The Sun.
London, England, 1810-01-02 00:00:00

TO MOTHERS AWL), NURSES.

?If RS. ME lICHA No.
NI, 3, Middiestx-street,
ViSomers,town, has exriieneed one of the greatest hies-
singS in hurnali n'ature, that of being restored to a'dear Child,
winch to all appearance was at death's door. Her dear Child
was in a consurosion, and lay several days in convul-
sions, with his '1 ecth, when a friend gave her half a bottle
Dt the'AMERICAN SOOTHING S/111113 ; the Mother
nu sooner tubbed it on his glom than, he/began to mend,
and had a good night, which was the first for three weeks,
and is now fully restored though he was quite tat:en off his
feet.

be had of the Proprietors, I fohnsoc, and Co. 9;,
Newrnan•strc:et, Oxford-street ; 4ncl retail of ,Golding, 4ii
Cornhilf ; and of all the priqeipal Medielite Veniit-is in
Town and Conntry, at 25." 91. a Bottle, tor Ready- Money.

Cl-11NG's PATENT WORM LOZENGES.
WORMS are the most frequeUt sources of Cliii
dren's Diseases. Their symptoms every Parent and
G Kardian of Children should be acquainted with. They oc-
casion I..ciss of Appetite, a l'alenos of the Colour of the.
Face, F.madiation, and irregular state ofthe Bowels,- attend-
ed after with violent pains; they bring on Convulsions ; they
anet.the groWth of the Body, and they prove fatal, by end,
ing in a Consumption or Decay. both a Preventative and
Cure bl these alarming Complaints, the above excellent Me-
riientit is'untvursally allowed, on the testimony or the highest
charaders it-hthis Country, both in rank and respedabiiity,
to hive no equal. Their public approbation, given
,to the
Proprietor, Irom a personal knoWledge of its wonclerftil sue-
ceslin their own Fatuities, stamps its merit beyond competi-
tion, and gives a sanction to ir, of which no other' Medicine
of the kind can boast. Parents, and others who haie. the
Care Of Children, should have this 'Remedy as a Family Me..'
diciiielo resort to, whenever the Stomach or Bowels of Chit-
dren areany way disordered, which *it will always be fouaid
to relieve.

I;;lc,wholeiale and retail, at Ching and Butler's,' No. .l,
Chcipside, Londo►t; •and retail .by Smith, Scott, and Bax--
ter, I:;ditinurgh ;. Neyvman, Exeter; Hoxland and Gran.
vine, Plymouth ; Hazard and Crutwail, Kith ; and by triest
Cottotry V'f.rlders, ir. Boxs at as, 9d. and eao).

