Star. — London, England, 1814-11-19 00:00:00

THE EVENING STAR. LONDON. • SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1814. 11 PRICE OF STOCKS THIS DAY AT TWELVE O'CLOCX. Reduced 63ii-4 per Cent.79i 80—S per Cent. Navy 94 95, Causal: 640 —for account, 6441—Omnium SI dis. Bank Long Aans.llls- 16 ths 18—India Bonds 16s. 17$. pre. Exchequer Bills 26. to ss. prem. AMERICAN PAPERS. We have received complete files of New-York Pa pers to the 23d ult. Their contents are highly in teresting ; but we must be brief in cur general notice, haviv .i..voted a considerable portion of our columns to the'Oilici tl Details respecting the Negociations at Cowilt, to which we refer. In the American Journals the opinions expressed respecting the demands of Great firitain are various. On their first promulga fuin, the general sentiment seemed to be that they were altogether inadmissible ; but on more mature reflection, it is allowed in many of the Journals, that they present bases which admit of discussion, and which m iy be so modified perhaps as.to lead to peace. The John Adams, which carried out these dispatches, reached New•-York-on the sth of October. Mr. DAt,. . tAs, son of the Secretary, was the bcirrer..They were laid before Congress on the 10th, and 10,000 copies were ordered to be printed andoirculated. In several of the States meetings have been held to consider of means for- the general safety, " bide. pendent entirely of any of the measures or proceeding: of a cued, dastardly, bider& Government.". Our limits do no,t permit us to-day t o do mere _than . notice these •,--o:d . ._procings, At Albany, in the State of New:York, „prong • Resolutions. have been adopted ; but in the -Senate of Massachniets, resolutions' have been pas ' 'sett thnt-Deleiedtri; 'tanltti•in ntimbir,* shall meet others be aptoinie4 Gy the otTier New England States, an'd frm a SEAft MI 'to : NG g.gss—not how- ever for the purpose of bartering aw iy the rights and len it9r7 : of the United Stares, .but to provide means tor t.,eir defence and security, inspite of a weak and inescient Administration. But , these, and similar cl.:cuments, wetnust defer it sert3ng till Monday. As to the military operations in Canada, these Pa 'pers present little in addition to the information al ready beftire the Public. The latest accounts from Sackett's Harbour are of the 14th October. Com modore CHAUNCEY'S fleet had returned to the harbour , on the 13th, and were moored head and stern across the harbour, in battle order. Sir JAMES YEO'S fleet, l including the large ship, came out on the llth, and l , returned the next day. The guns on board the Oneida' vire to be taken ashore, and a battery erected with ' them. It was expected (as Sir James reo had now the complete command of the Lake) that the fleet would trot again go out this season, but would remain in tf.eir present situation to defend the place. The Burlingt , ,n Sentinel, of 7th October, annotmces, tt part of Commodore MAcnoticucti's fleet, on L the Ch..mpl tin, passed that town on the preceding but - .day, for winter quartets. the poceeciings in Congress, from its meeting in Sep'ember to the ariival of the dispatches from &,ent, by the Juhn Adams, did not embrace any p )int conne. ted with the great puha cal q uestions, now at isuie between the two countries. Thanks were v.)ted to the N Iva' and Military Officers who com manded against Ow British in Canada, and a motion was carried to enquire into the causes of the Capture of Washington, &c. A proposal has been mad 2, in Congress, fur a Grand National or State Bank, to supply the public exigencies by the issue of raper ! At the date of the Papers now before us, no di ;cos si, la had taken place on the subject of the Gheqt con!erences. A letter from Washingur, 21.2tedgetober 14, statm th4t 'Congress had sat that 'day for .two, hours with closed doors ; atul that afterwards. another eommuni• cation was pubbely,isade fres/2.th* Psieutoorr, with a copy pf the various instructions sent, by him to the Ghent Commissioners. first instruction he de-1 m4n,ls a total abandonment of the right of Impress.. merit tp this he adheres'until March last, when the apprn.iching overthrow of his friend and patron, Bo- ArAnvz, became apparent. In June and August, he gives up all the causes fur which he wensto-waram in ono breath NORFOLK, OCTOBER 7. We learn that two frigates and a bomb-ship have kiined the English shipping at anchor in Lynhaven Bay. OCTOBER 10.—The reports from the Bay side this tnuining, state 30 sail of the enemy's shipping at an chor in Lynhaven Bay—principally ships. BALTIMORE, OCTOBER 19. - - LLTEST FROM THE ENEMY.—An American priso ner (a sailor) who was on board the Dragon, 74, went ashore with a watering party in the Patuxent. on Saturday or Sunday List, where he gave the offi cers the slip, and went over to Herring Bay, from whence he arrived this evening by water. He re porg lying i.i the Patuxent the Dragon, 74., one fri gate, one bomb-ship, two transport-ships, and one scliponer tender,. He says aeinforcements are confi denifiregOectedi:.