The New Hampshire gazette — Portsmouth [N.H.], 1809-12-12 00:00:00, page 8

. 1 Continyed Jrom the frft page.] =
immediately conne&ed with the object of this
letter. Fthink that the obje& of that propo
sition, so far as it agreed with your previous
understanding of the intentions of this gov
ernment has been fubftantilly carried into ef
fe& on our part. Itis true thatyour gov
ernment might at the date of the instructions
“have expe@ed from the incipient proceedings -
of Congress, that Holland would be embrac
<d by the reftritive laws of the United States.
Not only, however, was the omission nom
inal since American veflels were at the time
by the decrees of that country refufed admis
sion injp its ports; but under the fame con
firu&ion of our laws by which the commer
«cial intercourse with Holland was permitted,
that with Portugal was also considered as
fegal in the event of that country being oc
cupied by the British troops in the name of
the Prince Regent.
It is therefore principally as respeéls the
second condition which relates to the colonial
‘trade, that erroneous inferences might be
drawn from the expreflions used in Mr. Can
ping’s inftrudions. . Altheugh the subject
must have been mentioned here incidentally,
and only in a transient manner ; as it is one
to which I ha! paid particular attention, and
on which my opinion had never varied, [
~ think that T can slate with precision in what
view I have always 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 % make
any arrangement whatever refpe&ing the co
lonial trade, a condition of the revocation of
the Orders in Council. The two fubjeéts
awere altogether unconne&ted, and lam con
ficent that such a proposition was never {ug
gefted either by you, or' by any member. of
-this administration. - Such an arrapgement
could be eff-&ed enly by treaty ; and it is
with a considerable degree of surprise that 1
fee your goverment now asking not only le
fiftance to the French dectees, but the aban
donment of a branch of our commerce,as the
price of the revocation of the Orders in
‘Council. This seems 10 give a new charaer
_ 40 a measure which- had heretofore been re
presented as an a& of retaliation relufantly
2dopted, and had been defended solely on the
ground of a supposed. acquiescence on the
part of the United States in the injurious de
crees of another mgtion. - ;
WASHINGTON, AUG. I§. ,
~ Sin—l bave the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 13th inst. in
which you have been pleased 10 fay that al
though you-* do not believe, that in the cog
' werfations we have had refpe@ing the pradi
~ eabilitysof an adjullment of the differences
betwee; the United States and Great Britain,
" we ever bave mifunderflood one another.—-
¥et, as from Mr. Canning’sinftru&ions, late-
Jy published by my government, it would"
feemn that some opinions are ascribed to feve
‘sal members of this aﬂmini&rhdgvh&mwi
_did not entertain, it appears uécefl.%y to af
~gertain ‘whether, on any point, a mifuppre-.
_hention can have taken place.” = ¢ o
. Inanfwer to your -enquiries, I have great’
fistbion n elloiog Yoo tht thre appeart
Soefobfanre or meaning of the conversations
2. In the event of a treaty embracing all
the points in dispute, and particularly that of
“impreflments, without which I trust no treaty
will ever take place, it was my opinion, and
I may certainly have exprefled it that if the
cother fubje@s of difference were arranged
aehtrespeding the colonial tredewould be easi
ly adje@ed I had considered the principle re
cognized in a former correspondence between
Lord Hawksbury and Mr. King onthe fub
;je& of the colonial trade, and subsequently
again adopted in the treaty pegociated
by ‘Messrs Muoroe and Pinkney, as a
general basis agreed on under different admia
iftrations, by both governments, from which
neither could now receede, and suscep
tible only of modification as to details,
The inftruéiions to our Ministers in London
‘on that fubje& had also. been publithed and
were known to your government. = .
I therefore believed that the United States,
in the ‘event of atreaty, would Rill be dispos
ed to wave for the:prefent, in the manner and
on the terms ‘contemplated by those instruc
tions, their right to that branch, and to that
tranch only,.of the colonial ‘trade, known
by the name of dire@? trade, thatis o fay, the
trade carried dire@lyfrom beligerent colonies
to the belligerents in Europe, when thattrade
was not permanentlyin peace as in war per
mitted by the laws of the country to which
those colonies belonged. The right totrade
between such colonies-and the United States
generally, and to that in colonial articles be
tween the United States and other countries,
gever ¢an or will in my opinion be abandon
ed, or its exercise be suspended by this gov
srnment. On the contrary, it is solely in or
der to secure, by an express treaty stipulation,
that trade against the danger of interruption,
thus by a mutual {pirit of accommodation to
avoid collisions, that the abandonment of the
dire& branch can ever be assented to.~
Permit me therefore to request, that you
will inform me whether you understood;
namely, that the relinquitbment, during the
present war, of whatis called the direét trade
‘was alone contemplated, ; ana that no ar
‘rangement on that fubje@® was suggested as a
condition of the revocation of the Orders in
Courncil. . .