A reurrenee to that intitnation cannot fail to show
that its sole objea was to avoid, in the further -db.'
ctissions-of a' case of tinnsal delicacy and importance;
the misconceptions ;Welt- known to. he incident to
oral proceedings, and or which -the diplomatic inter-
course berw,...-m the two Governments had furnished
so many and such serious proof, nay of which your.
letter itself is additional illustration. That a change
la diplomatic discussions tram' an oral to a written
'form is not without preceient, I cannot refer
which be More. sati4lnCiory to yon than the in-
timation recently given by Sir. Canning; in 'the c:lse
of the proposal by Mr. Pinckney on the subject of
the Orders, in, Council and the. Embargo, that the
discuSFriOns which had been previousl;:verbal, most
-thenceforth- take a • written form. ,And -t‘.l ti ttsts
view I take the liberty of recalling your attebiloi-s 10!
• the subjbin-ed 'exit atts (See A. enw.l.3.)'ot letters that
paved on that occasion.
'On the•pc:esent., as on that oecasion,..the: change
from verbol to wriven communications was rerineAed
• after two cor.4erencts, and when the. subje.ct 'appfeir-
ed to o: e 1)f the parties to Piave, by those,Verbil dis-
cnssbns, hc.en brought to a point,-w inch requit n
precise understanding of the views: and propo,hions.
of the' oiher.'.
Yon *lO, S'ir, hence petceive, that in maintain-
,' irig:the , winch -every- Governmeot has to the:
!_rules of Intereaur.e with, foreign fond:inn:tries near
• it, ilt) ellabathillent has been 'Or intended on.
-any right or customary .privilege belonging to you in
that ehafiteter, nor any•thiug 'done to' impede the
properkmd usual course of negaciation.-
i. Yoti lave been sntficieully app; sued, L 7 my letter
of" the 9th,Of the light in which theTre,ident views
the •arrangement 'lately made by your prrtdecesor
with this Government, and .of the, grounds on
Which he has expected 13 formal and satisfactory- e'x-
planatiOn of Ole reasons 'for the reinsal of hip Bri-
tannic Majesty to eat ry it-into effect: He persists in
that expetiatidn, and in the opinion that there has
been given tui explanation .that-iS adequate, either as
to'the matter 'or as to the mode:.
When one Government has been solemnly pledg-
ed to another in a mutual engagement by its ac-
knowleged and competent agent, arid refuses to ful-
' fit the pledge, it is perfeally clear that it owes it,
both to itself and to the other' party, to accompany
its refusal with alOrmal and frank disclosure of sut-
ficient reasons for a step, which, lAittiout such rea-
sotis';' must deeply injure its own eharader, as welt
'as the rights of the party confiding in its good
faith.

To refuse with honour (says a high authority
On public law) to ratify what l y,.s been
. concluded on
by virtue ofn full power, it is.ecessary that the
Govermnent should have'. strong and' solid reaNxis,
and that he thew in partictilar that his Minister 'has
viblated his instruction*"
•
Although it is particularly incumbent on the Sc-
.Vereian in such case to shew that his instructions
have been violated, yet it is not a mere Violation of
them on immaterial points that will be sufficient.
It is indispensably requisite; moreover; that the rea-
sons,be strong "anesolid ; that they manifestly out•
weigh not only the general obligation to abide-by
what has been so done, but also -the disappoint-.
meat 'and injury accruing to the other parry. And
it is worthy of notice, that the case under discus-
sion is of a higher, cliarecter,yind appeals with greater
solemnity to the honour and justice.of the refusing,
party,-than the case stated in •Vatel, inasmuch as
the transaction, now disavowed, was not a treaty or
convention to be ratified by both parties, previous to
an execution by either. It had, according to the
- terms .of it (and this peculiarity appears to have
been contemplated by yout-Govertnt:at),' *-
wally and immediately.eartied intOexer:
execution cn t'ito
part of America. The refusal or his Britaileic
Ivlajesiy, . is therefore • not simply to ratify what
had been ratified by the other party, but to carry into
efjeti, on his part, art arrangement which. had been
carried into full effeet with good faith on the part of
the United States. Now- the ease is strengthened
by the further peculiarity; that some of the circurti-..
stances attending the execution of the arrangement
' on the part of the United States render it unsu.,,cep-
tible of full equivalent for° the refusal to execute it
on the other side. ,
It has nut escaped observation, that the obligation
of your Government to tender explanations on this
occasion is admitted by your attempt to shew that it
has been sufficiently done in what pased in conver-
sation between Mr. Canning and Mr. Pinckney, and
by the inStrbdions given to .Mr. Erskine to commu-
nicate such explanations. With every di.pvsitton
to view in the most favourable, light wliatever may
1,, affeelthe t.latiOns between the 'two countries 7; it is
; impossible to mistake the conversations of ttf,;e)rt-
i gistt:rs for a discharge of such a debt to the goad

