The Rhode-Island Republican — Newport, R.I., 1810-01-10 00:00:00, page 2

w&: of the United States are knaves ond
-breukers, and their Congress and Presis
dent a mere cypher. The navy of G. Lritain
wus to strengthen (ae latter m mauke the
- former. virtuous. And this cond ind the
whole d2spatch, was t 9 be communicated in
umg: all its parts) to the chief magis
trate of the nation ! " 3 g
It seeins to be some importance to the
merits of the case in question; to discrimine
ate clearly between the act of a minister con
cluding an agreement in virtue of a full pow
er in relation to terms of the agreement, and
the uct of a minister concluding such agree
ment by the authority of a general power (or
letter of credence to act for his sovereign in
uny matter respecting which he should be in
‘structed. - In the first instance, the Minister
would have to produce his full power to the
povernment with which he was shout to ne
‘wociate ; in the second, the Minister being
vesident near the government, and his gener
al letter of credence being in the possession
of the government, he would not be under
the nccessity of 'rreseming any new power
nor obe compelled to shew his instructions,
but, acting in his usual envoyal ac:d plenipo
tential character, full fiith and credit would
be given to him in that shape by the govern
ment with which he treated. Mr#. Erskine
appears to have acted in the latter way. He
made the arrangement in virtue of his gener
al leiter of credence, and kept his ¢ several”
letters of instructions out of view, ¢ subject
“to his own diseretion.” But if a. full power
had been negessary to enable Mr. Erskine to
eonclude the arrupgement , Mr. Jackson ac- l
knowledges that he bad that fuli power in his
possession i for, says he, in kis lotter of the
sth of Novéember, ¢ the instructions in this
A{Mr. Erskine’s) case took the place of a fuli
power.” And, if a full power had not been
reyuisite, Mr. Jackson gives a very substantial
deason why it was not necessary : “ No full
/power (he obscrves in his letter of Nov. 4th
.was given in the present [Mr. lirsi«inc’s}
ax because it was not a treaty, but the ma
terlals for forming a treaty, that was in cone
templation.” Thus, in any view of the sub
ject, My, Ecskine'’s mode of proceeding and
the authority by which he acted, are pronoun
<ed by Mr. Jackson te have been correct and
suflicient. |
The despatch from Mr. Canning to' Mr.
Erskine of the 23d of January, affords the
most conclusive proof that the arrangement
which he was authorized to conclude with
the American Executive was not to be sub
ject to any subsequent. act of ratification in .
London previously to its going inw operation,
for, Mr. Canning says in that despatch, ¢ His
Majesty will be prepared on the faith of such
engagement [as Mr. Erskine might make ]
either immediately (if the repeal shall have
beon 4mmediate in America) or on any day
specified by the American government for
that repeal, reciprocally to recal the Orders
in Comnacil, without waiting for the conclu
sion'of the treaty ; and, you are authorized,
in the circumstances hercin described, to
make. such reciprocal engagement on His
Majesty’s behalf.” Here is a clear power to
conclude and give instantaneous effect to the
agresmcnt the moment it was entered into ;
there is no reservation for the King’s consent
,after the arrangement was made ; His Mu
-3«3-‘. approbatfon preceded the fact, and Mr.
Lrekine was acting on this point at least, by
the absolute command of his sovereign, nor
18 the case at all singular : other British Min
isters, resident at foreign courts, have been
cloathed with the same power. Alleyne
Fitzherbert concluded a preliminary arvangc
ment with the Court of Spain, {which was
signed at Madrid the 24th of July, 1790, by
bimself and the Count Floirida Blanca, res
pecting the capture of certain British vessels
in the bay of Nootka,) in virtue ol his general
letter of credence as ambassadour extraordin
ary and plenipetentiary to the Catholick king,
and this arruangement was held sacred and
binding on the British government, and was
iollwed Ly a convention .between . Britain
and Spuin on the 28th of October of the same
year. These state papers may be found in
the London Annual Register for 1790, pages
320 y 301 und 803, Itis, therchore, a flimsy
pretence for disavowing the arrangement of
the 19th of AEH,_ to say that it was subject
to rutification in Englund, secing the authori
ty is explicit to the contrary, and supported
by a ?uallol case in English history. And
Mr. Jackson is truly unfortunate in bis allu
sion to the rejected ufc:t{ assented to by Col.