*T attack will again ,he made. Tistitspress fens A piserlis zepresents, that at five o'clock, p. n yeetiNditykeeven•thips were discovered l i6,4lo.lhFp's 144 ag up. Immediately f k . f r two entails* sa'a irere4trosied below the Island, s:anding the' same Iso.tosd down 01 Bey, tecurned last night and tins morning. They had proceeded .dowti as far as Sandy Point. One of them .saw a barge cap. cure a schooner below Sandy Point last evening. ~• WASHINGTON, OCTOBER 11. MOULT IMPORTANT. • The following Message was yesterday sent to both Houses of Congress by the President of the United States. The sentiments it excited in both Houses were purely national, and almost unanimous : " TO TOL SENATE AND HOUSE Of REPILISENTATIVIS Or TN! UNITED STATES. ig I lay before Congress communications just re ceived from the Plenipotentiaries of the United States, charged with negotiating peace with Great Britain ; chewing the conditions on which alone that Govern ment is willing to put an end to the war. " The instructions to those Plenipotentiaries, dis closing the grounds on which they were authorized to negotiate and conclude a treaty of peace, will be the subject of another communication. (Signed) 44 JAMES MADISON. " Washington, October 10, 1814." DOCUMENTS. COPY OF A LETTER FROM MESSRS. ADAMS, BAYARD, CLAY AND RUSSELL, TO MR. 1410:4R0e, RECRF.TARY OF bTATE, DATED " GIANT; Mit August', 1814. " SIR—We have the honour to inform Ton that the British Commissioners, Lord Gambier, Henry Goul' burn, Esq. and William Adams, Esq. arrived in this city on Saturday evening, the 6th inst. The day after their arrival, Mr. Baker, their Secretary, called upon us to give us notice of the fact, and to propose a meeting, at a certain hour, on the ensuing day.— The place having been agreed upon, we accordingly met, at one o'clock, on Monday, the Bth inst. We enclose, herewith, a copy of the full powers ex hibited by the Briti.h Commissioners at that confe rence ; which was opened on their part by an expres sion of the sincere and earnest desire of their Govern ment, that the negociation might result in a solid peace, honourable to both parties. They, at the Lime time, declared, that no events which had occurred since the first proposal for this negociation, had alter. ed the pacific dispositions of their Government, or varied its views as to the terms upon which it was willing w conclude tie peace. " We answered that we heard these d-clarations with great satisfaction, and that our Government had acceded to the proposal of negociation, with the most sincere desire to put an end to the differences which divided the two countries, and to lay, upon just and liberal grounds, the foundaticn of a peace which, se curing the rights and interests of both nations, should unite them by lasting bonds of amity. • " The British Ccmmissioners then stated the fol. lowing subjects, as those upon which it appeared to them that the discussions would be likely to turn, and on which they were instructed : 1. The forcible seizure of mariners on board of merchant vessels, and in connection with it, the claim 'of his Britannic Majesty to the allegiance of all the native subjects of Great Britain. 66 We understood them to intimate, that the British Government did not propose this point as one which they v ere particularly desirous of discussing ; but that as it had occupied so prominent a place in the dis putes between the two countries, it necessarily at tracted notice, and was considered as a subject which would come ill der discussion. " 2. The Indian allies of Great Britain to be in clude) in the pacification, and a definite boundary to be smtled foi their territory. " The British Commissioners stated, that an ar. rangement upon this point was a sine qua eon; that they were not authorised to conclude a maty of peace. which did not embrace the Indians as allies of his Bri tannic Majesty ; and that the establishment of a de finite boundary of the Indian territory was necessary to secure a permanent peace, not only with the In dians, but also between the United States and Great Britain. " 8- A revision of the boundary line between the • United, States and the adjacent British Colonies. " With respect to this point, they expressly dis 'claimed any. Intention on the part of their Govern ment, to acquire an• increase of territory, and repre sented the proposed revision as intended merely for the purpose.of preventing uncertainty and dispute. " After having stated these three points, as subjects of discussion, the British Commis,ioners added, that before they desired any answer from us, they felt it incumbent upon them to declare, that the British Go vernment did not deny the right of the Americans to the fisheries generally, or in the open seas; but that the privileges, formerly granted by treaty to the United States, of fishing within the limits of the Bri tish jurisdiction, and of landing and drying fish on the shores of the Britisb territories, would not be re. newed without an equivalent. " The extent of what was consilered by them as waters peculiarly British, was not stated. From the manner in which they brought this subject into view, they seemed to wish us to understand that they were not anxious that it should be discussed, and that they only intended to give us notice that these privileges had ceased to exist, and would not be again granted without an equivalent, nor unless we thought proper to provide expressly in the treaty of peace for their renewal. 66 The British Commissioners having stated, that these were all the std)jects which they intended to bring. forward or to suggest, requested to be inform ed, whether we were instructed to enter into negoeia tiqn oa these several points ? and, whether there was any amongst these which we tbousht it unnecessary `' . 