Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political — Alexandria [Va.], 1810-01-26 00:00:00, page 2

, . siwoe'lXe si ,
&. Smith's misrepzsi'eeenwieni qsMr- faci
- em'e letten, continued .si—And come re
am'b upon the principle: pretended to _6e
set up by Great-British quit!!! the Unit
— WE pass now to the essmination of the
last' ckrge preferred by Mr.-Smith against
Mr. ]ackson : _
" That he had heen instructed to insist
upon the three conditions of Mr. Canning,
arhich had been deen declaredby our go
vernment iasdntissible'." -
As this charge is still perssscvered in, and -
os it is made the chief cause of complairtt a
gainst the British mation,-rit is of great im
portance to steel-tain whether Mr. ]sckson '
was directed to persevere in these claims ; -
rect-llecting, however, that there is' abun
dant evidence that our government author- 3
izEd Great Britain in the first finstanee to ss
gapect they viould be cOncedt-d. ss
Mr. ]ackson in'his" first letter of Ottob'er ss
All, in answer to this charge caplicitly de
clares, " That he was not authortzed to re
ss new t/teseproponls which had" been found to ct
be unacceptable to us, and that he'could not
have made such :: prapeesicl inasmuch as it
would be-ineomissent with his other declass
ration, that he was-not instructed to make
any prepasal whatever on this subject, but
to" await the pr0positions which our cabinet
might see it to make Great Britain." Mr.
Smith in his answer to this positive and ex
plicit, clear and uiiambiguous declsration,
that Mr. ]sekson was not directed to perse
vere in these claims, replies, " That he per
cer'oes that any agreement on this subject
out;! indited-a satisfaction on the part of the
U. 8. to relinquish the trade'with the ene-_
vities colonies'tvenct in branches not hitherto
interrupted by British Orders for capturc,
lad also! unction to the ousorcing of an
act of Congress by the British navy." Mr.
Stnithctadds, " That a known determinntion
onthe part-Of his Britannic majesty to ad.
here to such enraordinary pretcnsions
would preclude the hope of success in the
negociation." ss
it is iInposaible to conceive a more pai/za
Uecmtraefiction, or a more unsair represen
tation ; and one can hardly conceive any
other motive for such conduct than the wish
to produce, not only a collision with (treat
Britain buta prejudicc in the minde us the
uniniormed part of the people at the United
States.
Mr. jack-son would have been justified
in replying to this ineult .in warm and in—
semperate language ; but he did not lose
night of the dignity of his office, and the in
terests of both countries to pt'ese rve a' good
understanding. To this Eat contradiction
he modestly replied, in his letter of Oct'obcr
Lad
** That his government ordered nun nor
to renew pmpocala which have been alrea
dy declared here to be nnaccepcable but to
receive and diacnss proposals on the partos
the U. Stases and eventnally to conclude
a coavention between the two countries. ]:
is not of conne intended to call upon me
an nate as a preliminaty to nag-Matter;, what
is the Whole'eatenc ot those instructions."
an this wild and sealpernte answer it
knows, that he was not inmncced to insin
upon-ths assensiva conditions, but that he
had a full poun- to conclude a treaty. of
which Much he could not lesson band state
du mthmin, yet it wna :irly to be in
" * ' ' ver-far aller: est/se can-ficient
which been declared oﬀensive, and up
an M & was not anchotized to insin. ss
him hansinnegmvocalproos of the:
May-(Great Duct-p w close wichssm up- ssss
"an, ten-a; andshis dis-beare 'osher;
"' si * nd ofche full-powera of Mr. i
' so mind-a in! adjnnnenc of
produced she _very laconic m:
What inn die.-Saith, chhsisi'pnt
unde-Samsoun— ct ' ' -*_
in.-"god- and "him ascend
fuct Un- , thKGans Britaicsiin-si
wa- u ' ' 'hid' m tourn
.eis hd del-ed Wfi Mr; Inch
si ' w and. as New-3
' THE DlPLOMATlC POctLIssCY Olss
* MR. MADXSON UNVElLED. si
i.;- - ._._. - -. w----—-—-—— M-...d—nd '
,
Actkxandm DZib Gaz'cm, _
cow-umour. m you-nen.