faith and reasonable expeaations of the United
Statei. Besides that they were mere conversations
in a case requiring the precision and" respe& of a
formal communication, it is certain that it was. nei-
ther understood by Mr. Pinckney, nor intended by
Mr. Canning, that those conversations were so to
be regarded. 'Mr. Pinckney is .ditOliCit7oi this point;
and Mr. Canning himself; after•dechning to recapi-
tulate in Writing what he hadverbally remarked,
sig-
nifi>Yd to Mr'. Pinckney,. in a letter deted-,May, 27th,,
that'his obssryetions on the aubjeft. wotild' be 'more
• properly made through the succeisor. of Mr. Erskine,
who was about to proceed to the United Swag.
• . With respect to •the instructions, on this point,
given to Mre Erskine, it might be-sufficieht to re- ,
they.were never carried inEi execution :
but it may be asked, whether it was a mark of
friendly respect to the United States to employ for
such a purpose a Minister with whom his Govern-
went had •thought propel; ptiblicly to withdraw its
confidence, 'and to the peculiar-delieacy and embar-
rassment of whose situation you have yourself re
erred, as act-taming for his not having executed the
task imposed upon him.. ..• ' .
I must here repeat what was suggested in my
former letter, that the successor of Mr. Erskine is,
the proper fun&ionary fot a proper explanation.. Nor
• can I 'perceive the force of your remark,.that the de=
lay incident to your arrival in the United States Ten-
• dered it more consistent with the friendly sentiments.
of his Majeity to press the Other channels for corn-
municating the motives for his disavowal.. To your
own rtconsideration I appeal, which in the course
most ceosonant to those friendly sentiments, was
not the obvious out of 'emp‘oying the new organ,
gearding at the samelime against any misconstruc-
tion of the delay by apprising the American
•Govern-
meat
.through its. Minister of the cause-of it, , The
supposition' that the delay incident toyour mission
gave rise to the conversation of Mr. Canning and Mr.
Pinckney, is not reconcilable to the correspondence
• of thd latter, which contains no such indication. On
the contrary, it distinelly spews that he was ap-
prised of the' intention to replace Mr. Erskine by' a
successor, whom he'regarded as the proper channel
for the explanatory communications, that he under-
stood Mr. Canning to be under the same impression,
and that he learned from yourself,-.not more than
two days after his 'conversation with Mr. Canning,
that you were to sail for the United States, within
three weeks. .
Although it may not have, been your intention
to have given to this.subject a posture which it would
not have naturally assumed, yet such has been the
tendency of, some of your. remarks, and particular-
ly of the conclusion you have. drawn. from the two .
circumstances, Ist. That no trace of complaint from
this Government against Ole disavowal appears in
the records of, the British. missiop, or was distinctly
announced by me in', our conferences, and 2d, that
from the official correspondence of Mr, Erskine with
,his Government, it appeais, that althoughle did-not
commun'cate ilc eztenso his original instructions, he
submitted to me the three conditions therein speci-
, ted and received my observations on-each. • ,
. If there be ho trace of complaint against the disa-
svowel in the archives of, the mission, it is because
this Government could-not have entered such com-
