The Statesman. — London, England, 1810-01-03 00:00:00

t i I the.Utsited "haters would at once bide with that power against the Whew which might continue its .1•11 ;" "cry opinion which he entertained re. speeting tee kst itsterests of his eountr , led him to wish that a good underst suiting shordil take plac e butweeti Great Britain and the Visited States, and that lie thought that the obvious advantages as [skit would thereby revolt to'. built coutitrias, were a sufficient pledge of the sine. city of his lett titwaits. These observations. sir, I beg leave to remark, s' were made to me by Mr. Mattison, about a month after the itstalligence hail been received in this country of the rejection by his Alaj..aty 's Govern meta of the cru i .osition made through Mr. Pink. hey 11 the President, foe• aim removal of the Emb 1140 a. respected Great upon con. ditioa that the Orders in Coasted should be with. drawn as resit( west the United St.oes ; -and his at w intents were, AS I iunccrved, eapres.red to me, ht order that 1 *night convey teem to his Majesty's GUlt.rioni, tit, so 41 to lead to 4 reconsideration of tl e ;imposition above meutioucd , u ith a v ie w t o the at!jti.tmelit of the 'Hifi:retires upon th tt subject het* veil the respee tire codintlies. But I never considered that 11 r. Madison meant that the Go. 'eminent of the United Status would Wedge them selves beyond the proposition respeetiug the Ent. bar4o, as above stated—b-cause that was the ex. tent of the power of the President by the Consti tutiois of the Coiled Slat's. I understood, very distinctly, that the observa.. Cons of the Secretary of State were intended to convey all opinion as to what ought and would be the course pursued by the United States, iii the event of his Majesty's Orders iu Council being withdrawn. In these sentiments and opinions, you con cerred, as I collected from the _tenor of several swayers flint's which I held with you at that period. With respect to the second point, as stated in your letter to be contained in a Dispatch from Mr. Canning," Ibe leave to offer the following explanation : lu the course of a private interview I had with Mr. Gallatin (the Secretary of the Treasury), he intimated that the non-intercourse law which was then likely to be passed by the Congress, might be considered as removing two very important grounds of difference with Great Britain, viz. the non-impurlation act, as applicable to her alone, and 4: , u the President's pro( Lunation, whereby the ships of Great Britain were excluded from the ports of the United States, while those' of France %%ere permitted to enter—but that by the non-intercourse law, both powers were placed ua the same touting. Honk] not pretend to say that this measure had been taken from any motives of concussion to Great Britain ; but as, in fact, those cuitserpriaaces fol lowed, he conceived they might - betlionsidered as removing the two great obstacle+ to sitanicilirtion. • Ile adverted also to tl.e probability of an .ail justment of atwitter ion:•ortatit piriiit in dispute be. ' tweet' the two countries, as lirtaid lie knew that it was intruded by the United States to abandon the attempt to carry on 4 trade with the culue.its of belligerents in time - of war, which was nut allowed in time of peace, and to trust to the ben t ; permitted by the French to carry on such trade in peace, so as to entitle them to a continu ance of it in time of oar. Agit maybe very material to ascertain what" trade with the colonies of belligerents" was,in toy concep tion, meant by Nlr.Gallatin,as intended to be abase. dotted by the United States,' feel no hesitation in de elatinz, that I supposed he alluded to the trade from the colonies of belligerents direct to their another country, or to the ports of other beliigerents, be. cause the right to such trade hail been the point in dispute ; whereas, the right to carry on a trade front the colonies of b Iligerents to the United States had nuwer been called in (position, and had been (-vete:fused by his Nlajescy's Supreme Court of Admiralty ; aid the tern., even upon which such colutual produce might be re-expurted from the United States had been formally arranged in a treaty biped in Loudon by the Ministers Plenipn. tentiary of both countries, which was not indeed ratified by the President