I have the honor to be, with the highest
sefpe& and consideration, Sir, yourob’t ferv’t.
(Signed) ALBERT GALLATIN.
Hon. D.M Erskine,Minifler Plenipotentary ¢
Mr. E:fkine to the Secretary of the Treaféa'j |
which passed between us, as Rated in Mr.
Canning’s iuftru&ions alluded to. o
* After the molt careful perusal of your state
ment of the-purport of our conversations, I
cagnot discover any material difference from
the representation which I have made upon
that fubje& to the Secretary of State ng.,
Robert Smith) in my letter "to him of the
‘l4th infk. to which I will therefore beﬁ»leave
to refer you, as i have thereindetailed the
substance of the conversation according to
‘my recolle@ion of it ; which is in-every ref
pe @ essentially the fame as that which you
{eem to have.entertained, ‘
Daring the conversation which we held
refpeing the pra&icability of an amicable
adjuttment of the differences between the two
countries, when the relinquishment by the
U. States during the present war, of what
is called the colonial trade, was suggested by
you, I conceived that you meant {as you have
stated ) *“the trade carried dire&ly from belli.
gerent colonies to the belligerents in Europe,
when that trade was not permanently in
peace as in war, permitted by the laws of the
country to which those colonies belonged.”
I never supposed that you intended to con
_vey an opinion that ‘the government of the
United States would mak%\uy arrangement
refpe&ing the colonial trade asa condition of
the revocation of the Orders in Council, the
two fubje@ts being altogether unconnedted
nor have I ever represented to His Mujelty’s
government, that such preliminary pledges
would be given.
~ With sentiments of the highest resp:&, I
~ have the honor to be, Sir, your most obedi
ent humble servant.
. . (Signed) . D.M.ERSKINE.
Tbe Hon. Albert Gallatin, ©c. &¢.
- Mr. Fackfon to Mr. Sniith.
wnmsc{on, tith ©&. 1809.
- Brg-—TI have had the honor \of receiving
‘your official letter of the oth in'ft.” towards
the close of which you inform me, \that it had
‘been thought expedient to put an \prd to all
.verbal communication between yo \arieif and
'me, in difculfing the important gbje¢\s of my
miflioir. Considering that a very fe\w days
bave elapsed since I delivered to the Priefident.
a credential letter from the King my M after,
and that notbing has been even: alled ed to
have ocenrred, to deptive e of the £ hicility.
The Becvetary of State to Mr. Fackfon, Evvoy Extraor- :
~ dinary and Minificy Plenipotentiary of bis Britannk |
Majefly.
e DEPARTMENT or sTATE, O& ¢ 1809,
SIR~-An arrabgement, as to the revocation of the
Britith Orders in Council, as well as to the fatis
faction required in the case of the attack on the |
Chesapeake frigate, has been made in dve form by *
the government of the United States with David
Montague Erskine, Esq an accredited minister Ple- |
nipotentiary of his Britannic Majelty. And afterit
had been faithfully carricd into execution on the |
part of this government and under circumstances ;
rendering its"effe@s on the relative situation of the 7
United States irrevocable, and, in some refpeéls, ir- 1
reparable, bis Britinnic Majcfty has deemed it pro- |
per so disavow it, tq recall his Minister, and to fend !
another to take his place ks {
~ Infuch a ftatc of things, no expectation could be |
more reasonable, no coixfe of proceeding more ob- |
- vioufly preferibed by the ordinary- refpeét due to |
~ the disappointed party, than a prompt and explicit |
~ explanafion, by the new fun&ionary, of the grounds I
- of the refufal on the part of his government to a
bide by anarrangement so folemsly made.—aecom
panicd by a substitution of other- propositions.
