navigation of all rivers
within the same, shall be free and
open to the subjects and citizens
of the two4 [states] respectively,
for the purpose of trade and commerce, it being well understood,
that5 [although by virtue of this
arrangement, the two high contracting parties agree not to exercise as against each other, any
other sovereign or territorial authority within the above mentioned country, lying between the
45th and 49th parallels of latitude,] this agreement is not to
be construed to the prejudice of
any claim which either of the
two high contracting parties may
bave to any territorial authority
in any part of the country,6 [lying within the said limits,] nor
shall it be taken to affect the
claim of any other power or state
to any part of the said country,
the only object of the two high
contracting parties being to prevent disputes and différences between themselves.
3 It is further agreed, that so
much of the country on the Northwest Coast of America, or any
where tothe westward of the Stoney Mountains* as may be claimed by, or be in the possession of
either of the two parties.
4 Powers.
6 Aforesaid.
ARTICLE.
Whereas it was agreed, by the
first article of the treaty of Ghent,
that *' all territory, places, and
possessions, whatsoever, taken by
* Or all the words that follow to be omitted, and the following to be inserted in
lieu thereof, viz:
•' But nothing- in the present article shall be construed to extend to the Northwest
Coast of America, or to territories belonging" to, or claimed by, ellker party, on tbe
continent of America, westward of the Stoney Mountains." £71]
ii§
either party from the other, during
the war, or which may be taken
after the signing of this treaty,
excepting only the islands hereinafter mentioned, shall be restored
without delay, and without caus-
ing any destruction, or carrying
away any of the artillery, or
other public property, originally
captured in the said forts or
places, and which shall remain
therein upon the exchange of the
ratifications of this treaty, or any
slaves, or other private property;" and whereas, x [doubts have
arisen, whether certain slaves,
originally Gaptured in certain
forts and places belonging to the
United States, and removed therefrom, but remaining within the
territories of the United States,
or on board the ships of his Britannic Majesty lying within the
harbors of tbe United States, at
the time of the exchange of the
ratifications of the said treaty,
are to be restored under the above
recited provisions of the above
treaty;] the high contracting parties do hereby agrée to refer the
said 2 [doubts to some friendly
sovereign, or state, to be named
for that purpose,] and the high
contracting parties engage to consider the decision of 3 [such friendly sovereign or state, to be] final
and conclusive on all the matters
referred,
B.
1. Under the aforesaid article,
the United States claim for their
citizens, and as their private property, the restitution of, or full
compensation for, all slaves, who,
at the date of the exchange of the
ratifications of the said treaty, were
in any territory, places, or poses*
sions whatsoever, directed by the
said treaty to be restored to the
United States, but then still occupied by the British forces, and
who were afterwards removed or
carried away by the said forces;
whether such slaves were, at the
date aforesaid, on shore, or on
board any British vessels lying
in waters within the territory or
jurisdiction of the United States.
And whereas differences have
arisen, whether,by the true intent
and meaning of the aforesaid article of the treaty of Ghent, the
United States are entitled to the
restitution of, or full compensation
for all slaves as above described.
2. differences to his Imperial
Majesty, the Emperor of all the
Russias
3. his said Imperial Majesty 140
No. 8.
Mr. Gallatin and Mr. Rush present their~ compliments to Mr-
Robinson and Mr. -Goulburn, and beg leave to state, that, on full
consideration, since the meeting on Friday, they do not feel themselves authorized to consent to the condition annexed to the second
article of the projet on impressment, which declares that " none oth-
46 er than the persons whose names shall be included in tbe said lists,
u shall be deemed to fall within the said exception.'* Their reasons
are stated in the enclosed unofficial memorandum
Mr. G. and Mr. R. give this notice of their disagreement, previous
to the meeting fixed for to-morrow, in the hope that, if the alteration
which they haveAeretofore proposed, should not, contrary to their
expectations, be found acceptable, some other amendment or modification may suggest itself to the British Plenipotentiaries, rather
than that the arrangement should fall through.
October 12, 1818.
Memorandum.