of the United States; but was nut übj, cted to as to that article of it . which settled the terms upon which such trade was to be permitted. . Such *as the substance, Sir, of the unofficial conversations which I had held with Mr. MadiSon, Mr. Gallatin, and yourself, which I did not con. seder or represent to his Majesty's Goveitiment as intended with any other view than to endeavour to bring about the repeal of the Orders in Council, by sheaving that many of the obstacles which had stood iu the way of sass amicable adjustment of the differences between the two countries werealready removed, and that a faint prospect existed of set tling what remained; since the limited States bad ethttrtted renetihina fon To resist nit 'unjust ag - gressiuns upon her neutral rights, which was ail that Great Britain had ever rcq'.ired ; but I certainly never received any assurances from the American I government that they would pledge titentselves to adopt the conditions specified in 11r. Canning's in. struclions as preliminaries ; nor did I ever hold out such an expectation to his Nlrjosty's Govern ment, having always stated to them that iu the event of his Majesty's thinking it just or expedi. cut to cause hie Orders in Council to be with. i drawn, that the President would take off the ern -1 bargo as respected England, leaving it in opera tion aaaiast France the powers which adopted," or acted under her decrees, according to the an- Thority which was vested in him at that time by =he Congrea; of the United States, and that there was every reason to expect that a satisfactory ar ratigement might he made upon the points of the coluuial trade which had been so lung in dispute between the two countries. As to the third condition referred to by yon, 'peel:lei in Mr. Canning's insti-ectionc, have only to remark, that I never held any conversation with the Members of the Government of the United States, relative to it, until my late nego ciation —or had ever mentioned the subject to his Majesty's Gevernment—it having, f o r th e f irs (' time, b:•en pres:•nted to uty consideration in Mr. Canning's dispatch to um of Bit of January, THE STATES iu which.that idea is suggested, and•is stated to have been assented to by Mr. Pinkney.. It would belinasailiotc at the present moment to enter upon an raamirsa•ion of the . 44 prettits:oits net forth if: Mr. Caistain4's letter of instructiotii." w 11 . 164 you ars pleased to terns " extraordi nary,'.' . . • coocitier it, however, to be my .duty to de , 4 laic that, during my negociation with you which led to the conclusion of AIL! provisional agreemwnt, I found no reason to. believe that any difficulties not I:! occur in the accomplishment of the two former conditions, as far as it Was in the power or the Pre+idont of the United Stites to accede to the first, and consistently with the explain:lion whi7!:l L have before given of the second point. On the contrdry, I received assurances through you, that the President would comply (as f.lr as it was in his ;Hitter) pith the first condition, and that there cool Ibe nu doubt that the C.)11;411:f3 ()it'd think it incumbent upon them to assert the rights of the United States against such pm ers as should adopt . or act finder the decrees of France as soon as their actual cunduet or deternrinitions upon that Sub ject could be ascertained ; hot that, iii thu mean time, the Pr,:sident had not Vie, power, and could nut undertake to pledgehimself in the formal man ner required to that cifect. I rcccivel also assurances from you that no doubt could be reasonably entertained that a satis factory arrangement might be made in a treaty upon the subject tit the second condition mentioned ;n Mr. Canning's ipstructions, according to my explanation of i: in the foregoing part of this let. ter, but that it necessarily would form an article of a treaty in hich the various pretensions of the two countries should be stinted. the third conditiuti, you certainly very distinct. ly informed the could not be, recognized by the l'resalent ; but you added what had great weight in my mind, that you aid not see why any great importance should be attached to such a recogni tion ; because it would be impossible that a citizen of the United States could prefer a complaint to his Gov..rnment on account of the capture