Virginia Argus — Richmond, Va., 1810-03-20 00:00:00, page 1

• . . * ' ■ .
' - . - ' ' ' */. •
■'
• I k
* *
1 5
picffaion} JS>ricc Current.
fcoHUECTsu Weekly.}
cash.'
D. C.
7»bacco, - - - 5 00
' V heat, new, - - 1 16
Flour, super- rmc, - • 7 00
Flour, fine, - r - 6 5Q
Corn, - - - - 3 33
lie mb, pet ton, • - 260 00
iZra/i, - - - 110 0Q
Bacon’ - - - 00 10
H iuskiry - - . 00 7lT
F O R E I gInT ;
ENGLISH OPINIONS ON
THE LATE CORRES
PONDENCE.
^From the London “Times” of Jn
r.uary 3.)
We this day resume the consider,
aficn of the correspondence between
Mr. Smith and Mr. Jackson. The
introductory part of the letter, which
wc insert from the former of these
gentlemen, relates to subjects of a su
bordinate nature. It first disclaims
the intention of offering any insult to
the British Envoy, in requesting tha<
his future commur.icntidns might be
made in writing; aftd then quarrels
with the mode in which the explana
tion lad been given, of his Britanic
j\T:iimotwf** for fb#» rl. a arAwrol I
of Mr. Erskine’s treaty. It seems
nothing will satisfy America but an
explanation from Mr. Jackson; and
tHis, Mr. Jackson says, he was not pre
pared f facially to make, as hi9 govern
merit had, at the time pf his mission,
contrived the business to have been
fclr*ady executed by Mr. Canning.
We must, however, observe, that if,
Mr. Canning did expressly tell Mr.
Pinkney on the 27th of May, that the
explanation would 4; be more proper
ly made by Mr. Efskinc’a successor*”
there must have been the grosses;,,
blundering imaginable, to send out
that successor uninstructed to give
such explanation : but this was at the
time when ministers were intriguing
to get each other out their places: theit
attention W2s better employed than in
studying to preserve consistency in
the public acts of the country. Yet
does the explanation itself rest upon
grounds, which even Mr. Smith does
«ot attempt to controvert: “ Certain
:t is,” says he, “that your predeees
4 sr.T did present for my condderatim
4 the three conditions which now ap
4.» <ar in the printed Document—that
‘he was disposed to urge them more
"4 than the nature of two of them (both
‘palpably inadmissible, and one more
‘than merely inadmissible) could per
4 mi'.” Here, therefore, we have a
direct cbticetsion on the part of Mr.'
. Smith, that the treaty concluded was
1 consentaneous to the instructions ;
and the explanation of its disavowal,
'therefore, ii properly made, upon this
1. riflC? r.li* /'’If ht rpfl ainltr to Ki,
oetir.cd umatisfactcry to America.
And lure, unhappily, the issue of
•the whole dispute may be anticipated.
'1 i i; ctdy terms which our Minister
•».v.:s authorise: d to make,** were,” says
A nit lien, *• inadmissible nay, were
me re than 44 merely inadmissible so
il neither government chooses to re
cede from its pretensions, war-is ine
■v ruble, and explanation useless. Mr.
]'.* Ahie’u act has only protracted the
period ot its commencement. It is,
perhaps, superfluous to speC*;^ that
me proposition which is Here called
•more•than “merely inadmissible,” is
tlv»t whereby it was proposed tha.
liritish ships should enforce the A
merica 1 hmbargo against France :,i*
proposition whicii we confesmgpvc^ u?
considerable Surprize at first, which
undoubtedly ought to be given up j
but wriicti Mr. Clausing st ties tit have
g iving from the acquiescence of Mr
a'ib k tic y.