plaint before the reasons for the, disavoWal had been
explained. and especially as. the, explanations were
justly. and-confidently expected through the new.
functionary. And as to the supposed reserve on Any
part on this subject in our several conferences, Idid
"imagine, that my repeated intimations to you of the
necessity of satisfactory explanations, as to the dis-
avowal, were sufficient indications of the dissatis-
faction of this Government with respect to the disa-
vowal itself.
' The-stress you have laid on what you have been
pleased to state as the substitution of the tertns finally
.greed on, t for the terms first proposed, • has excited
no small negreeof surprise. .Certain itis, that your
predecessor did present for my consideration the three
conditions which. now- appear in the printed docu-
ment--Lthat he was disposed to urge them more.than
the'nature of two of them (both palpably inadmissi-
ble, and one more than merely inadmissible) Odd
permit, and that, on finding his first proposals nu-
successful, the more reasonable terms comprised in
the :zrrangernent respeaing the Orders in Council.
were adopted. And. what,TSir, is therein. this'to
countenance the co: « usion you have drawn in. favour
of the ,right of his•Britannie Majesty to disavow the
- proceeding? Is any thing more common is ne-
gociat ions than to begitesvith a higher demand apd that
tailing to descend to a lower,? 'To have, if not two,sets
of instructions, 'two, or more than two grades of pro-
. positions in the same set of instructions, to begin'
with what is • the most desirable, and to, end. with
'what is found to be admissible, in case the more de-
- sirlble should not be attainable. This must be ob-
vious to every understanding, and it is confirmed by
~ universal eXperience.
.
. What were the, real and entire instruions
given to your predecessor is a -question essentially
between him and his Government. That he liar!, or
at least,. believed he had sufficient authority to con-
elude the arangernent, his formal assurances, doring
our discussions, were such as to leave tio rootit for
doubt. Ilis subsequent letter of the 15th June re-'
pewing his assurances 1.0 me " that the tvrins of the
agreement so happily concluded by the recent nego,'.
ciation will be strictly fulfilled on the part of his Ma-
jesty,"
sion than was as to his instructions. And with a
view to shew what his impressions hay...-1 been even
since the disavowal, I must take the liberty of re-
. .ferring you fo.,the annexed, extrae4 (See C) from
his official letters of the 31st .July and of the 4th
of Angtast. . , ,
the declaration « that
,the diSPatch from Mr..
"Palm* to Mr, Erskine, of the, 23d January, is the
,p'nly dispatch by which the cienditiens were preset-if>.
p 4 to Mr. Erskine for the conclusion of an arrange-
ment on. the matter tp.which it relates," is. now for
the time time made to this Government. And I need
Ilardly add, that if that dispatch had been communi-
cated at the lime of the'arrang*lit, or if it had:
heen known that the propositions contained iri: it;
and which were at first presented by Mr. Erskinee
were the qnly ones on which he was-authorised to
make an arrangement, the arrangement would not
ha-
.•
ve heen made.
••
youAs have disclaimed any authority to offer
fi'9lNlations foe the disavowal, as you have been
wtliidg to ascribe the want of such authority to the
cpnsideratien that other ehennels hadbeen preferred
2114 as ysl.! have even considered 1-11 --;.ircutnstane,eS