rnmzn un wan-no :! ..
cAMUELsNOWÞtm'
Rye-intreat, w
Do'lyG-em, 0 DCM'FM '
Country Gaunt, 5 Down _ct
. !RIDAY, lANUARY' 26. )
!BOH 'l'Il none:! unm
-v
* Ttm' it as understo'ild am his mljesty
Peneveres in "quit-ing an indispensable
conditions an entire 'rel'mquiehmegtt sins the
colonial tude, and aleo : pesst'miuiou te' the'
British navy to aid in the'ssexekut'mge law of
Congnesa." si
" This it-hn-been IN" was thaohttely
false; and one would naturally eXPect to
\ find no emell degree of temper in Mr. jack
? loa'l rsseply—bttt he cautiomly abstained
? frnui—imiming theiodcctcorom example --of
Mr. Smith : Reciting therefore, at large
thil oﬀemive cldtue in Mr. Smith's lette:
'** This 'satne statement tsct eonnuneom
your letter of the 9th instant, and it)-recent
ed as the substance of our previous .confer
, enees.— . In my answer, l tookthe liberty of
! shewing that—such a supposition was mn
F neous, and lsihave looked in vain to my let
ss ter of the '23d to find any sufgestious of
"that nature: I believe, there are, that by '
reference to my two letters you will find ;
tha't the atdtement now again brought sor- !
ward is contained in neither of them, that
it made tie-part of my conversations with
* you, and that \ have in no way given room
to suppose that ( ever made such aseate
ment at all." _ -
* -- Our language, though remarkable for"!
stength,*-does vnot surnish the means of a
more direct and possible denial of a charge
. --and one would have supposed it impossi
ble for any man, with'honest—siviews, to per
'sist in it after such uneqnivoeal declarmions.
But Mr. Smith and Madison havedisap
pointed us ; they rely- more upon the folly
and blindness of-t-heir partizsns than one
could have conceived to be possible.
l in spite of all-this evidence we are still
told, with the most unparalleled indelicacy,
that Mr. ]ac-kson was directed to persist in
pretensions; which our government had re
\ peatedly declared to be inadmissible.
, ln retsii'ew'ing the whole correspondence,
we discover this to be the result, that M r.
]atsikson was not authorised to insist upon
the conditions stated in Mr. Canning's let
ter, although they were known to have been
previously agreed to"" by our own Officers;
that on the contrary he was ordered to re
ceive our proposals and fully empawered by
special authority to conclude a treaty on
such terms" as should he mutually advanta
geous ; and further, that the events of the
war had rendered the conditions stated in
Mr. Canning's letter less important to
both parties, and therefore ii was to be ex
pected that Great Britain would more rea
dily consent to madg'sy them. All this is
stated by the British minister; and althn'
from our receptiou of- all sormer proposals
he could nOt see any benefit, nor could he
be expected 4 to state besorehand the full
extent os his instructiOns, ye: from what he
in.imat=s it is unavoidably to be presumed
he was directed— to' agree to something
more agreeable to us than the former con
ditions. _
lt was precisely the discovery oftlsissifitll
power and of this disposition to come ssion,
whith produced Mr. ]ackson's dismissal.
Let any impztrtial- man peruse this whole
correspondence, and he will find an invari
able disposition to seek an occasion ofcol
lision on the part of our cahinet, and as sc
duluus a desire on the part as Mr. ]at'ltson
to avoid it. One thing he must particular
ly notice, that although Mr. ]acltson's in
siuuations (if any man can discover them)
must be found in the early part of the cor
reapundcnce, yet there was not the slightest
intimation of discontent on our part until
Mr. ]ackson's-letter of the 2Id of October
disclusing his full powers and removing e
very possible obstacle to a final, full and
, satisfactory adjustmt nt.