of his yes ad while engavd in a trade absolutely interdicted by the laws of his country. Under these circumstances, therefore, finding that I could nut obtain the recognitions specified in Mr. Canning's dispatch of the 231 t.f January formed but one part of I.is instructions to me) in the formal manlier required, I considered that it would be in vain to lay before the Govern_ ment a l the United States the dispatch in question, ill WA . was at libertg to have done in extenso, had I. thought proper. But as I had such strung grounds for believing that the object of his Ma josty's Government could be attained, though in' a different manner, aad the spirit, at least, of my several letters of instructions be fully complied with, I kit a thorough conviction upon my mind that I should be acting in conformity with his Maj..sly's wishes ; and, accordingly, concluded the late provisional agreement on his Majesty's be half with the Government of the United States. disavowal by his Majes•y is a painful proof to me, that I had formed an erroneous judgment 4;f hi. iilaj:•sty's vieus ana the intention of tny instructions; and I have most severely to lament, that au act of mine (though uninttu.tinnally ) situ:►ld produce any embarrassments in the relations• belt% cot the two countries. It is a great consolation tome, however, to per ceive that measures have been adopted by both Governments to prevent any losses, and to obviate any incoi.veniencies which might have arisen to the citizens or subjects of either country from a re liance un the fulfilment of that provisional agree ment; and I cannot bat, cherish a hope, that a complete and cordial understant:ing between the two countries may be effected. I beg leave to add, that it would have given me great i happiness to have contribute(' to so desirable an ()Vet, and to off :r you the assurances of the great respect and high consideration with which 1 remain, Sir, your most obedient humble servant, D. M. ERS6INE. The Hun. R. Smith, &c. &c. &C. 71 *- TIIE SECEETARY TREASURT kb. ERININ inV I : 11R. aOsington, August 15,.1809. SIR—I do not believe, that in the eintversationS we have had respecting the practicability of an ad-. justment of the differences between the United States and Great Britain, we ever have misunder stood one another. Yet, as from 31r. Canning's. instructions lately published by your Government, • it untold seem that some opinions are ascribed to several 3lembers of this Administration, which they did not entertain, it appears o necessary to as certain ulietherouany point a misapprchensiou can have taken place, , 1 e ill forbear. Miking any observations on what in the _inWeelious..is. wUul. the. tkirtLeunditiois e since it is not asserted that that inadmissible prop°. sition was suggested at Washington. . . The points embraced in Mr. Canning's,, first propositiosi formed the principal topic of our conversations, relative to a revocation of the Orslers in Council. Yet in the manner in which that proposition is expressed, it goes fur. ther than had been suggested by the Members of the Administratiun. kis sufficiently evident froin the proceedings of Congress, both previous and subsequent to the unratified agreement of -tspril last, that the United States intended to continue the rtitriction on commercial intercourse with France, whilst such of her decrees as violated our neutral rights continued in force, and to remove those restrictions in relation to Great Britain, *in the event of a revocation of the Orders in Council. But that.state of things, so far as it related to France, was to result from our own laws, known cc anticipated by your Government, • when they authorized an arrangement ; and it was not proposed by us that the continuance of the non intercourse u ith France should he made a con dition of that arrangement. IVhilst on that sub. ject, 1, will add an observation, though perhaps i Hut iininediately connected with the object of this l letter. , I think that the Object of that propusi. SO far as it ugreed with your previous under. onling of the iatentions of this .Government, has been sabstautiaity carried into OU 0,141* :'rs~ • . r part. It is true that your Government might, at the date of the instructions, have expected from the-incipient proceedings of Congress, that Idol._ land would be