pnder which the arrangement Lock place'to be such
as could only lead to a disavoWal,-and therefore as
superseding..the necessity of any explanation what- I
ever, it is to be *regretted, that you. had not deemed
it proper to render precise-a:4d explicit, that part of 1
you letter which seems to imply'that you. had in our it
conversatations, in-relation to the atLir of the Cher
sapeake, following the Words of your instructions,
held out not only the manner in-which the-repara-
tion had been accepted, but even the form in which..l
it had been.tendered, as warranting his Majesty in ;
even retracting the offer of reparation, and that you I
had elucidated.. the observation 'by a referenCe to the I
particular.expressions at all events, put it to-
tally
out of bis power to confirm any act containing.
'them.

' Whatever may have been your intention in this
part of your conversation, or whatever may be the
import of the- passage .to which I have just al-
luded, I have now. the honour of signifying to
.you, that I am authorised. to receive in a proper
form whatever explicit 'exptanatious you may choose
to make with respe6t the. grounds of this part
,of the disavowal and without inquiring whether
your authority be derived from instruations that have
been addressed to, yourseif,
.or that have devolvod
on you as the successor of the Minister who bad de-
clined to execute them. _ _

As you have, at the same time been pleased, to
Say, that his Britannic Majesty had authorised you
to. renew the offer'- of ,satisfaaion whiche,Mre
Erskine was. instruaed to make, it Was also na-e
turally expeaed that • you would in your letter.
have _stated with precision in what that offer dif-
fered from the reparatiOn solemnly tendered by •
Mr: Erskine, and accepted by the United States,
and that you would have shewn in what the re-
paration thus tendered' differed from bis instruc-,
tionse -And when I had the honour so- 'intimate
that order to: avoid the misconeeptkons incident to
oral.. proceedings, it was thought expedient that
our further discussions ,on the present occasion.
should be in the, written form, there was no part
of the subje& to which that., intimation
,applied
with more force than the case of the Chesapeake ;
none on which it was more. desirable to avoid Mis-
conceptions and obtain a precise knowledge of the
propositions which You were authorised to make, not
only because I did
.not really understand the par-
ticulars of the offer as distin&ly as you seem to have
supposed,' but, also because, on that point,' and on
that alone, you bad 'expressly 'Stated that you had
propositions to make, and that you were author-
ised to carry them into immediate execution.
On the subjea of the Orders in Council, the Pre-
sident
perceives with sentiments. of deep reoret, that --
your instructions contemplate neither an explanation
of the refusal of your Government to fulfil the arrange-,
merit Of that branch of the existing differences, nor
the substitution of any other plan,of adjustment, nor
any authority to conclude any agreement bn th4t
subject ; but merely to receive and'cliscuSs proposals
that might be made to,you on the part of the United
States ; and these, it appears, must include a sti-e
pulation,on the part orthe United States to relin-
quish -the trade with the enernies' Oulonies, even
in bra-riches not- hitherto interrupted by British
Orders for capture, and also a sanction to the en-
forcing of an Act of Congress by the British navy.
• Were the .way properly opened tot formal pro-.
positions, fromehis GovernMent, a knoWn determi-
nation on the part of his Britannic Majesty to ,ad-
hare to.stiCh extraordinary pretensions, would pre-
dude the hope of success in such advances, whether
regard be had to the conditions themselves; or to
the disposition they indicate, in return for-the con-
ciliatory temper which has been evinced by the
United States. •
• As to the demand, in .relation to the colonial
trade, it has been the less apprehended, as it is not
in itself connected, nor has it, ever before been
brought, into -connection, either with the case of,
the Orders in Council, or with that of the Chesa-
peake.. And, it was reasonebly to be presumed, if
the idea of such, a condition had in the first in-
stance proceeded from the erroneous belief that it
was .not objectionable to the United States, that it'
would not have
.been persisted in after that error
had been.ascertained and acknowledged. •
'The other demand could still less have been ap-
prehended. . Besides the inevitable and incalculable
abuses incident to such a license to for9ign cruisers,
the stipulation would touch one of those vital prio-
dples of sovereignty which no nation ought to have
. been,expeded to 'impair. For where, would be the
difference in; principle between.authorking a foreign
Government to execute, and authorising it to make
laws for, us ? Nor ought it to be supposed that the
• sandi'ous and precautions, of a law of the United
States, in the cases, of the prohibited trade in ques-
tion would prove inefficacious for its purpose.
,Hati,notte,ot those obstacles presented themselves
to the course cerrespondingevith the sentiments and
dispositions-olthe'President, I should have felt green'
pleasure in giving you formal:assurances of his tea-
dieess to execute the CONitirtIODA authority with
which he is invested for restoring in its full extent,
as . far aS it may depend on the United States, the
• commercial intercourse of the two countries, and
. that he would, moreover,, he disposed to,eXtend the
experiinene of a friendly negociatiou to every point
of difference and of mutual interest between-them;
If, indeed, in the event of a successful termination
of what relates to the case of tire Chesapeake, it .be
' thought that' a removal of the difficulties. arising
from the Orders in Council might be facilitated by
comprehending them in a general negociation, and
the operation of the Orders can in the mean
bc, suspended, the door might be considered as ini-
mediately open to, that course. of proCeeding.
To such a suspension no reasonable objection can
be made, if, as you have stated, the Orders in
Council, as now modified, leave the trade of the
United States nearly as great as it would be without
the existence of such Orders, so long as France and
the other Powers shall- continue their decrees, and
inasmuch as a discontinuancd of their -decrees by
those Powers centessedly requires an immediate and
int ire revocation of the .Orders in Couocil. •