11 4 to bring into the negotiation ? n they desired us to state,, on our part, such other subjects as we might intend to propose for discussion in the course of the negoSietion. The meeting wasthen adjourned to thenest day, in order to afford us the opportunity of consultation among ourselves, b:tfore we gave an anse er. " In the course of the evening of the same day, we received your letters of the 25th and 27th of June. " There could be no hesitation, on our part, in in forming the British Commissioners, that we were not instructed on the subjects of Indian pacification or boundary, and of fisheries. Nor did it seem probable, although neither of these points had been stated with sufficient precision in that first verbal conference, that they could be admitted in any shape. We did not wish, however, to prejudge the result, or by any hasty proceeding abruptly to break off the negotia tion. It was not impossible that, on the subject of the Indians, the British Government had received er roneous impressions from the traders in Canada, which our representations might remove : and it ap peared, at all events, important to ascertain distinctly the precise intentions of Great Britain on both points. We, therefore, thought it advisable to invite the Bri tish Commissioners to a general conversation on all the points : stating to them, at the same time, our want of instructions on two of them, and holding out no expectation of the prohahility of our agreeing to any article respecting them. " At oirr meeting 'on WC etisuitig day eve informed the British CominissioneisYttat upon the first and • f , third points proposed by them we were provided with instructions, and we presented as further subjects con sidered by out Government aa . suit:ll4e foediscussic.n. Ist. A 'definition or biockatie ; and as far as might be mutuelly agreed of ether Leutrel and belli gerent rights. " 2d. Cleirns of indemnity in c Itain cases of cap ture arid Eeitur.... We then :::tted that 1112 two subjects, Ist of In dian pacific ttioa, Ar.d boundary. and 2d of fisheries, were not etishiacci hy our instructions. •4 We observe:l,ora as these points had not been heretief: . .re the grounds of any controversy between the Government of Great Bi itain and that of the United States, and had not been alluded to by Lord Castlereagh, in his letter proposing the negotiation, it could not be expected that they should have been anticipated and nude the subject of instructions by our Governniest : that it was natural to b. supposed that our instructions were confined to those subjects upon which differences between the two countries were known to"exist ; and that the. proposition to de tine, in a Treaty betmeen the United States and Great Britain, the boundary of the Indian possessions 'within our territories, was new and without example. 1"--No such provisions had been inserted in the treaty peace in 178, nor in any other treaty between the two countries—no such provision had, to our know ledge, ever been inserted in any treaty made by Great Britain or any other European power in relation to the same description of people, existing under like circumstances. We would say, however, that it would not be doubted, that peace with the Indians would certainly follow a peace with Gteat Britain—that we had in formation that Commissioners had already been ap pointed to treat with them; that a treaty to that ef• sect mi B ht, perhaps, have been already concluded— and that the United States having no interest, nor any motive, to continue a separate war against the In dians, there could never be a moment when our Go vernment would not be disposed to make peace with them. G , We then expressed our wish to receive from the British Commissioners a statement of the views and objects of Great Britain upon all the points, and our willingness to discuss them all, in order that, even if ' no arrangement should be agfeed on, upon the points ; not included in our instructions, the Government of the United States might be possessed of the entire and precise intentions of that of Gre'at Britain, re specting these points, and that the British Govern ment might be fully informed of the objections on the part of the United thaws to any such arrangement. In answer to our remark, that these points had not been alluded to by Lord Castlereagh, in his letter' roposing the negotiation, it was said that it could not be expected that in a letter, merely intended to ' p invite a negotiation, he should enumerate the topics of discussion, or state the pretensions of his Govern•' ment, since these would depend upon ulterior events, and might arise out of a subsequent state of things. In reply to our observation, that the proposed stipulation of an Indian boundary was without exam ple in the practice of European nations, it was asserted, that the Indians must in some sort be considered as an independent people, since treaties were made with them, bosh by Great Britain and by the United States; upon which we pointed out the obvious and impor tent difference between the treaties we might make with Indians, living in our territory, and such a treaty as was proposed to be made, respecting them, with a foreign power, who had solemnly acknowledged the territory on which they resided to be part of the United States. 