The reparation for the Ch» sspeak*
rs next ndyerted to : and Mr. Suntl
» lu re states, that 44 he is authorised tc
4 receive in a proper form whatevei
■‘♦xplicit explanations you (>Ir. Juk
^ 4 son) may ihoo>e ' / make witu res
4 pset to the grounds of this part ol
4 the disavowal; and that ^Sie-qecr
‘ ingly au.is,) without inqumrg wh
• *| \ W
4 ther your authority he derived from
‘instructions that have been addres
‘ sed to yourself, or that have devolved
* on you as the successor of the min
* istcr who had declined to execute
‘them.” The motives for the retract
ing of this reparation we explained
yesterday, to consist in the insulting,
haughty, and offensive manner in
which it was received. To tell an in
dependent government, even in ac
cepting of its humiliation for a sup
posed offence, that “it would have
best comported with what “ was due
to its own honor,” to have offered
more, is language which of itself de
mands an apology among civilized
States. When, therefore, Mr. Smith
talks of the “conciliatory temper
i which has been evinced by the Um
! ted States,’* he is certainly doing nei.
ther more ncr less than laughing in our
faces.
Upon the subject of Mr. Jackson’s
going out to America without instruct
tions, to tender any precise propositi
ons for the general arrangement ofdif
ferences, we have a few words to offer.
This may at first sight appear strange;
hut yet our surprise will abate when
we consider that our propositions are
in effect before the Americans. They
sire three in number, and were cited
in our paper of yesterday. Cut these,
it may he said, the Americana ..again
and again declare, that they will not
entertain: true—then the most na
tural mode of proceeding is, that
they should now tender other s ; which,
as Mr. Jackson states, it was the ob
ject of hio mission to receive and dis
cuss. “ I (sa>'3 our envoy) have no
thing farther to offer ; vou know mv
proposals and refuse them ; let me
hear your’s.” “ X;>,” says the Ame
rican Secretary', even “were the way
properly open for formal propositions
trom this gov; rnment, a known de*
termination on the part of his <Ji i:aa
uic Majesty to adlier • to such -extra
ordinary pretensions,' would preclude
.he hope of success in such advances,
whether regard he had to the condi
tions themselves, or to the dispositi ;n
they indicate. Was ever doctrine so
monstrous as this advanced before r
Why, negotiation upon such a princi
ple inu&t always end «e its very com
mencement, if one negotiator makes
an offer which the other deems extra
vagant : the rejecting party has only
to say, “No, these are your offers,
wi:h which I cannot close ; you arc ob
stinate and ill-cJTsposed, that f know
priori you will adhere to them ; I
therefore will make you no others
whatsover.”
Be it, therefore, always recollected,
.hat t. e negotiation with America has
been suspended, not because we will
make her no offer, but because vve
• tave made her one, which she not
deeming satisfactory, has refused to
make any other in return.
The ouly remaining subject of im
portance dneussod in the American
Secretary s letter relates to the injury
said to be sustained by his country
men from the disavowal of Mr. Erk
«<»o>'6vhivui, i> .v, itis un
deniable that the. arrangement itself
was beneficial to the Americana ; and
:he meaning of Mr. Smith’s expres
sion, that they faithfully, on their
part, carried such arrangement into
effect, is precisely this, that they in
stantly availed themselves of the ad
vantages resulting from it. True it is,
that the order, whereby it was disa
vowed, ought not by us to have been
hastily carried into effect, so as to en
' rap vessels which had come out on
the faith of the arrangement. 13at
that this was not the case will be tole
rably evident to those who consider
that the treaty was concluded about
the middle of April—was known in
ishgland, and disavowed by our tninis
teis, on the 24th of iVlay; and yet
vessels were allowed to clear out un
der it from Anrjerican ports idl the
*Oih of July ; so that it must he stfon
ly suspected, that the list of grievan
ces given in Mr. Smith’s Utter, ol
springing from its abrupt suspension,
is an imaginary on . We caunotcon
etude our observations to day with
out remarking on the extremely bitter,
acrimonious, and sarcastic style, in
which this 1 elter ot Mr. Smith’s is
written.