That 'a suspension of the Orders, with a view to
their being brought into a general. negociation; is
more reasonable than a temporary submission to their
authority by the :United, States with that view, is
obvious from the refle6tion .that such a submission
would necessarily involve a relinquishment of ;the
principle which they have stedfastly asserted, wheri.
as a discontinuance ut the Orders in, Council, in tle
present actualtat of things, would not be

patible with the principles on 'which they were ori-
ginally founded.
This principle was, as you well know, the neces-
sity of tetaliating,• through neutrals, injuries te-
ceived through a violation of their rights by another
Belligerent. In the aaual state of things, and un-
der the actual modification of the Orders in Council
prodUced by it, it is admitted by you, that the Or=
• ders hive no practical gifted in abridging the corn-
meice of neutrals, -and can• of course have no reta-
liating effed on the other Belligerents.
Although it cannot be allowed to be true that the
Orders in °Council are no 160 get injurious to the
commerce of- the UnitedStines, it is certainly true
that ihey produce no degree of injury to tl e enemies
of Great Britain that can cotlntenance the retaliating
plea alleged in support Of them.
What, permit me to ask, .is the-degree of injury
aanally accruing to the enemies of Great Britain
from her fetalLiting Orders According 'to those
Orders; as now modified; and mote especially tak-
ing into view along with them the prohibitory law
of this country in relation to France; the essential
difference.iletween their repeal and their existence
consists in this—that in the case Of their repeal, as
pledged by the 'arrangement of April,, the trade of
the United States might be carried on direetly with
the ports of Holland, whilst, during -their, exist-
ence, as at present, it is to be carried on through
the contiguous and 'neighbouring ports. To your
own calculations, Sir, 1 submit Whether' the ihcOn-
siderable area of circuit on the prices in Hol-
• land and in
.the'cotintries snpplied through her, can
:any ,longer sustain the plea of infliaing distress oh
~an enemy, or palliate the injuries done to a friend
by a proceeding 56 contrary to his sentiments of jus-
tice, and whic subjea his regular commerce not
only to inconvenient channels, but to aft the abuses
which may result f;-orn the suspicions, real Or pre7
tended, of interested cruisers: Yob cannot but be
Sensible, that a perseverance under such circum-
stances, in a system which 'cannot longer be ex-
plained by its avowed °hie& would force. an expla.
nation by some object not avowed. What objed
might be considered as best explaining it; is an in-
quiryinto which I do not permit myself to enter
further than to remark, 'that in relation to the United
States, it must be an illegitimate object. .
It remains to make a few observations which are
due to the just interests of the United States, - and
which are invited by yours relating to the Orders in.
Council of May last. ,
, .
You seem to consider that measure as comprising
the utmost precaution that was in the power of his
Britannic Majesty-to take, for preventing losses, from
his disavoWal of the engagetnent of your predecessor
to citizens of the United States, who had resumed
their commercial pnrsuits on the faith of that att.
Wit4out• entering, into a full view of the inade!-
quacy of the 'Order -in that respell, I take the
libertiofTpointing, out the following instances in
which it falls ,essentially short, of its declared in,
tention.