F "It is then proved, that the sharp, ir
ritating imrsductory letter of our secretsry
of state, corn rising four articies nschatrge
against the ritish minister, was perfect
iy resutcdiin the subsequent correspond
encs ; but notwithstanding the British mi
nister's allegations they were oﬀcnsively
adhered to. ( anticipate that thou outra
geous psrtiznns who exclusively arrogate
to themselves the virtue of patriotism, will
hcrcgnterrupt meby ssying, that the de
clsrsticns of our ministers are more to be
relied upon by : True American than that
of ** C'opcnlcagm jack-son." I grant every
thing on this subject to national prejudice :
l agree, whic'usiisas much ss can be asked
of me, that cunnindiﬀermt subject, Mr.
]ackson, though supported by for! and evi
dance, is on: to be-sicrtdited by ctan Ameri-'
can patriot in Opposition to Mr. Suii'w un.
supported-by'auy proof; but s'till ( most
humbly content! for the peace of our coun
try, for the avoidanoc (li'th: hot-ton of
1 war, thst where ths point .of direct-dance
; consists "in what are or an: ttot'thsie palm-.
si sign: upon which Afr- jacL-ton' does it:-kist,
thy; his detention solemnly - {tye-tell as
to the are-.": of his pretcnjiim: is conducing
evidence of those preteustom. - si \
I Ws shall now, ]!an one or two other b
'
l."
towards Mr. ]ackson, the representative of
:lsis Britnnnic majesty.
Mr. Smith, mbst unaptly snd unfortu
sinately, had-cited : case from Vattel, to
sishew that Great Britain had no right to rc- ss
:jcdt the isirrssmgement with Mr. Erskiu:.— 4]
That case was. unhappily mast directly s- :
gainsr our side.- lt went to prove, that'ss
"* where-a bargsin was made by : minister
siin virtue 'osfullpowen it could not be re
jected without solid and weight}; reasons."
sss Mr. ]ztck son tinned bar/t parts of this
quotation against Mr-Smsiith, and with un
, answerahiesi force :-- ,
I Ist. That Mr. Erskinc had not ss Mr.
ss Vattel supposes in his quotatirm, full pawss
: (n'. \
i 2dl_\" That his majesty had call'd am!
f weightg reasons for the rejeetion—to wit,
; the tntni violations of instructions—the sai
; lssure to obtain any (If the conditions or ob
jectl CXPLCICG 'Dy lllc ugrccureun.
, How does Mr. Smith reply to these for
i cihle objections-P By a sarcasm Which par
' takes as much of temper as of weakness
ss' ** l understand,sir;(ssys heto Mr. ]scksun)
{ for the for time, that you object to Mr.
Ersktne s went offer/1 pmers. [( that be
an objection, the _same applies to yourself.
and we Might not to have heard you as long
as we have done, because you have exhi
hitcd no full pawers.
This was an admission of the principle ;
for if it had been true that a minister ple
nipotentiary ex qﬀicia had a right in all cases
to bind his sovereign, it would have been
the most natural, the most perfect, and cer
tainly a less insulting answer.
But Mr. Smith's'reply was defective on
another ground, as proved by the corres
pondence between Mr. Jessersoa and Mr.
Hammond, cited by me in a former num
l her: For though a-sll/l power isrequisite
to conclude tum/sign, yet a general letter of
credence is.-sufficient to nt-gnciate. Thus
in common life we are satisfied to make a
hargain with a repxlsi-ss'l array-ney, but when
we come to take the deed or contract, we
require and we examine the letter of attor
ney—in this case Mr. ]acltson was only
put-ing the way to a treaty : it was there
fore prematnre an-l indecorous to demand
his powers: -lt was still more than that to
demand them in so taunting a manner; but,
what is still worse, Mr. ]:zckson declares
that he'harl long bestsire this verhalZy srated
to Dlr. Smith that is: possessed such full
powers. To these Very irritating remarks
of Mr. Smith's, which one would have ex
pected would have roused the utmost re
sentmcnt of a laws-lily man, as Mr. ]:tck
son has been represented by our tlemocrnts,
he calm}, replicd, in his letter of the 4th
ol Not'ember—
"That he was surprised at the transition
by which it appeared to Mr. Smith that
this part of the su'cject was connected with
the anthoritssv empowering him to negociate
with Mr. Smitb. It will not, (sactts Mr.