We still continue to hear with the
gr atest antomshnent, but from pc
nanv rc>pi.cta)le couriers as not tr
be able wholl .* to adopt the truth o*
th' i, but the most confident accounts
i<d the manner ip which Mr. Krt»kiners.
dispatches were-garbled, before they
were presented to Pari ament. Nay,
:t is eve" said that he hul actually ob*
• a ne^l the substantial consent of the
American Executive Government to
all the three matters required by G. B.
as inserted in his instructions, and ast
rioted by order ot the House of Com
mons in the last Session, on the moti
on of Lord Iienry Petty: and that the1
arrangement was concluded entirely
upon the basis of such instructions,!
except that the arrangement was pro-]
visional, only because the powers of
he American : x.-cutive did not ex
tend to givu an official recognition of
the terms o” condi ion; required by
the instro .ions ; although there was]
no objection raised to them in any!
quart r, nor anv clou >•. of their beingi
acted upon by Congress. VVe can on
ly observe, tlijjt iftne above statement
oe true, the A meric an Government]
oust itsell either be disavowing its!
o wn act, or there must have been two
sets ot instruction , in conformity to
the latter of which the treaty must
have been concluded ; inasmuch as
Mr. Smith’s letter, contained in this
day’s paper, again and again declares
the indignation with which any offers,
branded upon Mr. Erskme’s acknow
ledged instructions, would, be receiver
by his government. *
It is farther asserted, that ministers
knew ot this conformity of the treaty
to the instructions : that they were in
full possession of Mr. Erdrine’s com
munication upon the subject when
tlirv flicauAur* I _SL...
I - 7 ;— »
wnich communication they concealed
from Parliament at the time the pro
duction of it was called for by Lord
Henry Petty, when he moved for the
instructions.
I iOm the Courie.r^a Ministerial
Paper.
1 he remainder of the documents,
laid before Congress, contained in A
merican papers of the first of last
month, have been received. They
bring down the correspondence be
tween Mr. Jackson and the American
government, to the abrupt rapture of
die negotiation, and Mr. Jackson’s
suusequent removal from the seat of
government.
\Ve must confess that this closing
part of the correspondence 13 more
satisfactory to us than we expected it
wotild be, we thought considering the
peremptory assertions of the American
government, that Mr. Jackson’s con
duct had been so gross & insulting, that
no f;rr her negotiation could consis
j tently with dignity or decency be car
iriedon with him, that some strong
case should have been made out a
| gainst him—though even then we
jsuouid have thought the American
(government acted with little wisdom,
jin shutting thi door against negocia
on, with such pettish abruptness. Out
really we find nothing in Mr. Jack
son’s letters that could more justify
(the American government in break
jing ofl with him, than would
L_ • • r in/r -v «
juonucu at*i. jacicson m Break
ing oH with the American govern
j ment. The latter perpetually recur
to the disavowal of ivlr. Erskine’a ar
rangement—was our minister to re
main silent, and skulk from rescuing
his court from the imputation of ha
ving acted unjustly ? No—he was to
shew that •he arrangement was dis
j*/ow(k1, because it was made without
authority. 1 he American government
then recur with the same frequency
to the assertion, that if .v,'r. Erskine’s
instructions did not authorise him to
conclude such arrangement, that fadt
should have been distinctly slated*
Here too we suppose it will be argu
ed, that our minister was to abandon
his court, and for lcar of offending
the American government, refrain
hom replying that the fact was known
to tht in* Ny, he acted with more fidel
ity to his court, & with the manliness
becoming his country & his character.
He stated that Mr. Erskine’s instruc
tions Were in substance made known
to the American government, and he
added that Mr. Erskine himself had
stated the tcrn.i which he was actu
ally induced to accept, were substitu
ted by the American minister in lieu
if those originally prop used i.\ pnrsu
i aocc of his-instruction*,
4
Beaten off these two grounds, the A
nsrican government have no recourse
left, ha*, to suppose rh it v. Ersk'me
had two sets of instructions, one,
which he did shew, not authorising
him to do what he did, a second which
he did not shew, affording hi:n co n
plete authority and justific itton. The
Sbiurditv of this supposition is evi
dent. Mr. Erikine of course, wool 1
not have con-,ealed such an authori
ty had he been in possession of it ;
but Mr. Jack son not stopping to ex
pose its absurdity, contents himself
with the more powerful answer, that
Mr. Erskine had not two sets of in
srructions — that he had only one,
which was made known to the Ameri
can government, and which did not
authorise him to conclude the arrange
ments he did conclude.