The Order does not provide for the important
case of vessels returning with cargoeslrona the ports
of Holland.
2. The•eXernprion from - interruption of vessels
bound from the United 'States to Holland was re-
strided by that
_Order to such as should have de-
parted prior to the 20t-ti of July, at ivhreli'dateit is
not certain that the Order, which was not Officially
,
communicated until the 31st of that month, had
even reached anyone point of the United States. So
that some vessels may .have sailed between the li-
Mited datii the arrival 'of the *Order in the
United States, 'and. many from .distant ports must
• have done so after its arrival, but before a know-
ledgs, of it had become general ; all proceeding on
the faith of the arrangement, yet all left by the
Order exposed to' captUre and- condemnation.
3. The Order does not provide for the important
case vessels which had sailed on the like faith
for Duteh ports -otherthan.those-of Holland.
4. It dt)s not include in its provisions the exteb-
sive list of vessels going indirectly from the United
.
States,
,but diredly frOm foreign portS, to those of
Holland,.: nor vessels trading entirely from foreign
ports to Holland ; and in both these instances pro-
ceeding on the faith of the arrangement professed to
be respeded within the defined period.
It is true, in these last instances the vessels, were
not to be captured- without an attempt, after con-
trary ,warning, to proceed to those por6., But I
need not remind you that the injuries incident to
the delay, and to the breaking up of such voyages,
cannot have been considerable, and will have result-
red as manifestly from the disappointed faith in the
arrangement, as- in the cases specially provided' for,
and consequently with all other losses fairly result- •
ing from the same tonajide confidence in that a&t,
'they will fall 'within the just indemnification for '
which the principle, assumed in the Order,' is a
formal pledge:
To,conclo,le, Sir, with pressing upon yotar candid
attention, that the least which the'President could
have looked for in consequence of the disavoWal of
a. transaction such as was concluded hy,yeur prede- •
cessor, and carried faithfully•into effect by this Go-
vernment, was an explanation from yours of the
disavowal, not 'through the' Minister disavowed,
but through his successor—an explanation fotinded
On reasons strong and solid in themselves, and pre-
senntl, , neither verbally nor vaguely, but in a torm
comporting, with the occasion, and with the. resped
'due to the character and to the good faith of the
disappointed party; that it. has been round with
much concern and with net less surprise, that,you
are charged with no sash explanations ; that you
have'apparently wished to bring the subjects which
have been formally and definitively arranged into
fresh negociations, as if no such arrangement had
taken place; •that one of the cases thus slighted,
viz. that of the frigate Chesapeake, is a case for
which reparation, not denied to be due,, had been
previously so long o,;ithheld,, or rather in which 41e
aggression itself has been spun milt to the 'present
Moment, by, the continued detention of the chari-
n'ers, whose seizure, making a part of the original
'• hostility committed against the American frigate,'
must be regarded in alight analogous to a continued
detention of the ship itself; that in the other case,
viz. that of the Orders in Council, you are not
authorised to tender explanations for the 'disavowal,
or to propose any new arrangement, or to conclude
a-ny agreement, but solely to receive and discuss
propositions, which.might be made to you, not con- -
aeaiing, at the. satne time,
,that, to, be satisfadery,
tllcY (Pust inch* two pudilionsi both inadmissible,

--one altogether irrelevant to the subjea, and the.
other requiring nothing less than a' surrender of 'an
unalienable 'fuuEtion of the national sovereignty.

• Notwithstanding these repulsive considerations,.-
.such is the disposition of the President to facilitaftt
a float and compiehensive account-iodation between
..
the-t4o nations, that he is ready, as I have already
had the honour of signifying to you, to favour any ''.
'node of bringing about so happy an event thatruay ....,..
be found consistent with the honour and the esseuk• _ ,T:
tial interest of the United States. . .
. .
I have the honour to be, &c. _ ..
(signed) K. SNIITIS, •
The lion.. Francis lames Jackson. .
(To be continued To-morrow.)
• ~,,

MAILS.
AItRIV2D..-I Dublin. DUE-3 Got:enburgh, z Lisbon,
2 Waterford.

PRICE OF STOCKS
_ THIS WAY AT TWKLVS o'cLocx.
Consols for Opening 7011 Red. Ann. - - 6g

I'HE SUN.

SOLEM QUIS DICi.ItE FALSUM AUDEAT?

-A._......,

L 0 N D 0 N,

TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1810.

The Marquis WELLESLEY appears daily to be-
come more obnoxious to the Opposition Writers ;
and, unless we are grossly deceiyed with respea to
the talents and to the principles of that Noble Lord,

he will always continue the object of their nvete•
rate hostility. If the Noble Lord had thrown his
weight into the Opposition scale—if, in a period of
unexampled difficUlty and danger, he had endea-
voured, by a captious and persevering opposition, to

thwart and embarrass the measures of Government--
then indeed those columns would have been filled
with his praises;which are now replete with invec-
tive and abuse. It is hot unentertaining to observe
the-curious contradiaions which frequently appeai
in thespace of 24 hours in the same Paper, respecting
the Marquis WELLESLEY. At one time he is bitterly
reproached for taking a satordinate office under Mr.

