Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-04-27

addition to what is .statedin our JOINT letter OF
January 8 1897, that nothing would nave
been more easy than to have omitted any pro- !
vision on the subject of it, and to have placea
that trade or the footing ofthe most iavot1te
nation. To obtain better terms BY treaty was
utterly impossible. We were much inclined
$ toeomit any provision on the subject, because
we were aware that the arrangement mace
would fall short of the expectation OF our go"
y~rhment and country, and most probably
!. snbiect MS TO .censure. We acceded TO that
Arrangement from conviction that 1t secured
,,s hatte,. terms than we should be likely to
enjoy, if left to depend upon the pleasure OF
!. the British government, simulated DIS We
lnew that was to restrict US in it by the India
company, and other interests OF the country
) Ii is impossible to conceive 700 high an l.
dea of the jealousy which is entertained OF
the United States, In commercial view, 10y
that government, and ct the danger with
which it thinks Great Britain Is menaced
by their extraordinary prosperity and rapid
growth The holdness of The projects, and.
the activity and ability with which they are
s prosecuted BIZ our merchants and mariners,
excite the admiration of Europe. Great Brit
tain has seen, wherever our citizens gained
footing, they never lost it. Without dlstrust-
ing her own means, or the hardness and ac-
tiyity of her people, she finds that our poslu-
/, on. remote from Europe, contiguous to the
West Indies and the southern continent, and
as near TO India as herself, give us advantages
s against which she cannot cope. The effort
which we made and rersevered In, for several
s months, to cain admission into British India,
on more favorable terms, and the disposition
: which was shewn by the British COMMISSION
ers to Weld, excited a sensation or more pro-
perry speaking, an alarm IN the board cf India
directors, and of the commercial people IN
general, even among those who had no paru-
cular interest In the question, which was eX-
tremelv obvious Had we made DO provision
In the treaty, to secure our adnlttance Into
ss.Isaia ON certain conditions, We mad much
have been fcttered 10 crSsS7, TsrS szoull
in every form.
We were extremely anxious to provide that
ourcitizens might make their shipments from
Europe, TO take specie from Spain and Por-
tugal, goods from iEngland, sc and that they
might touch at the Cape of Good Hope, at
the Isle of Bourbon, at the Mauritias, sc.
that they might carry on the ceasting trade in
India, and be permitted to pass from Calcutta
to China. These advantages were insisted
s on, but the pressure which we made produced
reports from the board Of directors, at the In
stance of the government, and from political
men conversant in these topics, which fixed
the government in Its decision not to grant
them. repeat, however, that it would have
been easy to have omitted the regulation from
the treaty, and placed the trade on the foot
ing Of the most favored nation, as it would
have been at any time afterwards, had the
state of affairs in Other respects permitted It.
BY your Instructions q provision In favor
Sfindemnity was not made an indispensable
condition of treaty. We were authorised to
conclude one without it. We were, there
fore, persuaded that the ground on which
that interest was placed, could not fail to be
approved. The arrangement which we made
authorised inst claim to expect dismission
of all the causes that were depending in the
courts of admiralty, and even to an indemnify
in the cases Of condemnation. The documents
which we forwarded to youin our joint letter
of give full view Of this subject, and
TO them beg to refer.
Your 5th objection applies to the 4 sth and
10Th articles of the treaty, and in the frstin-
xtahce to the prohibition it contains, of ex-
tending the privileges which are made reci-
PrOCeu OSl"SCh 1hS Dat(ACSS " O$Hcf uallOnS
which is supposed to oe breach OF neutrali-
ty. Had conceived that those articles were
Justly exposed to that imputation, should
certainly not have assented to them But
saw no foundation for the imputation. With
Spain and HoAand we have treaties which Sc
cure them all the rights to which they are
entitled. 1t is usual and certainly proper, for
q nation in estimating its claimson other pow
erS. % examine lie treaticS with them and
not to think of setting up pretension beyond
the limit of such treaties. BY treaty, neither
ofthose powers have any right in the case In