~ Uader the influence of this reaforable expeation,
the President has learned, with no less surprise than
regret, that in your several conferences with me you
have slated : i '
tft. That you have no inftrutiond from your go
vernment, which authorize yow to make any expla
nations whatever to this govcrm\nc;{j\: to the rea
sons, which had induced his Britanic Majesty to dil- .
avow the arrangement lately made by your prede
ccffor,and that therefore you could not make any
such cxplanations. ‘
ad. That in the case of the Ch:fapeake, your in
structions only authorize you (withoutafligning ary
reason whatever why the reasonable terms of fatis
faction tendered and acccpted,have not been carried
into effet) to communicate to this government a
note tendering fatisfaction, with ad understanding 1
that such ngte {hould not be signed and delivered by
you, until yon thould have previously seen and ap
proved the proposed answer of this government, and
that the signing and the delivery of your note and |
of the an{wer of this government should be fimul- ]
tanegus. j
3d.. That you have no inftru®ions, which author
ize you to make to this government any propositions |
whatever in relation to the revocation of the Bri
tith Orders in Council ; but only to receive such
as thiy government may deem it proper to make to,,
ou. | ; :
2 4th.§ That, at all events, it is not the difpnfition
or the intention of the Britith government to revoke
their Orders in Council; as they refpe@ the United
States, but upon a formal ftipujation oa the part of
“the Ug;{d States to accede to the following. terms
‘and conditions, viz. i
It. Tthat the ad of Congress, commonly called thie
-~ Non=<lntercourfe law, be continved againlt France,
so long as\fhe thall continue her decrees. -
ad. ‘l'hat the navy of Great Britain be. authorifed
to aid in enforcing the provisions of the said a&t of -
Congress. R B 0 o
' 3d, That the U. States shall explicitly renounce,
during the é::'ent war, the right of carrying on any
- trade whatev ~dirc&,br,indircq, .ﬁvit~l{'atiy~_ colony
of any'cnemy of Great Britain, from which they
wcre_.cxe!u&&w‘ing peace; end that this renuncia
tion muft extend, not only to the trade between the
colony and the mother country, b? to the tradc be
tween the colony and the United States. i
- If, in the aforegoing representation, it thould ap.
pear, that I have in any _inftance milapprehended.
your meanidg, it will afford me real pleasure to be
enabled to lay before the President a statement, cor
‘reted agreeably to any fuggeltions\with which you
may be pleased to save: .. 5
¢ To avoid the misconceptions jocident to oral pro-.
ceedings, I have the honor to intimate that it is
gtbbught cxpedient, that our furtter.difeuﬁons on the
present occafios, be in‘the writttn form. And with
‘great sincerity I assure you, that (whatever communi
rcations you may be pleased thus tio make, will be re
- geived with an anxious folicitude)\ to find them such
“as ‘may lead to a speedy removal |of eyery existing
obftacie to that mutual and laftisg friendfhip and.
'/A,égrdi&ﬁzéﬁw:;-i‘hg two nationsy, which itis obe
vioufly the intéreft of both to foftey. . .
e | RSMITH,
Tbe Hon, Francis James Fackfon, S e
of aceefs, and of the eredit to wifich; vecor
disg to immemorial usage, [ am by tha
letter entitled, I believe there does not axift
in the annals of diplomacy a precedent far
such a determination between two Ministers, .
who have met for the avowed purpose of ter:
minating amicably the existing differences
between their refpe&tive countries : But, after
mature lefleftion, lam induced toacquicfce
in it by the recolle@ion of the time that must
neceflarily elapse before I can receive his Ma.
jelty’s cemmands upon so unexpeéted an oc
currence; and of the detriment that would
ensue to the public service, if my miniflerial
funflions, were, in the interval, to be alto.
gether suspended. 1 shall therefore content
myfelf with entering my protelt againkt a
proceeding which T can confider in no other
light, than asa violation, in my person, of the
most essential rights of a public minister when
adopted, as in the present case, without any
aliedged mifcondu on his part. As a matier
of opinion, 1 cannot, I own assent to the pre.
ference which you give to written over ver.
bal intercourse for the puipofe of mutual ex
planation and accommodation: [ have
thoyghtit due to the public chara@er with
which I have the honor to be invested and to
the confidence which his Majefly has most
gracioully been pleased to repose in me, to
state to you unreservedly my sentiments on
this point. - I shall now proceed to the other
parts of your letter, and apply to_thers the
belt consideration that can ajife from a zeal
proportioned to the incréale of difficulty thus
thrown in the way of the restoration of 2
k thorough good understanding bewween our
| relpedtive countries.
- You Rate, Sir, very truly that an arrange
ment had been made between you and M.
‘Erfkine, and that bis Majeity had thought
proper to disavow that arrangement.