Monroe, because Col. Monroe informed the
Jritish commissioners that he was acting con
trary to his instructions, and the treaty con
tained, moregver, & special provision that it
should not go into effect before it was ratified
by the American and British governments
rcsp‘W& cilrcumsu\ucc -precluded
tae _ : mposture i the case,
.Wa t, " from, the treachery ps\eul}'cr
wig ST ' 2 S N O -
same be éver allowed that the ar gment
xct opsly framed on the part of Mr. Ers
‘“‘:‘“:: ';:-tm “as the terms of it were muni
that m"‘ Lm»c tlO the United States, it
s.ﬁw mt& British govern
maere deins W Jde aguinst every contingent
pian Ml‘& ght W from the violgtio?ot
P'%le, fackson himself appears to be per
“ aware of the propriety of such a pro
‘,wo and lays no m&a“o::shnh upon
“ frankness, promptit most scru
‘:mdsh ‘:cg'ml m.‘nadond henour,” with
‘ “ his majesty rament gave notice
0 the Ammlmf?&: & Liks o the
disavowal, of the motives of it, and of the
_precautions spo taneously taken by his ma.
! 0"!&&'.‘"“ \uy:Jess or injury wcmllu
the Citizens of {the United States.” Ba,
hen pressed upon this subject, when certain
portant omissions were indicated to him,
‘and it was shewn that his majesty had not
\ “ Loxpow, ocroner 12 .
“Admu\ionofﬂnmenthhthe
trade to the Continent, had an interview rday
with the Board of Trade. !m“n{non.
mnkm&i&nﬁud‘wbemﬂm
r‘um manufactures, to Holland, as it
allowed to and from France ; and that licences
would be granted for that purpose.” '
There is, however, a circumstance connec
ted with this ¢ great system of policy,” which
the Sccretary of State justly denominates a
“ phenomenon,” und which renders very
questienable the vaunted magnanimity of the
“ councils of this great and powerful Mon
arch.” It is that whilst “a total and up
qualified interdiction of ail trade with the
encr.ies” of Great Brituin is enforced agains®
the United States, Briiish merchants, with
the tacit permission of these “ councils,”
supply through the ports of Hollund and clse
where, the continent of Europe with those
very articles of colonial produce,* the priva
tion from which, My, Jackson exultingly a
vows, is to preserve the world srom universal
domination ! Does coffee or does sugar
change its nuture, by passing into the Euro
pean markets through the hands of English
men and smugglers, instead of being convey
ed thither in vessel of the ¥nited States, nav
igated by American seamen ! Or will Mr.
Jacksom udmit (what is most probable) that
this ¢ great system of policy,” so “ worthy
to govern the councils of a great and power
ful Monarch,” instead of having for its object
resistance to Bonat‘m, in vindication of the
rights of nations, s to paralyse the comuierce
of the citizens of the United States, with
France, Holland,ltaly and their dependencies,
in order that the shop-keepers of London and
of Liverpool may enjoy the whole profits
acc;mins from the supply of the enem&o of
Great Baiain with the productions of the
\Vr India Islands, and even of the conti
nent of America? In this latter case, thut
chivalrick spirit which the new Envoy assures
-;nbi;ﬂ“ to b; ﬁ:‘nd: the hearts of the Brit
sh Monarch and his subjects,” migrates into’
Daltiy * pounds, sHillhga’Niiﬁ:a“::d in<
stead of valiantly freeing the world from bon
d?' lies mutely spug in the pockets or the
coffers of English merchants until called forth
by the Ministry, to supply the means of some
new project for infringing the law of nations
and outraging the jurisdiction and rights of
neutral states. e )
" The urticle, copied from the London
wm 1809, pnte this fuct iqns.:'.l
R S Bt
, < . .
cautions “to prevent any loss,” Mg,
;‘ m‘w replied, that *it was pot and
: not be intended to obviate lllebb
inconvenicnée.” ' And as a reason why the
“non-intention * to obviate all inconvenience™
was correct, he l:é‘roﬂes a case Where no
previous contract exists, em::zndhnguﬁlog
the fact that the guarantce all possible
1088 was due from the king of Great Brituin
to the U. S. not as a favour, but as a right ;
not as a recompence for the common depre.
dations of British cruisers, but 28 an act ne
cessary to skreen him from the impatation of
violating the faith of Great Brituin for the
purpose of decoying, like the crying eroco
diie, the property of the American citizens
within the grasp of his naval force. And why
does Mr, Jackson remind the Secretary of
State of the ¢ usual liberality of British tribu
nals” ? As well might Ulysses have conso
led his unhappy companions by referring
them to the merciful disposition of ti:e Cyc
lops, who devoured one of their number each
revolving day. !