Lists of Seamen naturalized.
It is required by the British Plenipotentiaries that persons, whose
names shall not appear on the lists of naturalized seamen, to be mutually furnished by the two governments, shall not be considered as
falling within the exception contemplated by the agreement; that is
to say, that such persons, although naturalized, shall, respectively,
be excluded from the public or private marine of either party.
But it is impracticable for the government of the United States to
procure complete lists of naturalized seamen, for the following reasons:
Prior to the year 1790, aliens might be naturalized according to
tbe laws of the several states; and it is known, that in some of them,
Pennsylvania for instance, the naturalization took place before Justices of the Peace. In these cases, and also when the records of a
Court may have been destroyed, it would be found difficult, if not
impossible, to obtain any other evidence of the naturalization than
the certificate given at the time to the naturalized person.
Since the year 1790, although the term of previous residence has
varied, the mode has heen uniform. Aliens have been naturalized
only in conformity with tbe laws of the United States, and before
such courts of record as were designated by those Jaws. But that
designation embraced not only the Courts of the United States, properly so called, but also the Courts of the several States, including
even those of a subordinate jurisdiction, amounting, together, to several hundred. It is necessary to add, that minor children of naturalized persons, if dwelling in the United States, become also, by
virtue of their father's naturalization, ipso facto, naturalized themselves.
If an attempt is made to compile the lists required from the records of the several Courts, a first and leading objection is, that the
Courts of the several states, not being bound to obey, in that respect, [71 ]
141
the orders of the General Government, it will be optional with them
whether the clerks soajl abstract, from the records of thirty years,
those ol the naturalization of aliens, which are interspersed among
them, and transmit those abstracts to the government of the United
States. 0^
But, supposing that every one of those Courts should comply
with the order, the lists must contain the names of all the British
natural born subjects, (and for the years 1790 to 1795, during which
time no discrimination of birth-place was recorded, of all aliens,)
who have been naturalized for a period of thirty years, without
pointing out those who were seamen, no specification of the profession or calling of the parties ever having been required by law to
be entered on the records. And those lists, although containing the
names of many thousand persons, not seamen, would be defective,
by the total omission of the names of the minor children above mentioned, their names not having been directed, bylaw, to make part of
the record, and the burthen of the proof of their citizenship resting
with themselves. g||
There is but one other source of information from which the lists
required might be partially obtained.
The collectors of customs have been required, by a law passed in
1796, to keep books, in which the names of seamen, citizens of the
United States, should, on their application, be entered. It is known
that this law was never fully complied with, and that the returns are
defective. But, even in the cases where the collectors have complied with it, the registers must, necessarily, be incomplete, since no
names were entered but on tbe application of the parties; besides
which, the names of the native citizens were not, by the law, directed to be distinguished from those of naturalized persons.
From this statement of facts, it follows that, although partial lists
maybe compiled, which will contain the names of many naturalized
British seamen,*those lists will still be very imperfect. If the condition now urged was complied with, the consequence would be, that
aliens, naturalized prior to the treaty, who have become citizens of
tbe United States on the faith of a public law, and are, thereby, entitled to every political and civil right enjoyed by native citizens, (that
of becoming President or Vice President of the United States only
excepted) would, by a retrospective, and therefore unconstitutional
act, be deprived, not of a privilege merely political, but of the right
of exercising the only profession they have, for the support of themselves and their families. And minors, too, who have never known
any other country but America, would be precluded from following
the seas when they came to a proper age.
The American Plenipotentiaries cannot assent to a condition involving such results. They are expressly bound, by their instructions, whilst admitting, as a general principle, that neither government shall employ, in its public or private marine, the natural born
subjects or citizens of the other country, to except from its operation all those who shall have been naturalized prior to the treaty.
That exception has been mutually assumed, as one of the foundations
m 142
C71 ]
of the agreement; and the effect of the condÊtôWalluded to, would
necessarily be, that a portion only of the persons thus previously naturalized in the United States, would be embraced by the exception.