Jackscn) escape your recollection that l in
formed you, at a very early period, that in
addition to the usual credcn'tia! [ever his
Majesty had been pleased to inrest me With
a full power under the great seal of his
kingdom for the express purpose of cond"
ding :! treaty ol cont'ention. [well rcmcm.
her your testifying your satissstion at the
circumstance ; and [now add, that when
ever it suits your convenience l am ready to
exchange myjizll power against that with
which you shall be provided for the progress
us the negociation. "
Thus we see that the laceratinq taunt of
Mr. Smith, was not only an unprovoked,
but in face of a positive knowledge, that
Mr. ];tckson Was furnished with special
and plenary powers.
- vered t'o btcot-veyed
L his ill/powere, Mr. Smith say: in his letter
!
stande- ofct Mr.ss Sshit 'sssbsqsi'oivg, am a
far " we can see unp'mvokssed harsh'n ",:
(
to . if. Pinkney, of Novct22,
" That nltbough Mr. ]nchon hnd given
us to undeintnd that the ordinary cr- dvn-ss
tial-, .mclt done in be delivered, could an:
bind his governoctieut, on such it case.]:is
praye-al had ctneithet' but: preceded by, not"
accompanied with the exhib'uion of other
com'miuion or full power." *
ln' this pangrctvph two idea: are endu
1n. Thut Mr. latchet-if- objectiosspsi toss
Mr. Brain-3 "did", ende-thin to the:
Une would imagine tnnt it woum be [it].
pouiblc, in a free country, a country en
joying the privilege. olsithc prcs-i, for ! mi
nister to question. after m.,it a dcciamtifm,
Mr. ]nckwn's power-, which cuch minis
tcr hsiuin right ntthe very moment to (1:
mand evident-mnine. But we shall God that
it is more easy to palm 08" am impoume in
this cniightened country. than we could
imagine ; and the result of thic assair wiii
shew, that even when detected, its eﬀects
on the author: of it, will not be perceptible,
unless it be to raise them in the ntimation
of thrir devoted partizans.
After this qﬀer of ,Mr. ]ackson to them
ctl'ssss' v —-—' -...,-_*-*- - t :— ..Qvo - - 7.
ss —si-—-.___
4
i
, " ' 'ssct 'sslsi l' ;. ! anf n'as;-13??? '
Tssw .]. "Mr. Smith anti_ Mr.- ;'.: sict
m man know—that it wn periectiy cas-:: ;;
and "won-ged by our own conduct in th:
case of him Hammond.
\ :dly- Tmt Mr. ]ackson realiv h'ttl a)
Lother power because he had not exhivit.,.l
i any. ss _
if any man, after reading ctthe' above, Ca't
find any means of getting nd of a- direct
end inch-{ent contndicuon, we shall for
the honor os oor Cabinet, be happy to n..
them pointed out.
-Amidat these charge: of perfidy and
faluhood,-edﬂncede'o iihmnily against the:
.Britieh Cabinet end Miniem'. one lows
sight of . greatnomber of off-nuing and
tude euggeetiom. lt would nardctiy' 5,
worth onr time and the ]zuh'ie patience i..
notice the strong and oﬀcnsivc [range-apt
which notified Mr. ]:chon of hie insiln
diecovenble and indiscribable off-'oce ; but
there in one sentence'which. for the honor of
our eonntty, I hope. (since one will be able)
[will explain tiiﬀenntly from its eppment
L-n m it; me premise. that in nntsnttnl cem
truvuni :, where there is neithtrjudgsi, jn-'
ry, norcmpirv, pct'scctjtuticc is not to be
expected. Neither p.ttcy ought to expect,
hnwwt-r they may claim to ohtnin every
thing they may deem right. Smnething
ought on hntb side-s to be :;tcristced to hnr
mony ; and the nation which. imim upon
the nttainmcnt of all in pretensinna cannnt
he conbidctcd as hctiug hestes-dy dcuiruuo of
peace.