- I have, here in the ountfet,to regret the loss
of the advantages of verbal intercourse with
you, as I should have availed myfelf of it to
inquire whether by your Ratement,it were
your intention to complain of the disavowal
itfelf, or of a total want of explanation ofit,
or of the circumfances of that explanation
not having been made through me. I ob.
serve that in the records ot this mifion there
is 00 trace of a complaint, on the part of the
U.States,of HisMajefty having disavowed the
a& of hiyg Minister. You kave not in the con
ferences we have hitherto held, diftinétly
anpounced any such compluint, and I have
seen, with pleasure, in this forbearance on
your part; an instance of that candor, which
I doubt not will prevail in all our ccmmuni
cations, in as much as you could not but
have thought it unreafonabie to complaimof
the disavowal of an a&, doge under fuchicir
cumftances as could only lead to the conse
quences that have altually followed. ‘
- It was got known when I left England,
whether Mr. Eifkine had, according to the
liberty allowed him, communicated to you
in extenfo his original infiru&ions. It now
_appears that be did not. Bat, in reverting
to his official correspondence, and parti
culazly to a defpatch addrefled on the zoth
of Aprl to His Majelty’s Secretary
of State for FYoreign Affair, I find
that he had submitted to your considera
tion, the three conditions fpecified in those
infirudtrons,as the ground work of an arrange
‘ment, which according to information re
ceived from his country, it was thought
‘in England might be made, witha profpeé&
‘of great mutual ‘advantage. Mir. Erskine
‘then reports verbatim et feriatim your obfer
_wations upon each of the three conditions,
Jand tbe reasons which induced you to think
“that others might be fubflituted in lien of
.them. It may have been concluded between
igou that these Jatter, were an equivalent for
‘the original conditions ; but the very a& of
fabftitution evidently thews that thpfe original
- conditions were, in fa&, very explicitly com
municated to you, and by you of course laid
‘before the President for his consideration. 1
need hardly add, that the difference between
these conditicns and these contained in‘the ar
_rangement of the 18th and ‘l9th April is
fufliciently obvious to require no elucidation ;
nor nieed 1 draw the conclusion, which I con
fider as~ admited by all absence of com
plaint, on the partof the American govern
ment, viz. that under such circamßances,
“His Majesty bad an undoubted -and incon-.
trovertible right to disavow the a& of his
Minister. - I must here allude to a supposi
tion, which you have more than once men
‘tioned to me, and by which, if it had any
the {lighte® foundation, this right might
perhaps in some degree, have yécen affeéled.
You ‘have informed me tbat you understood
that Mr. Erskine bad two sets of infiru&tions,
by which to regulate his condué ; and that
upon oue of them, which had not been com
municated either to you or to the publiz,
was to be refled the juftification of the
terms finally agreed upon between you and
him. It is my doty, Sir; solemnly to declare
to you, and, through you, to the . President,
that the defpatch from Mr. Canning to Mr.
Erskine, which you have made the basis of
an official correspondence with the latter
“Minister, and which was read by the former
to the American Minifer in. London, is
the ooly defpatch, by which the conditiops
were prefctibed to Mr. Erskine for the. con.
clufion of am arrangement with this country
- 'on the matter to which'it relates. ~ = . %
- To terurn to the immediate fubjet of your
letter.—ls, Bir, it be your intention to %ate,"
that no explanation whatcvsrhnibeep given
to the ,Aﬁaetibgaﬁgmrnmcnt ‘of the- reasons
~which'induced His Majelty to disavow the
ferve,/that in the mﬁmﬂm
i E Ny intention, thofe”reefons
‘were very fully and forcibly ﬁaléﬂtg&d‘if
he has not transmitted. thegr to ‘yon, I_can
embarraflinent of his situation, for which ha
probably trusted to the President’s goodnel
to make some 2llowinee 3 o 1 ihe migﬁt tha
more realonably be led to that reliance on it,
as a fuil and ample: communication was also
made upon the subj-& by His Majelty’s
Secretary ‘w State for Foreign A ffairs ro Mr.
Pinkney,to whom the whole of M:" Eifkine’s
original in@rudions was read, and who it was
natural to suppose, wonld convey to his gOV~
etnment so much ‘information upon a very
momentous occasion, as would relieve Mr.