The American Plefiipotenliaries beg leave to add, that the condition appears to them unnecessary. According to that which they
propose, every British natural born subject, not included in the lists,
and claiming to be employed as a seaman on board an American vessel, must adduce proofs of his having been naturalized prior to the
exchangêtof ratifications. He must produce ëfther the original cer-
tificate of his naturalization, or an authentic copy, attested as such
by the proper Court. If claiming as a minor, by virtue of his father's naturalization, he must, in addition, produce legal proofs of
the fact. In the cases for which the condition is intended to provide,
proofs may always be given, similar to those which, in every case,
would be admitted as conclusive by the laws of Great Britain, as
well as by those of the United States.
Finally, tbe right reserved to either party of annulling the agreement at will, affords security in this case, as well as in' all others.
This reservation, vvllich had not been contemplated by the Government of the United States, has been acceded to by their Plenipotentiaries, in order to remove every objection to the arrangement, and
to avoid the necessity of entering into details respecting the measures
necessary to carry it into effect. Great Britain being, thereby, effectually secured against every risk, and holding in her own hands'a
complete remedy against deviations from the terms of the compact in
all cases, no necessity appears to exist for an additional security on
this particular point.
No. 9-
Protocol of the seventh Conference between the American and British
Plenipotentiaries, held at Whitehall, on the 13th of October, 1818.
Present—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush,
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Gbulburn.
The British plenipotentiaries acquiesced in the amendment proposed at the preceding conference by the American plenipotentiaries,
in the article respecting captured slaves, except as far as related to
the insertion, in the article, of the name of any particular power.
They" brought forward new articles, (.A, B, C, D, E,) respecting
the fisheries, the boundary, impressment, and maritime points, and
accompanied the articles D, with the annexed memorandum E.   They
agr<-« d to the omission of the article respecting the Mississippi.
It was agreed to meet again-on Monday, the 19th instant.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN. [71]
143
ARTICLE A.
Whereas differences have arisen respecting the liberty claimed by the
United States for the inhabitants thereof to take, dry, and cure fish,
on certain coasts, bays, harbors, and creeks, of his Britannic Majesty's dominions in America: It is agreed between the high contracting
parties, that the inhabitants of the said United States shall have, for
ever, in common with the subjects of his Britannic Majesty, the liberty to take fish of every kind on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland which extends from Cape Ray, to the Ramian islands,
on the Western and northern coast of i\e\$$bundland, from the said
Cape Ray, to the Quinpon islands, on the shores of the Magdalen
islands, and also on the coasts, bays, harbors, and creeks, from Mount
Joly, on the southern coast of Labrador, to and through the streights
of Bell Isle, and thence, northwardly, indefinitely, along the coast,
without prejudice, however, to any of the exclusive rights of the
Hudson's Bay company; and that the American fishermen shall also
have liberty, for ever, to dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays,
harbors, and creeks, of the southern part of the coast of Newfoundland, hereabove described, and of the coast of Labrador; but so soon
as the same, or any portion thereof, shall be settled, it shall not
be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure fish at such portion so
settled, without previous agreement for such purpose with the inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the ground. And the United
States "hereby renounce, for ever, any liberty heretofore enjoined or
claimed by the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry, or cure fish on or
Within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, creeks, or harbors, of his Britannic Majesty's dominions in x\merica, not included
within the above mentioned limits: Provided, however, That the
American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such bays or harbors
for the purpose of shelter, and of repairing damages therein, of purchasing wood, and obtaining water, and for no other purpose whatever. But they, shall be under such restrictions as may be necessary
to prevent their taking» drying, or curing fish therein, or in any other
manner whatever abusing the privileges hereby reserved to them.
article B.
