Star.
London, England, 1814-11-19 00:00:00

the Indians, which arrangement woOd be subiect ft
the ratification of our G )vernment ?

" We answered, that before the subjects were dis.
timely ttederstood• and the objects in view more pre.
cisely disclosed, we could not decide whether it would
be possible to form any satisfactory article on the
subject ; nor pledge ourselves as to the exercise of a
discretion under our powers, even with respect to a
provisional agreement. We added, that as we should
deeply deplore a rupture of the negotiation on any
point, it was our anxious desire to employ all pieseee
means to avert an event so serious in its consequences;
and that we had not been without hopes that a di:.
cussion might correct the effect of any ertoneout
formation which the British Government might }nee
received on the subject, which they had proposes!
a preliminary basis.
46 We took this opportunity to :Tithe:, that L.-,
nation observed a policy more liberal and herwatet
towards the Indians than that pursued by the United
States ; that out object had been, by all practicable
means, to introduce civilizstiolt amongst them ; reef
their poves,ions were secured to them by well defined
boundaries ; that their persons, lends, end other pro.
petty, were now more effectenlly protected against
violence or freuds from any quarter, than they had
beet under any former Government ; that evett ottt
citizens were not ?Hewed to purchase their hinds
that when they gave up their title to any pnrtiOn-set
their country to the United St: tee, it was by Veil
tary treaty with our Government, who gave therre it
satisfactory equivalent ; and that through thei,e means
the United States had succeeded in preserving, sirai
the Treaty of Grenville of 1795, an sinintenueteil
peace of IC; years, with all theindiati tribes—a period
of tranqtti:lity mach longer than they were tocileitO
have enjiyed heretofore. - 7`•• • :.1.1
si It was then expressly stated on onr:pett;:
the proposition respecting the Indians Irts:lierdli
tinctly understo We asked, whethee ihe 011066:
tion, and the settlement of a boundary fn. therm Were
both made a tine qua non P Which as answered in
the affirmative. The question was then asked the
British Commissioners, whether the proposed Indien
boundary was intended to preclude the Unite !Statei
from the right of purchasing by trusty from the In-
dians, without the consent of Great Bsitaih, lands IY.
ins beyond that boundary ? And as a restriction upon
the Indians from selling, by amicable treaties, lands
to the United States, as had been hitherto practised?

41 To this question, it was first answered by one of
the Commissioners, that the Indians would not be
restricted from selling their lands, but Oat t‘ le
United States would be restricted from purchasing
them ; and on reflection, another of the Commis-
sioners stated, that it was intended that the Indian
territories should be a barrier betkeen the Britt*
dominions and those of the United States ; that Ix&
Great Britain and the United States should be re-
stricted from purchasing their lands ; bet that the
Indians m ght sell them to a third party.
" The proposition respecting Indian boundary,
thus explained, and connected with the right of sot
vereignty ascribed to the Indians over the country,
amounted to nothing less than a demand •of the ab-
solute cession of the rights both of sovereignty and
of soil. We cannot abstain from remarking to you,
that the subject (of Indian boundary) was indistinctly
stated when first proposed, and that the explanations
were at first obscure and always given with Mut-
tante. And it was declared from the first moment,
to be a rine qua. nen, rendering any discussion un-
profitable until it was admitted as a basis. Knowing
that we had no power to cede to the Indians any part
of our territory, we thought it unnecessary to ask,
what probably would not have been answered till the
principle was admitted, where the line of demarka-
tion of the Indian country was proposed to be
established ?

ig The British Commissionerh after having repeat-
ed that their instructions on the subject of the Indians
were peremptory, stated, that unless we could give
some assurance, that our powers would allow us to
make at least a provisional arrangement on the sub-
ject, any further discussion would be fruitless, and
that they must consult their own Government on this
state of things. They proposed accordingly a suspen-
sion of the conferences, until they should have re-
.ceiveil an answer, it being understood that each party
might call a meeting whenever they had any propo-
sition to submit. They dispatched a special messen-
ger the same evening, and we are now waiting for
the result.