To all these points the American
govern vent recur over and over
gain, and we do the reford insist, that
Mr ; Jackson was perfectly right, nay,
that he would have violated his dutv,
it lie had not, as often as they were
pressed, given that decisive and con
vincing answer which he did give*
I he screnessof rhe American govern
ment upon fhese points is s Pmething
d.<ke fne soreness of the woman in the i
play, who could not bu.ir to have her
want of chas'ity alluded t;. “ Touch
any subject but that, and 1 am as gen
tle as tue lamb—'nut whenever you
Ip-.ovcfke me upon that, lam ready to
tear your eyes o ut, villain.”- The A
j meric an government seem to have
thought they had played a most dex
[ t&m3 diplomatic trick in inducing
our mmisteV to sign an arrangement
so contrary to hU instructions ; the1,
were in haste to execute it, that is, to
secure the advantages it aiforded
them ; and then rinding the trick of
no avail, they cry out ^against ns be
cause ffc would not be the dunes of
it.
Our readers will remark with the
pride of Tritons, the manifest advan
tage which Mr. Jackson has in argu
ment Sc lac*. over tne American secre.
tarj'. The latter evidently dares r.ofc
enter the list3 with him—he shifts
his ground, and conceives our minister
to have urged pretensions which are
distinctly and unequivocally denied.—
I Me says “ it is understood that his
Britannic majesty perse veres in requir
ing as’indispcnsible conditions on the
part of the United Smtes, an entire
relinquishment of the right to trade
with the enemy’s colonies, and also a
permission to the British navy to aid
in executing a law of congress.”
This statement Mr. Jackson dis
tinctly denies ever having made, ei
ther by word of mouth or in writing.
Not a word, too, is said in reply o M *
Jackson’s letter of che 2Tdv Oct. about
the terms of satisfaction offered for
$he attack upon the Chesapeake—nay,
with almost unparalleled disingenui
ty, Mr. Smith argues as if no such
letter had been sent, and no reparation
offered—After reading it, the most
strenuous advocate of the Americans
will hardly deny that the reparation
we oifered was ample, most am
ple.
If there be any who contend that
the points pressed by 31 r. Jackson
were not necessary to be pressed,
could do no good, and might do much
harm to the negociation—that the cor*
i eapondence ought not to have iifen
retrospective, we reply— lie it so—
Yet if the American1'government be
gan by taking that retrospective course
our minister coul 1 not d > otherwise
than follow them, and take tie line
he did—Dut it is not easy for us to
believe after an attentive perusal of
the concluding part ot the correspon
dence, that the reasm.s given for
breaking off all negotiation with Mr.
Jackson \n re the real ones—they seem
only to have been ibe ostensible ones,
.met this, we dare say, \vc shall see
shortly.
Alter leaving Washington, Mr,
Jackson was forced to apply for speci
al safeguards for hunseii, family and
suit; Having already been once gro-s
lypnstilted by the ijnabit.int* of Hamp
ton, and the p:\si encowraged th
(people to commit violence noon hit
person.
it would not be doing justice to
Mr. Jackson not to direct t:iu aueuti
on of our reUlert in a pecnlinr mi -
ner to ti'ic very able man ier in w<ii< h
, on letters arc written ; .p». liculurb
.the letter of the 23 1 of Oc% Kis lan
Jg iage may be too strong for thedeli
jeate nerves an i appetites of the A
J.merican advocates, it may not he !»rai
(decl and festooned with snfHcisnt ele.
I gunce tor them ; he may not have
! pinched the plaits of his |i!rtast.ology
with sunicient neatness, nor placed
nis patches and feathers with thut cor
rectness of millinery which was c?.l
Ctf/ued to pje.ise.the eye and the taat«t
ot that cxt[uisiti '•/ dcuc.ue govern*
meat. blue we tru*: v. e shall always
{have ministers speaking such true
iifitbh language.
j F110 M TITeTH'ATIL 3 hi A NV
I.o*r»r>N, Tii&rsd jy, Jan. I t.