It is agreed that a line, drawn from the most northwestern point of
the Lake of the Woods, along the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, or if the said point shall not be in the forty-ninth parallel o£
north latitude, then, that a line, drawn from the said point, due north
or south, as the case may be, until the said line shall intersect the said
parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection, due
west, along and with the said parallel, shall be the line of demarcation between the territories of his Britannic Majesty and those of
the United States; and that the said line shall form the southern
boundary of the said territories of his Britannic Majesty, and the
northern boundary of the territories of the United States, from the
Lake of the Woods to the Stoney Mountains* But nothing in the pre- 144
[71]
ceding part of this article shall be construed to extend to the northwest coast of America, or to territories belonging to. or claimed by,
either party, en the continent of America westward of the Stoney Moon-
tains; and any such country as may be claimed by either party, westward of the Stoney Mountains, shall, together with its harbors, bays,
and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free
and open to tbe vessels, subjects, or citizens, of the two powers, respectively, for the purposes of trade and commerce. It being well
understood that nothing contained in this article shall be taken to
affect the claims of any other power or state to any part of the said
country, the only object of the two high contracting parties being to-
prevent disputes and differences between themselves.
article C.
His, Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain,
&c. &c. &c. and tbe United States of America, animated with an
equal desire to prevent, by conventional regulations, the recurrence
of inconveniences, which have heretofore arisen from the employment
of the natural born subjects of His Britannic Majesty in the public
or private marine of the United States, and from the employment of
the natural born citizens of the United States in the public or private
marine of His Britannic Majesty, have nominated Plenipotentiaries
to negotiate a convention for this desirable object.
His Majesty tbe King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, &c. &c. &c. has nominated the Right Honorable Frederick John Robinson, &c. &c. &c. and Henry Goulburn, Esquire, &c,
&c, and the President of the United States has nominated Albert
Gallatin, Esquire, Sec. &c. &c. and Richard Rush, Esquire, &c. &c
&c. who, having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due
form, have agreed upon, and signed, the following articles:
article 1. !p|
The high contracting parties engage and bind themselves to adopt,
respectively, without delay, the most effectual measures for excluding,
respectively, from serving either in their public or private marine, the
natural born subjects and the natural born citizens of the other party,
that is to say: His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, for excluding the natural born citizens of the
United States from serving either in the public or private marine of
bis dominions; and the United States, for excluding the natural born
subjects of His Britannic Majesty from serving either in the public
or private marine of the United States; and such measures, when
adopted, shall be immediately communicated by each party to the
other: Provided, always, That nothing contained in this article shall
be understood to apply to any seamen, being natural born subjects of
His Britannic Majesty, or natural born citizens of the United States,
who have been naturalized by the respective laws of either Power,
previous to the signature of the present Convention. [71]
145
.ARTICLE 2.
The high contracting parties engage to deliver, each to the other,
within eighteen months from the ratification of the present Convention, a list, as far as it may be found practicable to obtain it, containing the names and description of the seamen falling within the
said exception, specifying the places of their birth, and the date of
their becoming naturalized. And it is further agreed, that no person*
whose name shall not be included in the said lists, shall be deemed to
fall within the said exceptions.
ARTICLE 3.
It is, however, agreed, that, if one of the high contracting parties
shall, pt any time during the continuance of this Convention, think
fit to noîïïy to the other that it does not insist upon the exclusion of
its natural born subjects, or natural born citizens, from the public or
private marine of the other party, it shall be competent to the said
other party, notwithstanding the engagement set forth in the first
article of this Convention, no longer to exclude the said subjects or
citizens: Provided always, that, whenever the Power which has made
the said notification shall recal the same, its recal shall be imme*
diately communicated to the other contracting party; and, on receipt
of such communication, the Power receiving the same shall, forthwith,
make it known, in the most public and official manner, and shall use
its utmost endeavors to restrain the said subjects or citizens of the
other party from further serving in its public or private marine, and
shall enforce the exclusion of such of the said subjects or citizens of
the other power as may then be in its service, as if no such stipulations as are contained in the preceding part of this article had been
agreed to.
article 4.
It is agreed by the high «contracting parties, that, during the continuance of the present Convention, neither power shall impress or
forcibly Withdraw, or cause to be impres*sed or forcibly withdrawn,
any person or persons from the vessels of the other party, when met
upon the high seas, or upon the narrow seas, on any plea or pretext
whatsoever: Provided always, that nothing contained in this article
shall be construed to impair or affect the rights of either power to
impress, or forcibly withdraw, or cause to be impressed, or forcibly
withdrawn, its natural born subjects or natural born citizens, not
falling within the exceptions mentioned in the preceding articles,
from any vessel being within its ports, or within its ordinary maritime jurisdiction, as acknowledged by the law of nations; and also
provided, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair
or affect tbe established right of search, as authorized in time of war
by the law of nations.