That there either is a British party in A
merica, or that Mr. Jackson thinks o, is too
manifest in the style of some parts of his cor
respondence. He says, that the conduct of
Gireat Britain to America arises out of “ A
great system of policy, deliberately adopted
and acted on,”’ and that it is a strong and sol
id reason for adhering to it, because it enables
his Britannick majesty to oppose « barrier to
the entire submission of Europe to the pover
of the emperour of the French, - It is to iillus
trate this idea that the allusion is made to
Augereau’s proclamation to the Catalonians
an wllusion which might do very well if ad
dressed to one of the pétty belligerent nationg
of Europe, but which is totally irrelative 4nd
aitogether ludierous when applied to Such a
neutial power us the United States. This
“ greac system of policy,” so ¢ deliberately
adopted aind acted on,” s to prevent the sub
jugation of Europe; thaiis, of Great Brituin ;
ior nearly all the rest of Europe is snbjugated
or new ;nodelled. And what is this boasted
system ! It consists in the difierence of price
on coffee and cugar, occasioned by the con
vevunce of those articles into France through
Hamburgh end Tonningen instead of their
being lunded in the ports of Hoiland. This
differgnce may be two or three cents on the
pound : and these two er three cents are to
be the salvation of Europe ; they are the rve
sult of the * great system of policy,”” pursued
by the British ; they are the strong and sol
lid reasons,” worthy (as Mr, Jackson pro
cluims) to govern the councils of a great and
powerful Moparch,” in a formal departure
from the common maxims of justice, in the
violation of neutral rights, and sufficient to
induce those councils to refrain from any at
tempt to ‘ propitiate Aunerica !” The ex
peditions of Sir Jolin Moore und of Lord
Wellington, and that magnilicent.gne to the
Scheldt, might be diversions in hehplf of suf
fering Spain and Portugal, and bleeding Aus
wia ; but the two or three cents difference in
price upon sugar and cotfee, is the stroke of
death 1o Napoleon ! it 1s the mortal blow,
which is to destroy his power forever !
It is sufiicient to observe, in relation to Mr:
Jackson’s declaration that he had full power
to negociate, indepcndgng of his general letter
» , - - 4 )
ull ) the President, it was impo ¢
on his own principies, o teat further w=h
him. until he did peesent it. . His offer there
fore, “ tv exchange his full power aguinst
that with which Me. Smith should be provid
ed,” is an evasion ; tle President could not,
according to vs:ge, funish the Secretary of
State with a full power Lefore Mr. Jackson
had protduced one : :nd for this very plain
reason, because the I'iesident copld not tell,
without having seen Mr. Juckson’s fuli power
what the new Lnvey was authorized to nego
ciate about ; purticularly after he had official
ly announced thai Le was only empowcred
“ to receive and discuss propositions.”
The able manncr in. which the Secretary
of Stute had exposed the singular proposition
relative to the reparation for the atttack on
the frigate Chesapeake; almost obviates the
ncccgahy of further elucidazion. The man
ner in which the paper of memoranda was
presented, however, deserves some notice.——
The afivir of the Chesapedke up to the 23d
of October, had becn embraced in the gener- 1
al correspondence between Mr. Smith and
Mr. Juckson. The latier in his letter of that
daie, omits the subject altorether ; but, in
a note of the 27th of October, he slipped in
a seperate proposhion, which he doubtless
thought wotld, like the artful pass of a fenc
ing master, effect g palpable hit. There was
somctßing so extremely I¥dicutous in this
trick, that it could excite nothing but'a sar
castick smile ot the awkward eflort at dexter
ity in Mr. Erskine's successoar.’ He was
vp{tced in the posture of a wandering and pre
tended conjurer, whoy being a povice in de
‘ ¢cptm, hugs himself in the coneeit that he
is déceiving his audience, whilst the audience
perceive the whole cheat and laugh at ‘the
conjuror’s clumsiness. ‘
ilut what wus this paper of memoranda ?
Surely not a tender nor un act of reparation.