embraced by the restriet:ve laws of the United States. Nut only, however, was the omission nominal, since A merit an vessels were at the time, by the decrees of that country, refused admission into its ports ; but under the same con struction of our laws by which the commercial in. tercourse with Holland was permitted, that with Portugal was also considered as legal on the event of that country being occupied by British troops in the name of the Prince Regent. It is therefore principally a; respects the second condition which relates to the colonial trade, that erroneous inferences might be drawn from the ex , pressions used in Mr. Canning's instructions. Al. though the subject must have been mentioned here incidentally; and only in a transient manner, as it is nue to which I had paid particular attention, and on which my opinion had never varied, I think that I can state Kith precision in what view I have al ways considered it, and must have alluded to it. • 1. I never could have given countenance to an opinion that the United States would agree, or that it would be proper to make any arrangemAtt whatever respecting the colonial trade, a condi tion of the revocation of the Orders in , Council. The two subjects were altogether unconnected, and I am confident that such a proposition was never suggested either by you, or by any member of this Administration. Such an arrangemente mild be effected - only by treaty ;. and it is with a considerable degree of sorprize that I see. your go vernment now asking resistance to the French de crees, but the abandonment of a 'branch of our commerce, as the price of the revocation of the Orders in Council. This seems to give a new character to a measure which had heretofore been represented as an act, of retaliation reluctantly adopted, and had been defended solely on the ground of a supposed aequiesciince on the part of the United States in the injurious decrees of ano ther nation. • 2. In the event of a treaty embracing all the points in dispute, and particularly that of •im pressments, without, which, I trust, no treaty will ever take place, it was my opinion, and I may cer tainly have expressed it, that if the other subjects of difference were arranged, that respecting the colonial trade would be easily adjusted. 1 had considered the principles recognized 'in a former correspondence between Lord Ilawkesbury and Mr. King, on the subject of the colonial trade.; and subsequently again adopted in the treaty negoci red by Messrs. Monroe and Pinknvv, as a general ba sis agreed on ander different Administrations, by torah Gover►►ments, from which neither could now recede, and susceptible only of modification as to details. The Instructions to our Ministers in London on that subject had also been Pub ;idled, and were known to your Government. I therefore believed that the United States, in the tvent of a treaty, would still be dispased to wave fur the present, in the manner and on the terms contemplated by those instructions, their. right to that branch, and to that branch only, of, the co— lonial trade, known by the name of direct trade, th is to say, the trade carried directly froM bel ligerent colonies to the belligerrats in 'Europe, w hen that trade was not permanently, in peace as in war, permitted by the laws of the .country to which those colonies belonged. The right to a trade between such colonies and 'the United Slates generally, and to that in colonial arti cles between the United States and other coun tries, never can or will, in my ()pillion, be aban. Boned, or. its exercise be suspended by this Go vernment. On the contatry ) it is solely in Order, to secure, by an express treaty stipula lation, that trade against the danger o 1 interrup. don, and thus by a mutual spirit of accu•tunnda. Lion to avoid collisions, that the abandonment of the direct branch cam ever be assented to. Permit me therefore to request, t!. it roll will Worn) me, whether you understood me un those two points, as I certainly meant to be understood, namely, that the relinlnishnomt, (hiring the pre sent war, 'of what is called the direct trade, was alone contemplated; and that no arrangement on that subject was st.:gested as a condition of the revocation of the Orders iu Council. I him: the honour to be, with the highest re svect and considondi