Eifkine from the necessity of entering into
mioute details of the mifunderfanding that
had occurred. Atall events, no complaint
can be substantiated againfß His M:jelty’s
govem? gent on sthis score, feeing that they
not only inftrudted the Miniiter who had
mide the disavowed arrangement as to the
motives whiich occasioned the disavowal; but
also with franknefs, promptitude, and a mos
ferupulous regard to national honor, gave
notice to the American Minister in London
of the disavowal, of the motives of it, and of
the precautious spontaneously taken by his
Majelty to prevent any loss or injury accru
ing to the citizens of the United States from
a reliance on any agreement however upaus
thorifed, made in His Majeßy’> name. The
mere allusion to this laier circumitance 'ifs
perfes me {rom farther noticing the effe&ts
“which you describe as being produced upon
the United States by the ciicumftance of this
agreement. How far they are irrevocabe it
is not for me to determine—but the word
irreparable seems to imply that a loss had
been fultained on the occasion by the public
or by mdividuals of this country. So far
as his Majeßy could be by possibility sup
posed answerable for such an eventual loss;
he has, as I have before RRated, taken the ut
most precaution'to avertit. -
As to the expe&ation entertained here, that
the explanation of bis majesty’s share in this
tranfadtion should be made throngh me, L
might conrent myfelf with simply observing,
that I was not provided with inflru&ions to
that effedt, because it was known that the ex
planation in question had already been given.-
But it accords with the sentiments of his Ma
jelty towards this country to observe also, that
he conflidered, that as some time must neces
sarily elapse between my appointment and
my entrance on the duiies of my ministry, it
would bea more friendly mode of proceeding
to ttate without delay, and through the chan
nels 1 have already mentioned, the metives
that compelled his Majesty to difsvow the 2-
.vernm%t in uncertainty in these reipecls,
greement, than to leave the American goe
-till the unavoidably protraéted period of ms
arrival in America - I fuy this in repard to
the original'notification 'of his Majesty’s des
termination, and of the motives of it, which
“being already made, it could not be supposed
in London that a repetition of them would be
‘expe&led from me; and of course no such
case has been forefeen in my inftruétions.—.
But if, beyond this any incidental explanation -
or difcuflion should be wished for by this go
vernment, [ came fully prepared to enter in.
to them. = I even confider them to have taken
place between us. I have certzinly derived
great fatisfadtion from the several houors,
which we bave spent in conference upon these
fut jeéts, because they have enabled me to re
move {fome mifunderflandings, and to refute
many misrepresentations, which you yourfelf
informed me of, in regard to :the condué of
the Britith government. I coniider such mu. .
tual explanations as highly beneficial to 2
right underftauding of the views dnd interefls
of the two countries, and I should with much
pleasure have renewed them, if you had not
informe:! me that the President had been plea
sed to prelcribe anocher and a different mode
- of conaudting our pegoriations..
I will neverihelefs avail myfelf of that
. mode ‘which he fill permits to/repeat to you
that his Msjefty.-hes authorifed me; notwith<
standing the ungracious manner in which his.
tormer cffer of fatisfadtion for the affair of
the Chefupeake, was received, to renew that
which Mr. Erskine was infiruled to makes
- You havefaid that you so fully underflood the
-particulars of that offer, that | deem it unne«
ceflary to recapitulate them here; I regrer
that, fiace they werz {oclearly understood by
you, you fhouid not yet bave been enabledto
state to me either in our personal communi
cations, or in the letter which lam now ane.
fwering, whether they are considered by the
President as farisfa&ory, or whether they are
such as he uitimarely means'to accept. . You
seem not so diftin@ly to have understood the
foim of proceeding in this' affair, which 'Y
took the liberty of fugge@ing as likely to lead
to a fatisfatory refuit, without however at all
_precluding any other method which might
appear preferableto you: My pgopofal was,
not to communicete a note tendering fatisfac
tion, but to agree with you before hand upon
the terms of a declaration on _the part of his
Majelly, wbich foould aétvally %e’vé. the fatisface
tion, (the conditions of which 1 informed you
-that I was authorifed to carry into immediate
‘execution ) and of a counter declaration to be
signed by you on the part of the United Siates
for the purpose of accepting such fatisfadion.
I expressly fßated that this mterchange of «fhi.
cial documents was not meant by me as the
- means of conveying to each other our refpec
tive sentiments ; thet I wuderficod to be, as
is nfgal,%bje &of our conﬁngcfs\ } :n’d I
_imagined that the papers to be signed by us,
vefpediively, would be the result of those fro
timenis so communicated, and that: by being
| mﬂmxum&h
- compadt by whick the two'countries would
h%ﬂrw is course of procesd
_ipg' is conformabl ‘* of the
oo oo {Continged i focind pegr 3