The National Register. — London, England, 1809-05-28 00:00:00

t t fOrw • • ' AL .1E; • :A . a 64;;":* Veln .461 fib • Our fling, tronkititution, anb Latug. SUNDAY, MAY 2S, 1809. No. 74. PRICE 94. POLITICAL DISQUISITION. NUMBER SEVENTY-TWO. NON-RATIFICATION OF THE AMERICAN TREATY. Nothing, for a long period of time, had given more sa tisfaction to the country in general, than the intelligence brought by the last American papers, that the differences between England- and America had been happily settled ; .that the Non-Intercourse Act was suspended. on one side, and the Orders of Council on the other. In proportion to the satisfaction which resulted from this information has been the disappointment at the subsequent official asser tion, that Mr. ERSKINE had proceeded beyond his instruc tions, and that his Alajesty's Ministers would therefore find it necessary to disavow the act. Every thing is thus thrown back into its former confusion: the British mer chants are disappointed, and the American Government exasperated. The present .disappointment, therefore, is not the worst part of this affair : the final settlement is now rendered more distant, and another fertile point of discussion introduced. The refusal to ratify the act of a Plenipotentiary is a ;natter of such high import, and may lead to such eventual mischief, that it is never resorted to but in the most desperate cases. It is necessary,,, indeed, that every Government should have this paramount autho rity over its agents, be.cans!! the folly or corruption of an agent might otherwise commit the safety and dignity of a nation: but a Plenipotentiary would he a mere name, an al:meaning term, if in all ordinary cases his acts might be disavowed. The amicable settlement of the disputes of nations is necessarily mad; facilitated by the personal pre sence and advocacy of its agent and plenipotentiary ; arid many disputes are thus arranged in lint! ne, and prevented from coming to a rupture, which, Ywithout sash facilities of mutual explanation and concession, might terminate in long and sanguinary wars. But it is evident that this sys tem cbuld have no pw:Oile et 4 ::‘o, if the nets of the agents were not to be considered as the acts of the principal. Such are the principles which should regulate the ratifi cation of time Acts of Plenipottiaries. In all ordinary Cases, in all comtnon act., in every thing. v.thich is either contained directly or indirectly in their Commission, or which results from it, the Government is hound both in policy anal faith to adoi.t the acts of its Plenipotentiaries. It is bound in policy, hecause a contrary system of conduct would entirely do away the system of political advocacy, and therein the facility of an amicable nrrangement of the dia'erences of Nations.—And it is hound in faith, I , ecause from the ordinary practice of civilized Nations, and the ordinary acceptance and acknowledgment of the public IaRW of Europe, there is an implied contract between Na tions, that each should be represented by its Plehipo!en tiary, and that the acts of the Agent should be considered as the acts of the Principal.—lt is under this understand ing that the discu4sions are commenced, and that. a Lied of diplomatic bargain•is driven. Can any thing therefore be Yea. 11.-4 Q. LX.XII7. so contrary to good faith as to reduce a party with vho►n we are bargaini►►; to his lowest possible terms; under_tl►e under standing that we, upon our part, are meeting hint with reit soaable concessious,, and then suddenly having loarned how tic- he will go, to break off all further Treaty. The result of these principles is, that it must ,be a very extrtine case which could justify such a refusal to ratify, because in all ordinary cases such a refusal is a breach of faith—and is moreover calculated . to . do infinite mischief, inasmuch as it impairs the ordinary means of political inter course and of amicable settle►nent. The question before us, therefore, is, whether there-is such an extreme case in the circumstances of Mr. ERSICINE'••• whether he has evidently not only exceeded his instrucft Lions, but exceeded;them in such a degree—so palpably, and so excessively, as from the evident necessity of the case to justify and oblige his Government to disavow his individual' act. This question cau only be tried by the production of the correspondence, and the American papers scarcely givo .it at sufficient length to warrant any positive deduction. To confess the- truth, as far as we can judge from the notes contained in these papers, we can really see no? thing which could in any way require such a disavowal. As far as the correspondence goes, it seems neces .sarily to restdt and to accompany the concessions and explanations of America. These notes 'are six in num ber. In the first, Mr. ERSKINE states in substance, .that his BRITANNIC MAJF.STE was willing,to make an honour- , able revaration of the affair for the Chesspeak, and that to make tWs reparation he waited only the passing of certain Acts by the American Congress, which should prp.duce state of equality iu the relations of the two belligerents with respect to the United States. • , _ _ _ The third passage of this Note, as it is paragraphed in the American Papers, is important, inasmuch as it most pro bably contains the point on which Mr. Easaixa is stated by the Government at home to have acted contrary to their instructions.—" Considering the act passed, by the Con gress of the United States, on the Ist. of March,, usually termed the Non-Intercourse Act, as having produced thit required state of equality, I have to submit, &c. that in addition to the prompt disavowal of the unaullo n rise 4 act committed by Admiral BERKLEY, and the recall' of that Officer from an important and hcoottrable command, his MAJEsvir will RESTOS: E retc MEN forcibly taken ovt of the Chesapeak, and make a suitahla provision for die un fortunate sufferers on that occasion." ,There are two points worthy of observitiott in this Note. In the first place, MS. EasitiNEtakes upon himself' tarcon sider the tion-IntereourSe Act ay having estahlisheil - those relations of equality, upon the occurrence of which he was Instructed to make the concessions above.mentioned. 'Chia is the point upon Which' EnsaiNi is cimlsillcred - by that Ifinistry at home as having departed fron his insfrUctioas: The point of fact seems to be, that Mr. ERSKIN iastroer Lions were conceived in the general terms in *llia he 'hat stated tlieiu, and that be took upoalhintSelf to theni to the particular act. It ceitaioly not very clear t a -4 . ~':~ ;!~:.~ J\t