19 146
£71]
artïcle 5.
The high contracting parties have agreed to extend tbe duration of
the present treaty to ten years, and they reserve to themselves to con-
ce; t as to its renewal, at such convenient period*previous to its ex-
pi a tion, as may ensure to their respective subjects or citizens, as
aforesaid, ÎJhè uninterrupted benefit which they expect from its prolusions: Provided, always, that eitfifer power may, if it deem it expedient, "Upon giving six months' previous notice to the other, wholly
abrogate and annul the present treaty.
article 6.
It is agreed that nothing contained in thelpreceding articles shall
be understood to impair or affect the rights and principles on which
the high contracting parties have heretofore acted in respéSt to any
of the matters to which these stipulations refer, except so far as the
Same shall have been modified, restrained, or suspended, by the said
articles. St And whenever tbe present convention shall cease to be in
operation, either by the expiration of the term for which it is enacted,
without any renewal of the same, or by the abrogation thereof by either of the contracting parties, as herein before provided, or (which
God forbid) by any war between the high contracting parties, each
of the said high contracting parties shall stand, with respect to the
other, as to its said rights and principles, as if no such convention had
ever been made.
H.
ARTICLE  (a.)
Whenever one of the high contracting parties shall be at war,
any vessel of the other party, sailing for a port or place belonging to
an eneihy of the party at war, without knowing that the same is
blockaded, maybe turned away from such port or place; but she
shall not be detained on account of such blockade, unless, after such
notice, she shall again attempt to enter. And, in order to determine
What characterises a blockade, it is agreed that that denomination
shall apply only to a port where there is, by the disposition of the
power which blockades it with a naval force, stationary or sufficiently near, an evident danger in entering.
article (6.)
In order to regulate what is in future to be deemed contraband of
war, it is agreed that, under the said denomination shall be comprised all arms and implements, serving for the purposes of war, by
land or by sea, such as cannon, mortars, muskets, pistols, and other E P ]
147
fire arms, petards, bombs, grenades, carcasses^ saucisses, rockets-
carriages for cannon, firelocks,; musket-rests, bandoliers, gunpowder, saltpetre, matchballs, and bullets, helmets or head pieces, cuirasses, swor()s, pikes, halberts, lances, javelins, saddles, bridles, and
other horse furniture, Jiplsters, pouches, belts, and, generally, all
other implements of war; as, also, timber for shipbuilding, tar, or
rosin, copper in sheets, sails, hemp, and cordage, and, generally,
whatever may serve directly to the equipment of vessels, unwrought
iron and planks only excepted; and a|l the above articleCare hereby
declared to be just objects of confiscation, whenever they are attempted to be carried to an enemy.
S|*.JK: -^ft-■••■■■%'■■■■"   (c,)   ■■■'■■'$■'■■-r   >   ■    '■■-■'
In all cases of unfounded detention, or other contravention of t|ie
regtij^tions stipulated by the present treaty, the owners of the vessel
and cargo detained shall be allowed damages proportioned to the
loss,.occasioned thereby, together with the costs and charges of the
trial. Jf All proper measures shall betaken to prevent delays in deciding the cases of ships or cargoes so brought in for adjudication, and
in payment or recovery of any indemnification adjudged or agreed to
be paid to the masters or owners of such ships or cargoes. And
whenever sentence shall be pronounced against any vessel thus can^
tured or detained, or against her cargo or any part thereof, a duly
authenticated copy of all the proceedings in the cause, and of the
said sentence, shall, if required, be delivered, without delay, to the
commanders of the said vessels, or to the owner thereof, or to the
agent of either, on payment of all legal fees and demands for the
same.