Sit:, your obedient ser, 'rant, • (sivlsl) ALBERT CIALLATIN. lion. D. M. Erskine, Minister Plenipotentiary, dtee.dcr., SIR. ERMINE TO TEE SECRETARY OF TOE TREA. BURY. Washington, August 15, 1809. Sta—l have tbe . honour to acknowledge the. re ceipt of .yowi letter of the 13th inst. in which you .hare Lean. plomykto -say, --tlnst although yon 'ado not believe. that is the coott4sations we I, & e had respecting the prafsticahility of an adjustment of thOgonatcroKlniegitthe United States and Great Britain', we ever itive tittisiodersiood one another. Yet, as fru:n Mr.' Canailles instructions, lately published by my Cavernmcht, it would seetngthat some opinions are est:: ibed to several Members of this Administration, which they did not entertain, it appears necessary to ascertain wWher,•ott any point, a inisappreheosiuo Can have 'taken place." In answer to your bigotries, I have great satis., faction in aisiiriligy on, .that there;appeara t 6: have been no inisittiderstanding respecting trio sub.. stance or mewing of the conversations which passel . between us, as stated in Mr- Cattning's instructions' alluded to. After the most Careful perusal of rim' • state. meat of the purport of our conv e rsations, I eau., not discover auy material difference from the re. presentation which I have matleLsapint that subjeet: to the Secretary of State {Mr. .Robert Smi th ), in 1 toy letter to him of the I . lloltstatit, to which will therefore beg leave. to rerer you, as l h therein detailed the substance of the conversation according to my rec,ollectioti of it ; a !licit is ini every respect essentially the same as that which you beem to havitentertaineil. . During the. c'otiversatioo which we held ' respect. ) ing the mit ticabilily of an ritica%le adjustment of the die' aces between the two couutriet, whoa I • - reZquishment by the tinited - States daring the present war, of what is called the colonial trades was suggested by yoo, I conceived that you meant (as you have stated) " the trade carried directly from•belligereut colonies to the belligerents in Euz rope, when that trade was not pernMitently peace as in war, permitted by the laws of thu country to which those colonies belonged.'► I never supposed that you intended to conve♦ an opinion that the Government of the United Stites wonld nytke any arrangements respecting the colonial trade as a condition of the revocation of the Orders in Council, the two subjects being altogether unconnected ; nor have I ever repro: sewed to hi s. m a j es ty' s Governments that suctt preliminary pledges would be given. With sentiments of the highest respect, I hare the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient hum: ble Scrrant, _ (Sizned) The /lon. Albert tiallniin s .te. U. M. ERSKINL. Fnom THE LONDON GdZE7'TE,' Jar. q. !Mikhail, December 29, 1809. The Lori! Chancellor has appointed *Nieholai Tohub Tresidder, of Falmouth, in the County o f Cornwall, Goa. to he it Master Ektraordittaiy iu the High Court of Ufa:leery. an. '2, 1810. His Majesty has been pleased to appoint Lieu. tenant-CW(3nd George Vigoureuir, of the 2d Royal Veteran liattalion, to be Lieutenant ; Governor of the Scilly Islands, vice Major-General deceaml. Arlairtlig-Q/flee, Jan. 2. Vice-Adiniral Camph,ll has transmitted to John %Vilma') Croker, Esq. a letter he had received from Captain Maxwell, of his Majesty's sloop the Royalist. giving an account of his having, on the 31st of December, captured a French lugger privateeT, called Le Francois, of fourteen guns and 'sixty men, out from Boulogne three days, without having made any'caphre. The Royalist hag also retaken two English res. ads which had been taken by the enemy. MILITARY I'ItOSIOTIONS. Ordnance-Office, Dec. 10, 18.19. Artillery German Le,,,,itm. Second Captain Bernhard Call'arina .1 be Captain, vice Tie deceased. Dated Nov. Rl, 1809. I.jeuten ott Charier Meer to "he Second Captain, with temporary rank, vice Butt...natal, promoted. Dated Nov. :11, 1809. Second Liceitenant Theodore Speckrnatin to he First Lieute nant, vice Me, er, pro:noted. Dated a above. Gentlenian Cadet - De Scharnhocd to be Second Lieu tenant, vice 3litlmann, promoted. Dated Nov. it, Gentleman Cadet Bernard Rief kagef to he Second Licata= fruit, vice Sdeckmalin, promote.l. Died Noy. 23, MD. Fi wt Lietttenint and Arlintant ieorge Wieria to be Secoot Cap tont. Dated Nov. :23, 164. • Commission in the RoyarPcnthroke Regiment of Fuzileeri illiatia,signed by the Lord Litutenant. John Mien Itidgwa2, , , Gem. to be Second Licutioant, vice Japies, promoted. Dated Auc..st 1809. ERRATUM hi the Gazette of the 19th ultim,. Royal (7hefitire ilitia. For Job Watson Boyle, Geol. to be Ensign. Dated Dee. Y, I t•O9, • head Job Watson Royle, Gem. to be Ensign. Dated Dee. 2, 1.304 BANKIWPTS. W. Kenwnrthy, Pendleton, Loncashire, jo:ner, to sarreo. dcr Feb. 3,5, 13. at the Co.nnicrelal amt , -Manchester. At torney, Mr. Ilurd,•Teitipl-, London. W. Fuiler.