" Before the proposed adjournment took place, it
was agreed, that there should be a protocol of the
conferences ; that a statement should for that purpo9e
be drawn up by each party, and that we should meet
the nest day to compare the statements.

a We accordingly met again on Wednesday the
10th inst. and ultimately agreed upon what ahou:d
constitute the protocol of the conferences. A copy of
this instrument we have the honour to transmit with
this dispatch ; and we also enclose a copy of the state-
ment originally drawn up on our part, for the put-
pose of making known to you the passages to which
the British Commissioners objected,

4, Their objection to sc.nre of the passages was, that
they appeared to be argumentative, andthat.tbe ob•
ject of the protocol was to contain a mere statement
of facts. They, however, objected to the. inbati3o
of the answer which they had itimen,to.oua question
respecting the effect of the proposed Indian b.un.

dary i but they agreed to an aheration of their orig.
Wrap, sittott on that subist, which renders it much
int—e explicit than as stated, either in the first con
feonce or in be ptoposed draught of the prot-r.-1.
Thr.i..ls,,.obji-cted to the insertHn of the f ict.
ghat. they had, .proposed to adjourn the conferences,
until thoff4lll4lola.taiu turther instructions from their
C,K*etnnsent. • Toe ,tar,. of their messenger may,
perhaps, disclose the motive of their reluctance in that
ospect..—We have the honour to be, very respectfully,
sk, your buaible and obedient servants,
(Signed) " JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, J. A. BAYARD,
Ho CLAY, JONA. RUSSELL."
4' PROTOCOL OF CONFERENCE. •

" AUGUST 8. 1811.—The British and American
Commissioners having met, their full powers were re-
spectively produced, winch were found satisfactory,
and copies thereof were exchanged.
~ The British Commissioners stated the following
subjects as those upon which it appeared to them that
the discussions between themselves and the American
Commissioners would be likely to turn.
4, 1. The forcible seizure of mariners from on board
Merchant ships on the high seas, and in connection
with it the right of the King of Great Britain to the
allegiance of all his native subjects.
el 2. That the peace be extended to the Indian
Allies of Great Britain, and that the boundary of their
territory be definitely marked out, as a permanent
harrier between the dominions of Great Britain and the
,United States. An arrangement on this subject to
he a sine qua non of a treaty of peace,
~ 3. A revision of the boundary line between the
British and American territories, with the view to
prevent future uncertainty and dispute,
4. The British Commissioners requested information
whether the American Commissioners were instructed
to enter into negotiation on the above points But be-
fore they desired any answer, they felt it right to corn_
municate the intentions of their Government as to
the North American fisheries, viz. That the British
Government did not intend to grant to the United
States, gratuitously, the privileges formerly granted
bY,treaty. to thefts, of fishing within the limits of the
Acipill sovereignty and of using the shores of the Bri-
tish tertiteries tor purposes connected with the fisheries.
Aumfir 9. —The Meeting being adjourned to
the 9th of August, the Commissioners met again un
that day.
~ The American Commissioners at this meeting
stated, that upon the first and third points proposed
by the British Commissioners, they were provided
with instructions from their Government, and that the
second and fourth of these points were not provided
for in their instructions. That 'in relation to an In-