The commanders of ships of war and privateers, of the'{belligérant
party, shall, in the searching of the merchant shjns of the other party, conduct themselves according to the acknowledged principles and
rules of the law of nations, and as favorably, moreover, as towards
the mpst friendly power that may remain neuter. The said commanders, their officers, and crews, shall forbear doing any damage to
the subjects or citizens of the other party, or committing any outrage against them, and if they act to the contrary they sjfrall -bèN-
punished, and shall also make satisfaction and reparation for alf.
damages, and the interest thereof, of whatever nature the sa^o1 damages may be.
, ."■■/■■   :   I fil '.'.■"'-.    .".."'      '■'."■'•
The ships of war and . privateers of the two nations, as well as
their prizes, shall be treated, in their respective ports, as those of
the most favored nation.
It shall not be lawful for any power or state, at war with either of
the high contracting parties, or the subjects or citizens of such power
or state, to fit out, or arm, ships of war, or privateers, in the ports of
the other of the high contracting parties, nor to sell what they may 148
f71]
take as prize from the ships or vessels of the high contracting
party with whom such power or state may be at war, in the ports
of the other, nor in any other manner to exchange the same; nor
shall they be allowed to purchase more provisions than shall be necessary for their going to the nearest port of that power or state to
which they belong.
•j£S    I      - •■'' ®; -"': •   ■■  :   ''--''' ~
In the event of a shipwreck happening to any vessel or vessels, belonging to either of the high contracting parties, or their subjects and
citizens, on the coasts of the other, every assistance shall be given
for the protection of the unfortunate persons, and for the preservation
of tbe ship, cargo, and all effects which may be saved, either from on
board the ship, or in any other manner whatever; and the same shall
not be concealed, nor detained, nor damaged, under any pretext whatever. On the contrary, the same shall be preserved and restored to
them, upon a suitable recompense being given to those who shall have
assisted in saving their persons, vessels, or effects.
If at any time a rupture should take place, (which God forbid)
between his Britannic Majesty and the United States, neither the
debts due from individuals of one of the two nations to individuals
of the other, nor shares or moneys which they may have in the public funds, or in the public or private banks, shall be sequestered or
confiscated; and the merchants and others of each of the two nations
residing in the dominions of the other, shall in no case be detained
as prisoners of war; but they shall be permitted to remove, with their
families, effects, and property; each government having, neverthe*-
less, the right, during their remaining in its dominions, to make such
regulations, and to take such precautions, as it may deem necessary
with respect to such persons.
Memorandum E.
Upon the subject of those articles numbered from à to k, which
were brought forward by the American Plenipotentiaries, and annexed to the protocol of the third Conference, the British Plenipotentiaries stated, that, although they were not instructed to bring any
of these topics before the conferences on the part of Great Britain,
and although they consideredat by no means necessary that the two
countries should now come to any conventional arrangement relating
to them, they were, nevertheless, ready to agree to the annexed articles, (a, b, c, d, e,f,) which embraced all the points upon which, in
their judgment, it was expedient that the two countries should enter
into positive stipulations. t 71] »
Slaves.
ARTICLE.
Whereas it was agreed, by the first article of the treaty of ?0hent,
that " All territory, places, and possessions, whatsoever, taken by
either party'from the other, during the war, or which may be taken
after the signing of this treaty, excepting only the islands hereinafter
mentioned, shall be restored without delay, and without causing any
destruction, or carrying away any of the artillery or other public
property, originally captured in the said forts or places, which shall
remain therein upon the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty,
or any slaves or other private property:" And whereas, under the
aforesaid article, the United States claim for their citizens, and as
their private property, the restitution of, or full compensation for, all
slaves who, at the date of the exchange of the ratifications of the
saio^reaty, were in any territory, places, or possessions, whatsoever, oirected by the said treaty to be restored to the United States,
but then still occupied by the British forces, whether such slaves
were, at the date aforesaid, on shore or on board any British vessels
lying in waters within the territory or jurisdiction of the United
States: And whereas differences have arisen whether, by the true intent and meaning of the aforesaid article of the treaty of Ghent, the
United States are entitled to the restitution of, or full compensation
for, all or any slaves, as above described: the high contracting parties do, hereby, agree to refer the said difference to some friendly
sovereign or state, to be named for that purpose; and the high contracting parties further engage to consider the decision of such
friendly sovereign or state, to be final and conclusive on all the mat-
* ters referred.