• Brandon, Norfolk, inoney-Ferivener, Jan. 6, 13. Feb. 13, at Ittoriu!y, Mr. Brews bri ke, Common Pleas °lce, littler Temple. It. Roper, Hoitad.ditch, timb,T-Inerrilainaan. 5, 49, Feb. 13, at Guildhall, London. A ttorine., Alessr.t. and AlR son. New Bridge-street, or,. 'l'. Ilarriagton, Crown-treet, true::--taker. Jan 6, 13, Feb. 13, at Guil.thall. Atteirnef, ;11r. ilrooke, St. Al baa-,..areet, • .1. like:icon. I to4blon. 00'w/li:tire. miller, Jnn. 12,19.: Feb: 13, ht the IS' hiw Litm Luu, BatMory. Attoruiee, Meeirn. A plin, Banbury. . J. W. Benson, Holbeach. tiacoloshire, surgeon, Jan. 5, 12, Feb. .LS. at the Rose and Crown 1 tin, ishech St. Peter, Ctunbridtteshire. Atturnies, ItCessrs. Briggs, Lheltctt, aua Fiber, Gray's-inn, !motion. 'l'. 'fit) kw. Edgeware-ruad, carpenter, Jan. 6, 24. Feb. 19, ut Guildhall. Acurnry, Mr. C. ljaaittoti, Berwick street, Soho. T. o.ltandler, Bohn ill-green, grease-melter. Jan. 6, 13, Feb. 13, at Guildhall. Attorotey, Mr. Gillman, 814114111- rov. Wartlmam, Holton, Yorkshire, calico-manufieturer, Jan. 22, 23, Feb. 13, at the Devonglire Arms, li i4hley s York:hire. A ttornies, Messrs. Caton and Brumell, Alders gate-street, Loudoo. K. Longridge and G. Priaje, Pains - her, Durham, colliery undertakers, Jan. 15,23, Felt. 13, at 1::e tilm!irspear Tavern, Newcastle-upnn-Tyne. Atturnies, Aiessrs. Bell zunt Brudrick. Bow-lane, London . , J. Wallis, Fieet-street, jeweller, San. (7. 11, Feb. 14, at Guildhall. Atturuies, Messrs. Junes mad liquid, Royal Exchange. • DIVIDENDS. . Jan. 6. T. H. Lloyd, Poultry, slate-merebant.—Jaa. T. Ward, 0 kford-w.ar:wt, ,tallow-chaudler.—Feb. 3. M. B. t eher. 140ihbufy, merchaut.—Feb.. 3101110.11, 110 yr• Coffee-house, insurance.figotitre—Feb. 3. J. Parsons, sen. nod jun. Ludgate-bill,..haaksellits.—Feb. W. A.T. Bowles, and . 1. Williatns, Kent-s:reet, Southwark, grocers.—Jan. 12. (.4. Sly, Waneead, Es-ex, slack-broker.—Jaa. 31 W. Beek, Bishopsgaie-:arset, dealer.—Feb. 3. W. aod J. Cult , . kin, Covenir., grocers.—Feb. 3. T. Corlett, Friday-s,reet, Choopside Warelimisenuto.—Feb. 3. G. Radon, Bernincd• •sey-strert,lvitthordre,ser. Feb. 3. J. Merrick and S.Hne, kin's, ninchants.—Feb. 3. W. Gore, Aldga4, Ilanciiestatc renousemin.-L Feb. '24. S. T. Ciistins, - shops4at t, Klemm.—Marco R. A. Aidersou and D. Rolm Coleman-street, inercbants.—Jap. 27. 11. Ba:- iarbe ing's Lym:. Norfolk,- halierdasher.—Jan. 13. NV. 'Champs Hi, Waudfortly al) izaecary.—Jan. 23. J. G. H. 11e; - ehayieli, Sherinwir-latwonerrhain.—J an. 2.1. Chris. A. Esciika s . , Soeitnrce•lane, nierckunt.—Jan. '23. W. Dean, KenifiXstreet, Itusseli-sqoar , , shop-keeper.—Jan. 53. •?.• Parnhatv, :ILurrry. surgeon.—Jan. 26. G. Jep , c., Pre:eot, Lancashire, grocer.—Marcu 3. J. Price, Finshur)- rsqnare, merchant.—Mareb '2l. R. Bafiks. Elthaus, Kear, victualler.—Jan. 27. W. Waller,. Exeter, ironmonger:— Ma.rch 3. 11. Jacksan, Mincing-lane, inercialat.—March 3. E. Crean Margaret- striver, Cayendisli-squkre, carperter.— J,):27., (1. Biker, City-rojd, coach-maker. —Jan.l7. • VVilsti - n, Beak... Wag, Gulden-square, Men'smieicer. • CERTIFICATES--Jaa.29. .1. Wat kilts, Chepstow, Monmouthshire, draper.-3.6mitl)r Kiinbeltori, Huntingdonshire ' dealer.-- J . Rigby, Wigan,. taarashire, currier,—J. P. Lucas, Birmingham, auctioneer.. —iV. 13ooin, Alancliester,cotton-spinner.—J. Adams, Wal sall, Stattu,dshire, factor.—lt. Ogden, Botany, near Ashton ! uutlcr-Liae, cotton-spinner. • DIED. On Saturday List, in St. Mary's Square, Birmingham, Mr. Samuel thybo.ne, of that town, after a coufiuement of ten years from a paral)tic strukr. LONDON : Printed mot Piiii!islied !‘v f). Lov amt., M tit Nita rIIiSM•N Or ICE% bi g ;6 e l .4" • . • ...;~_ .. ,