din pacification, they knew that the Government of

1 the 'baited States had appointed Cin nissioners to
treat elf
~peace. with. die Indians, Sand that ityrasikot
opetallable that peace had beets made with them:
"s*A-Inerirvan Commissioners presented further
144er-to moldered by the Government of the United
States as suitable fur discussion.
-61 1. A definition ci blockade, and as far as may
bnapved, of other neutral and belligerent rights.
_•+!c2. Certain claims of indemnity to individuals for
captures and seizures preceding and subsequent tc
the war.
" S. They furtl:cr stated, that there were various.
other points to which their instructions extended,
which might with propriety be objects of discussion,
either in the negociation of the peace, or in that of
a treaty of commerce, which, in the case of a pro-
pitious termination of the present conferences, they
were iikewise authorised to conclude. That for the
purpose of facilitating the first and most essential ob-
ject of peace, they had discarded every subject which
was not considered as peculiarly connected with that,
and prese!ile4 only those points which appeared to be
immediately relevant to this negociation.
" The American Commissioners expressed their
wish to receive from the British Commissicners a
statement of the views and objects of Great Britain,
upon all the points, and their willingness to discuss
them all.
44 They, the Antetican Commissioners, were
asked, wh.:her, if those of Great Britain should en-
ter further upon this disctsssion, particularly respect.
ing the Indian boundary, the American Commission-
ers could expect that it would terminate by some pro.
visional arrangement, which they could conclude,
subject to the ratification of their Government I
" They answered, that as any arrangement to
which they could agree upon the subject must be
without specific authority from their Government, it
was not possible for them, previous to dhcussion, to
decide whether any article on the subject could be
formed which would be mutually satisfactory, and to
which they should think themselves, under their dis-
cretionary powers, justified in acceding. (Signed)
(Prue Copy.) CHRIST. HUGHES, JUN. Sec. of Leg."
The meeting was adjourned.
DRAUGHT OP ORIGINAL PROTOCOL MADE BY THE AIME-
RICAN SIIIILSTERS, OP THE TWO FIRST CONFERENCES
HELD WITH THE BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
" At a meeting between the Commissioners of his
Britannic Majesty and those of the United States of
America, for negotiating and concluding a peace,
held at Ghent, Bth August, 1814, the following
points were presented by-the Commissioners on the
part of Great Britain as subjects for discussion s
" 1. The forcible seizure of mariners on board of
merchant-vessels, aid the claim of allegiance of his


Brkannic Majesty ego! all the eatteatties objects
of Great Britain.
44 2. The Indian Allies Of Great Britain to be.in-
chided in the pacification, and a boundary to be set
tied between the domlitions of the Indians and those
of the United Sta.'s. Both parts of this point ire
considered by the British Government as a rine qua
non to the conclusion of a treaty.

46 3. The revision of the boundary line between the
territories of the United States and those of Great
Britain adjoining them in North America.
" 4. The Fisheries, respecting which the British
Government will not allow the people of the United
States the privilege of landing and drying fish within
the territorial jurisdiction of Great Britain without an
equival.
" A nierican Commissioners were requested to say,
whether their instructions from their Government au-
thorized them to treat upon these several points ; and
to state on their part such other points as they might
be further instructed to propose for discussion.
44 The meeting was adjourned to Tuesday, the 9th
August, on which day the Commissioners met again.
64 The American Commissioners at this meeting
stated, that upon the first and third points proposed by
the British Commissioners, they were provided with
instructions from their Government; and that on the
second and fourth of these points, there having not ex-
isted heretofore any diffnences between the two Go-
vernments, they had not been anticipated by the Go-
vernn::•nt of the United States, and were, therefore,
it+t provided for in their instructions. That in relation
to an Indian pacification, they knew that the Govern-
ment of the United States had appointed Commis-
sioners to treat of peace with the Indians; and that it
was not improbable that peace had been made with
them.

66 The American Commissioners presented as fur-
ther points (subjects) considered by the Government
of the United States as suitable for discussion.
" I. A definition of blockade, and, as far as may be agreed, of
other neutral and belligerent rights.
" 2. Certain claims of indemnity to individuals for captures
and seizures preceding and subsequent to the war.
" 3. They further stattd, that there were various other points
to which their instructions extended, which might with pro-
priety be objects of discuuion, either in the negotiation of the
peace or in that of a treaty of commerce, which in case of a pro-
pitious termination of the present conferences they were likewise
authorised to conclude. That for the purpose of facilitating the
first and most essential object of peace, they had discarded every
subject which was not considered as peculiarly connected with
that, and presented only those points, which appeared to he im •
mediately relevant to this negotiation.

" The American Commissioners expressed their
wish to receive from the British Commissioners a
statement of the views and objects of Great Britain
upon all the points, and their willingness to dis-
cuss them all, in order that if no arrangement could
be agreed to upon the points not in their instructions,
which would come within the scope of the powers
committed to their discretion, the Government of the
United States might be put in possession of the entire
and precise intentions of that of Great Britain with
regard to such points ; and that the British Govern-
ment might be fully informed of the objections on the
part of the United States to any such arrangement.
" They, the American Commissioners, were asked
whether, if those of Great Britain should enter fur
ther upon the discussion, particularly respecting the
Indian Loundlrys the American Commissioners could
e:peci. it would terminate by some provisional arrange-
ment which they could conclude, subject to the ratifi-
cation of their Government ?