PERCEVAL, and the next day the public are solemk-t
ly assured 'that his Lordship is exceedingly a
tious of the office of Prime Minister; and, to *C
,the whole, the third day produces an account
quarrel between !hese two Ministers, and of a cha
in which one. or both of them were wounded !I
There is certainly ari agreeable variety in these sort of
paragraphs, and they evince great powers of invention
in the Writnrs, but we should suppose that a man
could hardly be found, even "among the Readers-4
the Opposition Papers, credulous enough,to be krt.
posed upon by them.

As the American Crl-respondence is not corn;
pleated, in the continuance of bleb we submit to
our Readers this day; we still deem it proper to re-
frain from all observations on the subjeet till we-
have a distina and comprehensive view of the whole
subjea in dispute.

Yesterday morning dispatches rs-ere received at
the Office of the War and Colonial Department from
LOrd,WELLINGTO-N, in Spain.
A Cabinet Council was held yesterday at the Fo..
reign Office.

Mr. CHARLES R.-VAUGHAN sets off 'this 'day to
embark for Spain, being-appointed Secretary to the
Honourable H. WELLESLEY. Mr. V. means, if
possible,- to visit the brave, but unfortunate t0v..., of
Saragossa, of which he speaks so highly in his lute-
resting narrative. • • '

CHRISTOPiIgIt MAGNAY, Esq. has been unani=
mously eio.e;cd Alderman of Vintry Ward in thss,
room of the late NATHANIEL NEwNHAD4, Esq.

Messrs. Brander, Grant; McLeod, .Blakiston,
Lewis, Tattnale, Hall, and Meek, •midshiprren of
the Royal Navy, arrived in London on Tues,-;,:.7 last,
having effeCted their escape from the prison of Givet, •
in France, ;after nearly four -yeas- imprisonment in •
that country: - On their way towards the coast they
picked up and brought w!th (hem 'a poor British
searnan with a .wooden leg, who effe&ed his escape
from the prison of Arras.' •
KNOWING-ONES TAKEN 7N.--A few days since
a .genteel7/aqing fellow, calling himself Thom
111:Indeville, Went to the Shakespeare Tavern, in.
Plythouth, and most completely got on the BLIND
side of the landlord, by informing him thar lie harks
cargo of oats, the arrival, of which he hourly ex-
pected from Waterford, at the .same time.:producing
simples, bill of lading, fact,' every thingap-
neared so correct,. that Mr. Adulteration, in expec—
tation of a good cnstomer,:did not tiesitAte >to ac.
co,nmodate;:hirn• with :board and lodging, together
with a new' great coat, &c. -In .the mean time the
pretended. merchant went.constantly tot the Cusi om-
houseloascertain.the arrival of the-Ahrldnta (the ship
which was Said to' have the: cargo..on. . At
length t4ie anival of the supposed Cap a n of the
Atalanta n%as announced, and being inttuduceti, the
natural inquiries respecting., the voyage, state of
the cargo, &c. were made, to whjcli suitable an-
swers being ;returned, nothing' remained but to
drink success to the. Sa,a of the." Cargo.----in the
midst of their festivity, a Gentleman.from Trema-
ton happened to drop in, and' being shewn the
sample, readily became a purchaser of the cargo;
but the ship having been .represented to have 114 ••• .
an unusually tedious voyage, and the crew, in con-
sequence, reduced to short allo.wance, an advance
of cash was. proposed to bind- the bargain and re-
victual. the ship,.which being unsuspectng!Y acced-
ed
to, and the time and phlce of delivery -appointed,
they took theil• departure, leaving the host and pur- •
chaser .to contemplate each other on their imaoittary
41a1a01si ,