'.      I    . '    ■     -•' ' No. 10. - it  ir. - '
Amendment to boundary line, proposed by American Plenipotentiaries at
the Eighth Conference.
In lieu of latter part of the article insert:
" And it is agreed, that any such country as may be claimed by
either party on the northwest coast of America, or on the continent
of America westward of the Stoney Mountains, shall, together with
its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within
the same, be free and open, for the term of ten years from the date
of the signature of this treaty, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects
of the two powers; it being well understood, that this agreement is
j not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim, which either of the
two high contracting parties may have to any part of the last mentioned country; nor shall it be taken to affect the claims of any
other power or state to any part of the said country—the only object of the two high contracting parties, in that respect, being to prevent disputes and differences amongst themselves." 150
Et*3
No. il.
Protocol of the Eighth Conference between the American and British
Plenipotentiaries, held at Whitehall, on the 19th of October, 1818.
Present—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Rush, S
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Goulburn. f
The protocols of the two preceding Conferences were agreed to
and signed. ~j|
The several articles upon the fisheries; the boundary; the territory
westward of the Stoney Mountains; the captured slaves; and the renewal of the existing commercial convention, were agreed to.
The American Plenipotentiaries expressed their regret that the
rejection of'several of the amendments which they had offered to the
projet on impressment, and which they deemed essential, compelled
them to decline acceding to that projet. >fe
The great alterations made by the British Plenipotentiaries to the
articles proposed by the American Plenipotentiaries on maritime
rights, also induced the latter to think, that, although a season of
peace appeared the most favorable time for arranging such subjects,
it would be inexpedient to discuss them any further, more especially
as it had never been the intention of the American Plenipotentiaries
to adopt, or propose, any articles upon maritime subjects, without an
adjustment of that on impressment.
The British Plenipotentiaries brought forward an article, as annexed, (F,) upon the subject of the direct intercourse between the
West Indies and the United States of America; but they stated that
they could not consent to sign any article upon that subject, unless the
American Plenipotentiaries were prepared at the same time to accede
to articles which should put the intercourse between Bermuda and
the United States, as well as between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and the United States, upon the footing contemplated in the
article originally offered by the British Government, with respect to
Bermuda; and in that respecting Nova Scotia and New Brunswick,
brought forward at a former conference by the British Plenipotentiaries.
The American Plenipotentiaries declared that their instructions
did not authorize them to sign the West India article, as proposed by
the British Plenipotentiaries, but agreed to take the whole question,
ad referendum, to their Government.
It was agreed to meet on Friday, the 20th instant.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
* FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN.
" '^-     ; •  '# F-    - "   -■     ' ;       0 '
It is agreed that the vessels of the United States shall have liberty to import from *[any of the ports of the United States to which
* The words within the brackets were not inserted, as is supposed by an accidental
omission, in the copy handed in by the British Plenipotentiaries,. [71 ]
151
any fore%n vessëlsare permitted to come, to] any of the ports of
his Britannic Majesty's dominions in the West Indies, which shall
be open to the vessels of any other foreign power or state, tobacco,
pitch, tar, turpentine, staves, headings, shingles, horses, mules, poultry, live stock, and provisions of all sorts, except salted provisions,
of any description* wThetber meat, fish, or butter, such articles being
of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States; and the
said vessels shall also have liberty to import, in the same manner,
any other articles of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of t\0
United States, the importation of which int^f the above-mentioned
ports shall not be entirely prohibited from every other foreign country or place.