They answered, that as any arrangement to
which they could agree upon the subject must be with
specific authority from their Government, it was not
possible for them, previous to discussion, to decide
whether an article on the subject could be formed
which wcuid be mutually satisfactory, and to which.
they should think themselves, under the discretionary
powers, justified in acceding.
" The British Commissioners declined entering
upon the discussion, unless the American Commis-
sioners would say, that they considered it within their
discretion to make a provisional arrangement on the
subject, conformable to the view of it prescribed by
the British Government, and proposed to adjourn the
conferences for the purpose of consulting their own
Government on this state of things.
" The British Commissioners were asked, whether
it was understood as an effect of the proposed boun-
dary for the Indians, that the United States would be
precluded from the right of purchasing territory
from the Indians within that boundary by amicable
Treaty with the Indians themselves, without the con.
sent of Great Britain ? And whether it was under-
stood to operate as a restriction upon the Indians
from ceding by such amicable treaties, lands to the
United States, as have been hitherto practised ?

a They answered, that it was understood, that
the Indian territories should be a barrier between the
British possesions and those of the United States ;
that the United States , and Great Britain should
both be restricted from such purchases of lands: but
that the Indians would not be restricted from selling
to any third party. (Signed)
copy) " C. HUGHES, Juv."

" See, to the Minion Extraordinary."
The Meeting was adjourned to Wednesday, the
10th August.
[Here follows a long Letter from Messrs. ADAMS,
BAV ADD, CLAY, Ruesw.L, and GALLATIN, to Mr.
MUNROE, dated the 19th of August, relative to a

Icontefetice hetd that day, but which, !x want of
rociO, we cannot give till Monday.]
NO It OF THE BRITISH COMMISSIONERS:
liteceiceil after the above l.etter was wrirreal

" The undersigned Plenipotentiaric•; of his Mita!,
'ruc Majesty do themselves,the honour of acluaintiny
the Pleriipotentiaries of the United Stites, that the.
have communicated ui their Court the resul►_ of th,
conference which they iaad the honour of holding
with them upon the ninth instant, in which they sta-
ted that they were unprovided witH any specific in•
strnctions as to comprehending the Indian nations in
a treaty of peace to be made with Great Britain, and
as to defining a boundary to the Indian territory.

" The undersigned are instructed to acquaint the
Plenipotentiaries of the United States, that his Ma-
jesty's Government having at the outset of the nego.
ciation, with a view to the speedy restoration of peace,
reduced as far as possible the number of points to be
discussed, and having professed themselves willing
to forego, on some important topics, any stipulation
to the advantage of Gteat Britain, cannot but feel
some surprise that the Government of the United
states should not have furnished their Plenipotenti•
aries with instructions upon those points which could
hardly fail to come under discussion.