, Mr. Mntiimn to sit us that Great Briu'm
!
I
tn the aﬀ-ir of the C-iecapenltc imista upon
i pretendinm which had bu n doclursicd in.:d
: miscihle. As this is the only point bn which .
; Great Britail tmk et any pretemiaui, nr m
i sists on any cmditimu, as we have shew n.
z and as the most certut'nly don in this (me
i incist on two pniitninurctv ptttnu. tt is impor
} tant to see how {as they are good came: for
! hlztrding our pence- . '
let. She innicu," That in the record of
th; : nisi-action t'hich she: shut]! nqree to ac
si-cept, : memorzndum shall he made that unt
lplochmntiun inferdictiag th': entrgsif'ns Bri
i tizh ships at was, has been row-aid."
WHEN. Mudimu in "his Love;-ed l'm-ss
go.};- entitln, " ctd [attend qu tle: fine step
, dawﬂþrocmlfnn tusi." . - ;
si This 'I! me! no; \ ]! i?- now admitfetl on all
tides shu'tfir act of the, Britioh mimiml who
nanthcrdrd; and ,of cow-se hu govern
]"
=
i
" You willsspereeive that throughout the
early stages o the cor't espnndeaee, this can
(that of the Chesaprake) was in some tu
spects improper/3: confounded with, in "(her
improper/5, "strutted/ram that of the Ord
era in Council."
Now, in the name of cantlnr. what course
was Mr.]acltson to take ? is he connected
it with the Order: in (found! it was impra.
pre :--lf he separated irfrem them, he was
equally in sault. is it not then clear that
Mr. ]ackson could not sa'tissy our govern
ment at any rate! This we have long
known, and this the present documsintt
prove beyoadl-tll contradiction.-Thry who
run. may read it—-and even the blind may
perceive it.
We have now finished this part of our
subject-and are latter ourselves redeemed
the pledge We had given to the public. It is
obvious from what has been said, that (ire:-( \
Britzsiin-adherz-d to no on} nsive propositions
in r.' it.:ion to her Orders in Counctl : That
those orders rest, as they always have done,
on ground which our own govesntnent'have
admitted to be correct in principle; that of
retaliation' on her enemy : That G. Britain
was willing to repeal them on the term!
which her minister assured her were ]trv
posea'by us : That finding we would not ad
mit th:.-m, she will not renew or insist upon
them—that Mr- ]arkson's reasoning ups-t!
them in his letters is sisnnlj: ,to convinr-si- 'l't
that thy are not now ionctbarfesszt to eithsir
them or us : And the lair inference is. that
when we proper.-se any terms short of them-,
and ye: amour-ting to a rcwictrlance !: the
French decrees, (ire.-at Britain will accept
them. That them] a right to expect as
mue/t at thy: from us is certain, because Mr,
]rﬀerson told Congress, and his party boast
ed lost year. that Woe had made her His-'t na
oﬀer: Such an osser, however, never has
been made. nml never will be," and the dis
coverctt' that Mr. ]ackson will agree to such
: prapom], is the true. rent.-an why the ne
gnciation is now bmlt- it oﬀ.
If then, as it appears, Great Britain does
not insist upon any preteneie—us as condi
tions [or the repeal of the orders in council
to which we cannot subscrih: *, isshe places
it sin.-ply on the ground of an eli'ecmai resitt
ance to the degrees of France, which we
have votrd shall not be submitted to, let me
examine isthere are any other pretensions
o! her's which should he a hart-ler to an at:—
can;:zctodalim.
meaning. ss la Mr. Smith'e letter ( ping: 81,
of the printed documcnte) he tho! writes to
Mr. Pinkney—