The vessels of the United States shall likewise have liberty to export, from any of the aforesaid ports of his Britannic Majesty's dominions in the West Indies, to any of the aforesaid ports of the United
States, rum, molasses, and salt, being of the growth, produce, or
manufacture, of any of his Britannic Majesty's abovementioned dominions în-the West Indies; and the said vessels shall also have liberty
to export, in the same manner, any other articles of the said growth,,
produce, or manufacture, the exportation of which, in foreign vessels,
from the said ports, to any other foreign country, or place, shall not
be entirely prohibited.
British vessels shall in the same manner have liberty to import
from any of the aforesaid ports of his Britannic Majesty's dominions,
to any of the ports of the United States, rum, molasses, and salt, being of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of his Britannic Majesty's
abovementioned dominions in the West Indies; and British vessels
shall also have liberty to import, in the same manner, any other article *nf the said growth, produce, or manufacture, the exportation of
which from the said dominions of his Britannic Majesty to the United States, shall be allowed, as aforesaid, in vessels of the United
States.
British vessels shall likewise have liberty to export, from any of
the aforesaid ports of the United States, to any of the aforesaid ports
of his Britannic Majesty's dominions in the West Indies, tobacco,
pitch, tar, turpentine, staves, headings, shingles, horses, mules,
poultry, live stock, and provisions of all sorts, except salted provisions of any description, whether meat, fish, or butter, such articles^
being of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States;
and the said vessels shall also have liberty to export in the same
manner, every other article, being the growth, produce, or manufacture, of the United States, the importation of which into the said
British ports, from the said United States, shall be allowed in vessels of the United States.
The vessels of either of the two parties, employed in the trade
provided for by this article, shall be admitted in "the ports of the
other, as above mentioned, without paying any other or higher duties, or charges, than those payable ih the same ports by the vessels
of such other party; and they shall have liberty, respectively, to
touch, during the same voyage, at one or more of the abovemen- 152
C71]
tioned ports of the other party, for the purpose of disposing of their
inward, and of taking on board their outward cargoes.
;vJ||jpj other or higher duties shall be paid, on the importation into the
United States, of any of the articles which may be imported therein,
by virtue of this article, when imported in British vessels, than when
imported in vessels of the United States; nor when imported directly
from the above mentioned ports of His Britannic Majesty's dominions, than when imported in a circuitous manner. And no other
or higher duties shall be paid on the importation, into any of the above-
mentioned ports of His BritannieMajesty's dominions, of any of the
articles which may be imported therein, by virtue of this article,
when imported in vessels of the United States, than when imported
in British vessels; nor when imported directly from the United States,
than when imported in a circuitous manner. It is agreed, moreover,
that no other or higher duties shall be charged upon any of the above
. mentioned articles, being, of the growth, produce, or manufacture,
of the two countries, respectively, when imported by virtue ofthis
article, on the one hand, into the said ports of His BritannjfcTMa-
jesty's Dominions, or into the ports of the United States, on the
other, than may be charged on similar articles when imported from
any other foreign country; but His Britannic Majesty reserves to
himself the right to impose higher duties upon all articles so allowred
to be imported into the said British ports from the United States,
than are, or may be chargeable, upon all similar articles, when imported from any of His Majesty's dominions: Provided, that in such
case, such similar articles shall be of the growth, produce, or manufacture of His Majesty's possessions. The same duties shall be
paid, and the same bounties shall be allowed, on the exportation of
any articles; which may, by virtue of this article, be exported, either from the said ports of His Britannic Majesty's dominions, in
the West Indies, to the United States, as from the United States to
the above mentioned ports, whether such exportation shall be in vessels of the United States, or in British vessels
0   No. 12.
Protocol of the ninth Conference between the American and Bntish Plenipotentiaries, held at Whitehall, on the 20th of October, 1818.
Present—Mr. Gallatin,
Mr. Hush,
Mr. Robinson,
Mr. Goulburn.
The protocol of the preceding conference was agreed to and signed.
The Plenipotentiaries then proceeded to sjgn the Convention.
ALBERT GALLATIN,
RICHARD RUSH,
FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON,
HENRY GOULBURN.   CtKtAvÇi*.  'vt^V^
"*    |      *"   7C 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/cdm.bcbooks.1-0308182/manifest

Comment

Related Items