It was a demond on the American govern
ment to legaiize, by acknowledging, the cor
rectpess of the principle upon which the
frigate was attacked ; and thus to justify the
outrage for which atonement was - y the me~
moranda proFosed. The reservation. for the
restoration of British subjects and deserters,
is tc all intents and purposes, such a demand.
Besides the satisfaction was not a point of in
terest but a point of honour. And what na
tion ever yet made conditions in a case of hon
our ! Docs Mr. Juckson imagine that the
government of the United States, is so mer
ccnary, that it is eagar to seize the trifling
sum which is to compensate the surviving
relations of the slain and the maimed in that
vile attuck ? Let bim, if he does, shake off
his duy«dream, and learn hencefurward that
it is the honour of our flag that requires sat
isfaction, and that the reparation is lot to be
accepted upon the principles of bargain and
sale. This is the doctrine maintained by Mr.’
Madison in his correspondertce with Mr.
Rose ; and it is the doctriné which the Brit
ish themselves maintained in the case of
Falkland’s Islands. .
The subject of this exposition requires, it
is conceived, very few remarks more in a se
rious point of view. As a topick of ridicule,
Mpr. Juckson’s letters will be exceedingly ac
ceptable to those who delight in betruyﬁ)g ars
rogance in the garb of duplicity. The ap
peal ‘which that minister has made to the
Rx:ﬁck casts upon him additional odium in
estimation of all worthy men. Itis not
- only unbecoming in an envey, but it is unbe
coming i a gentlemen : it is pot only a de
parture from the rules which ought to gov
¢rn Lis diplomatick comnduct, but itis a per
version of the truth. Excepting one poim,
the falsehood of the appeal is sufficiently dc
veloped in the preceding strictures : that
point isy where he endeavours to pursuade
the publick that he is charged with “ fmpor-
Stant negociations.” Nothing can be mere
certain than that he was wot so charged : or,
that if he was, his negociations were not
“ important,” in an amicable view, to the
t. United States ; and this conclusion is aban
- dantly verified by the words of Mr. Jackson
- himself, for, in his Jetter to Mr, Smith of the
-23 d of October, he says, ¢ the object of that
. part of my conversation to which you seem to
~attach the mest importance, was to say that I
~ was not charged 1o make any proposal what
ever ;" which is a clear admissiot, that Mr.
- Smith was anxious for sewm¢’ friendly propo
- saly, but that Mr. Jackvon had mone to offer
~him. The appcal establishes another very
- myaterial and unfortnate fact, if Mr. Jackson
- can be relied on ; he declares that his « duty
imperiously exjoined him to act as he has
- dome : if this be so ; if it was imperiously
_enjoined on him to act thus, the evil gees
Murther than Mr. Jackson: it is in the British
government. A wmelancholy truth ! but
~which has long been suspected. .
Must ull hope of peace be relinquished ?
. Must war be prepered for 2 Congress alone:
;“ @in decid€ the question. The legisiative body
is'the Alexander to cut the gordiun knot :f
- petplexities that compress the encrgies of the
] :::xn The writer of this pnducrﬁ:: is the
“friend of peace ; but he is also the [nend of
~American rights and honour. He cherishes
the ilea of tranquility ; but would blush to
~discaurage a war in a pre-eminently just cause,’
~either on account of its expense or its havd
ships If no other reason induced the despair
of a restoration of a good understanding with
Bu‘h.d,'mm cause can be discovered
for it in the appointment and conduct of Mr.
Jackson. Independent of othercircumstances,
already adverted to, he was selected by the
" Bratish cabinet with the full knowledge, com- -
municated bL)(r. King whilst minister in
London, that he was odious to the governiment
of the U. States. His behaviour here has
beci a tissue of insolence and absurdities; and
the very law of nations to which be so cava
mpu in behalf of his rights, he has
g el i [ Continued.] it g
In ordinary cases the power is distinct from
the ingtructions and the instructions ape not
protduced ; noy can they be required. to be
pradueed. In such cases the powet only
gives notice that the minister may treatyhot
what that tre.ty must be, It gives no intima
tion of the siipulations which he is to insist
on, or which he muy agree 10, - These ire all
detailed in his insiructions, whith are separate
and 1o be kepi to himuself for his own fovern
ment. Tbisbeing so, how was ourgoveranent
to knoWw that in this particular cuse, that tiie
power and the inswuctions were Liended to
gether in the same instrument, wnd that by
demanding the sight of thic one, they wouid
necessarily come to the knowledge of the
other. Why presume it, when the thing was
contrary toall probabiiity——when perhaps such
an instance had seldom or everoccurred ? The
government had anight to presume, and doubt-.