Under the inability of the American Plenipoten-
tiaries, to conclude any article upon the subject of
Indian pacification and Indian boundary, which shall
bind the Government of the United States, his Ma-
jesty's Government coticeivs that they cannot give a
better proof of their sincere desire for the restoration
of peace, than by professing their willingness to ac-
cept a prcvisional article upnn those heads, in the
event of the American Plenipotentiaries considering
themselves authorised I'm :4r cede to the general prin
ciples, urns which such an irtick ought te be f mnd•
ed. With a view to enable the American
tentiaries to decide, how fir the conclusion of such
an article is within the limit of their general discre-
tion, the undersigi ed are directed to state fully and
distinctly, the b .ses opon which alone Great Britain
sees any prospect of advantage in the centinuanee of
the negotiations at the present time.
" U ad, rslgned h ,ve already had the honour o'
stating to the Ana rican Ilenipotentiaries, that in con-
sidering the poirts alsose teferral to, as a sine qua n
of any tt. tty of peace, the view of the British Go
vernmesit is the permanent tranquillity and security
of the Indian n (Onus, and the is vention of those jea-
lousies .Inl irritations, to which the frequent altera-
tion of the Indian limits has heretofore given rise.
" For this purpose it is ind7spensibly necessary that
the Indian nations who have been, during the war, in
alliance with Great Britain should, at the termination
of the war, be included in the pacification.
It is equally necessary, that a definite boundary
should be assigned to the Indians, and that the con-
tracting parties should guarantee the integrity of their
territory, by a mutual stipulation, not to acquire by
purchase, or otherwise, any territory within the r.peci
fled limits. The British Government are willing to
take, as the basis of an article on this subject, those
stipnlations of the treaty of Grenville, subject to mo-
difications, which relate to a boundary line.
" As the undersigned are desirous of stating every
point in connection with the subject, which may
reason tbly influence the decision of the American
Plenipotentiaries in the exercise of their discretion,
they avail themselves of this opportunity to repeat
what they have already stated, that Great Britain
&tires the revision of the frontier between her
North American dominions and those of the United
States, not with any view to an acquisition of territory,
as such, but for the purpose of securing her possessions
and preventing future disputes.
" The British Government consider the Lakes,
from Lake Ontario to Lake Superior, both inclusive,
to be the natural military frontier of the British pos•
sessions in North America. As the weaker p'iwer on
the North American continent, the least capable of
acting offensively, and the most exposed to sudden
invasion, Great Britain considers the military occu-
pation of these Lakes as necessary to the security of
her dominions. A boundary line equally dividing
these waters, with a right to each nation to arm, both
upon the lakes and upon their shores, is calculated to
create a contest for naval ascendancy in peace as well
as in war. The power which occupies these Lakes
should, as a necessary result, have the military occu-
pation of both shores.
" In furtherance of this object, the British Govern-
%ens is prepared to propose 4 boundary. But as this
might be misconstrued as an intention to extend their
possessions to the southward of the Lakes, which is
by no means the object they have in view, they are
disposed to leave the territorial limits undisturbed,
and as incident to them, the free commercial navi-
gation of the Lakes, provided that the American Go-
vernment will stipulate not to maintain, or construct,.
any fortifications upon, or within a limited distance of
the shares, or maintain or construct any armed vessels
upon the Lakes in question, or in the rivers which
empty themselves into the same

" If this can be adjusted, there will then remain
for discussion the arrangement of the north western
boundary between Lake Superior and the Mislissippi,
the free navigation of that river, and such a vaca-
tion of the line of frontier as may secure a direct
communication between Quebec and Halifax.

44 The undersigned trust that the full statement
which they have made of the views and objects of
the British Government in requiring the pacification

tiatiOrti petaisitiii genic. id di&
miter es, will enableshe Anst.iican BknipotbntiaEyre
t conclude a provisional article upon ihe basis above
tined.

" Should they feel it necessary to refer to the Go.
vernMent of the United States for further instructions
the undersigned feel it incumbent upon them to ac:
quaint the American Pienipotentiales, that the Go.
vernment cannot be precluded by any thing that has
passed from varying the terms now propos^d, in such
a manner, as the state of war, at the time of
ming the conferences, may, in their judgment, render
advisable.

gg The undersigned avail themselves of this occasion
to renew to the Plenipotentiaries of the United States,
the assurance of their high consideration.
(Signed) "GAMEICH. HFNItt
" WILLIAM ADAMS.
" Ghent, 19th August, 1914."

In one of the American Papers there is a long de.
tail of an attack made by a British naval and laid
force, on the 15th September, on Fnrt Bowyer, on the
point Mobile. The Americans repelled the attack,
destroyed a British ship—the HERMES, of 24 or 28
gnas—and damaged the Sorum of 18. They boast .
also of having killed and wounded 85 men on board
the CARON, of 24 guns.—Another brig was present,
name unknown. The land force consisted of 110
marines, VOO Indians, and SO artillerists. The Bria
tis!) retreated towards Pensacola, whence they had
come ; but the garrison expected another attack in st
few days.