46 We were then asked by the British Commis; sioners whether, in case they should enter further upon the discussion of the several points which had been stated we could expect that it would terminate by some provisional arrangement on the points on which we had no instructions, particularly on that respecting the Indians, which arrangement woOd be subiect ft the ratification of our G )vernment ? " We answered, that before the subjects were dis. timely ttederstood• and the objects in view more pre. cisely disclosed, we could not decide whether it would be possible to form any satisfactory article on the subject ; nor pledge ourselves as to the exercise of a discretion under our powers, even with respect to a provisional agreement. We added, that as we should deeply deplore a rupture of the negotiation on any point, it was our anxious desire to employ all piesee e means to avert an event so serious in its consequences; and that we had not been without hopes that a di:. cussion might correct the effect of any ertoneout formation which the British Government might }nee received on the subject, which they had proposes! a preliminary basis. 46 We took this opportunity to :Tithe:, that L.-, nation observed a policy more liberal and herwatet towards the Indians than that pursued by the United States ; that out object had been, by all practicable means, to introduce civilizstiolt amongst them ; reef their poves,ions were secured to them by well defined boundaries ; that their persons, lends, end other pro. petty, were now more effectenlly protected against violence or freuds from any quarter, than they had beet under any former Government ; that evett ottt citizens were not ?Hewed to purchase their hinds that when they gave up their title to any pnrtiOn-set their country to the United St: tee, it was by Veil tary treaty with our Government, who gave therre it satisfactory equivalent ; and that through thei,e means the United States had succeeded in preserving, sirai the Treaty of Grenville of 1795, an sinintenueteil peace of IC; years, with all theindiati tribes—a period of tranqtti:lity mach longer than they were tocileitO have enjiyed heretofore. - 7 ` • • • :.1.1 si It was then expressly stated on onr:pett;: the proposition respecting the Indians Irts:lierdli tinctly understo We asked, whethee ihe 011066: tion, and the settlement of a boundary fn. therm Were both made a tine qua non P Which as answered in the affirmative. The question was then asked the British Commissioners, whether the proposed Indien boundary was intended to preclude the Unite !Statei from the right of purchasing by trusty from the In dians, without the consent of Great Bsitaih, lands IY. ins beyond that boundary ? And as a restriction upon the Indians from selling, by amicable treaties, lands to the United States, as had been hitherto practised? 41 To this question, it was first answered by one of the Commissioners, that the Indians would not be restricted from selling their lands, but Oat t‘ le United States would be restricted from purchasing them ; and on reflection, another of the Commis sioners stated, that it was intended that the Indian territories should be a barrier betkeen the Britt* dominions and those of the United States ; that Ix& Great Britain and the United States should be re stricted from purchasing their lands ; bet that the Indians m ght sell them to a third party. " The proposition respecting Indian boundary, thus explained, and connected with the right of so t vereignty ascribed to the Indians over the country, amounted to nothing less than a demand •of the ab solute cession of the rights both of sovereignty and of soil. We cannot abstain from remarking to you, that the subject (of Indian boundary) was indistinctly stated when first proposed, and that the explanations were at first obscure and always given with Mut tante. And it was declared from the first moment, to be a rine qua. nen, rendering any discussion un profitable until it was admitted as a basis. Knowing that we had no power to cede to the Indians any part of our territory, we thought it unnecessary to ask, what probably would not have been answered till the principle was admitted, where the line of demarka tion of the Indian country was proposed to be established ? ig The British Commissionerh after having repeat ed that their instructions on the subject of the Indians were peremptory, stated, that unless we could give some assurance, that our powers would allow us to make at least a provisional arrangement on the sub ject, any further discussion would be fruitless, and that they must consult their own Government on this state of things. They proposed accordingly a suspen sion of the conferences, until they should have re .ceiveil an answer, it being understood that each party might call a meeting whenever they had any propo sition to submit. They dispatched a special messen ger the same evening, and we are now waiting for the result. " Before the proposed adjournment took place, it was agreed, that there should be a protocol of the conferences ; that a statement should for that purpo9e be drawn up by each party, and that we should meet the nest day to compare the statements. a We accordingly met again on Wednesday the 10th inst. and ultimately agreed upon what ahou:d constitute the protocol of the conferences. A copy of this instrument we have the honour to transmit with this dispatch ; and we also enclose a copy of the state ment originally drawn up on our part, for the put pose of making known to you the passages to which the British Commissioners objected, 4 , Their objection to sc.nre of the passages was, that they appeared to be argumentative, andthat.tbe ob• ject of the protocol was to contain a mere statement of facts. They, however, objected to the. inbati3o of the answer which they had itimen,to.oua question respecting the effect of the proposed Indian b.un.