American papers, containing ihfbf
VfiUiioti ot very serious importance,
were sent on aho'e by the American
frigate John Adams, which passed
Dover cu Tuesday, and were received
I in town* yesterday afternoon. It is
[understood that a gentleman, charg*
ed with dispatches for the American
envoy, at Pari*, had been previously
landed on the coast of France. The
American frigate did not, as was ex
pected, make for the Thames,.but
shaped her course for Holland. Our
readers will perceive, in the extracts
that we have given, with what ran
corous resentment the conducto f Mr*.
Jackson has inspired the predominant
party in America. Even the very
senate have abandoned the language
of .diplomacy, not hesitating to declare
t!uu cl i'Ir. JacKson, in iiis correspon
dence, “ insolent.” The introduction
! of a bill to “ authorise the president
i to send out oi the country offending
i .itiiimf afa D , * ..ami**,.* .1_^ 1
proposed under die impulse of sudden
irritation. Y/e cannot see the neces-.
sity, the importance, or the utility o£
such a bill.
The budget of Mr. Gallatin is a
1 lam ratable proof oi the departure of
; America from the principle of econo-,
m,, on which she hitherto has acted,
liie seed* of corruption have, w*
'greatly fear,already been scattered in
that only remaining seat of freedom,
i Even the remarkable events that have
recently occurred in Europe, are less
calculated to excite surprise-, than (ho
announced probability of the United
States being compelled to res
the despicable and ruinous system', of
borrowing. For the last seven years
the prosperity oi America—the in*
crease of her revenue—and iff ex
tinction olfcher debt, have been subjects
of annual triumph.—Yet, in 1810, wicb
the example of England before her tyesy
America i3 about to open the floUt! .
gates of corruption to “ Loan mX
gers 1” As yet, the emigrations from
England have been chiefly from those
classes who could no longer exist m
. their n.rrve land, in consequence of
the effect of this very system, which
is about to be adopted in America
Farewell, a long, an eternal fare well
to the happiness of chafe land.in w hicla
! the funding, taxing, banking, jobbing,
lighting system, once g.ts foot-no.
I What has Amcrict to-do with war ?
jj.1 tne kingdoms of Europe prefer
(bloodshed and slaughter to peace, why
anuuu America involve uerseif as a
party in their madness ?—iia<j not A*
merica the means, the ample, nay,
boundless means or comfort and h.» >*
[ pines*, within the boso n of her own
territory? What a despicable race
must be the American if they any
longer hesitate to refuse all intercourse
with the belligerent cffaairbeiM of Eu*
rope ! But < i; co-umeroe ot v ijeric .
— Snail America .submit to the priva
tion of her commerce j ivfi.it so’ch ■
of human beings can ry ;er hope fi
dependence? Wit t sari-ty iauec i
ever deserved the eiijovmcnt ot tii
blessing; whose irs lesi CUpi llt\,
who33 insatiable -avarice, lead ! then
it > the most re note region* i 1 pl( ,
[suit of wealth, while they ueg'er; ihr
busings, the comforts, and ih !n<»
•pinesi which nature hor, placed >-l
: their eyes at home ? The <y;tS u> *e
| of the products of ihe 'Various <: ; ur i
of this globe wars the origin, and i-»
i natural, rea^ohabl?, and legitimate o,,«
' ject of com uci w c#
I With all the superstition,
1 and,in many respects, prv,. »qr v>ra •
l ot Chinn, wc iooi tu v uu for ;u- n , ■
I steal/ adherence to i.. rr ;. .1.,. ..
plei of nation it in fop : . lj.\ - -, v * i
what cuj'Sti'y ii Chiu * 'depend;.it i. •
1 he.'ijo hsnerev ? A-jur*.- t it of e*; *.s
* ■ i
*