less did presume that the ordinary course had
been pursned—thut Mr. Erskine had a power,
and had instructions distinct {rom that power—
and that the production of the one would not
lead to the knowledge of the otlier,
But let us suppose, however improbable,
that our government had conceived that the
instructions might be blended with the power,
and under pretence of questioning whether
Mr. Erskine had a power, they had cunningly
contrived in that way, and by a side wind to
get at his instructions. How, after all, could
they be certain what kKind of treaty Mr. Ers
kine might make? How could they be cer
tain that the power contained his only instruc.
tions ! How particularly couid they be cere
tain if he averred as he might, and in this
case has, that he had ether instructions ?
Couid they call on hin: to shew those other
instructjons ? No, they could net. In no
cuse can a minister be requirgd to shew his in- -
structions. - Hud oux\govcgment therefore
employed this fincsse, it could not have
guarded them against what has happencd.—
Tle erroneous opinions entertained on this
subject seem to have arisen prineipally from
two souices=—one Is the confounding the .
power and instructisng, wnd mistaking them
for one and the same thing.. This seems to
bave been the uiisfortune of Mr. Potter, His
observations, so far as they have bearing
upon the resoiution are bottomed on ‘this
mistaken idea. He evidently supposes that
the government, by secing the power of a
minister, may know oot enly that he may
muke a treaty, but ‘What kind of a treaty
ke may meke. One would have thought
that the very case he took to iiustrate his
ideas, would have taught him the &]'utinqﬁm
he overiooks. There the power to convey
wouid have given bimi no information as to
terms which the agent might agree to, These
would depend on his private instructions,
which the agent would have in his pocket,
snd which My, Potter would have no rightto .
demand a sight of. - : A
‘l'be other source of false ideas'on the sub
ject, is of a quite dificrent natave. Ttisan
errour in the contrary cxtremie. It supposes
that the power must necessarily be distinct
from the instructions, andin one particujar
form ; and when the power.is not thus dis
tinct nor in this form there is no power at all.
"This ts Mr. Dana’s ides, and much of his in
genious and Yearned argumient is founded vp- -
on that errour. That the power is wsuaily
scparate from the instructions is agreed j-wnd
his numeroys autherities and precedents were
not necessary to establish the pon'lion.? ‘ ?m
is the power neccssardy so separmte ! For
this M‘?O Dana has pﬁxlxce?.o preccdent,
has cited po authoiily, has reverted to fo
principle, nor is‘there any. Sovereigys ase
not thed u* to.amy peccssity of this sort.
They may make their powers scparate from.
their instructions, or-biend them together as
they please. The desputch of Junuary was
upon the face of it an instrun:ént of this dou
bie nature. b
But the whole of this discussisn might be
laid out of the case, for in fact it has nothing
to do with it. |
- Ina rei t, France and i".ng-
Jand sta Epmg in the saume Lostile re
lation towards us. The affair of the Chesa
peake, however, magnuifies the conduct of the
latter to an infinitely more warlike attitude
than that of the former. The outrage upon
our national flag, had it been avowed by the
British government, was good cause of war,
For morg than two years that great indignity
has remaincd unatoned : and every proposi
tion to make reparation, except the one so
scandalously disavowed after the completion,
has been attended with some demand that has
aggravated the insult. Irance is not so tanoi
ble to our force as Great Britun, Shall we
fight both? The choice between them,
would, indeed, be difficuit. But if we do
strike, let us strike where we can be felt.—
May the decision of our rulers be wise, and
propitious te the prosperity of the republick.
PUBLIUS.
The resclution before Congress, goes to ap
prove the conduct of the President in dis.
missing Jacksop for having insulted the gov
ernment.© The cuse involves the injuiry,
whether the dismissal was proper on that
ground, and it inveives no other. Whether
the disavowal was a just cause of comphaint
ot not, makes no part of the case ; for, deter
mine that question cither way, and still it re
mains jusi as uncecided as before, whether
the dismissal was proper. 1f the disavowy
Rcflections on the FProceedings of our Go
vernment with Jackson, the Britis/
Minister. :
Political Piscellany.
For the RerußLiCcNYy.