The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-05-12


We have the honor to be,
With great consideration & esteem,
Sir, -
Yourmost obedient servants,
JAMES MONROE,
WILLIAM PINKNEY.
JAMES MADISON, Secretary
Of State, Harrington. S
No. 8. LONDON, January s, 1907.
|SIR,
We have the honor to transmit you a
treaty, which we concluded with the British
commissioners, on the 31st of December.
Although we had entertained great conf
denCe from the commencement OF the nego-
citation, that such would be its result, it was
not until the 9th, that we were able to make
any satisfactory arrangement of several of
the most important points, that were invol-
vtd in it. On the next day, we communica-
ted to you that event by several dispatches,
three of which were forwarded by vessels
from Liverpool, SO that we hope you will re-
ccive very early intelligence of it. We COM
nit this, with the treaty, to Mr.. Purviance,
who, we hatter ourselves, will have the good
| fortune to arrive in tinre to deliver it to you
before the adjournment of congress.
| The necessity we feel ourselves under, to
forward to you the treaty without delay, will,
we fear, renderit impossible for us to enter
SO fully OH the subject of it, as on many con-
siderations it might be proper to do. We
are aware that such instruments must be
construed, by an impartial view of their con-
tents uninf1uenced by eXtraneous matter
A knowledge however of the sense in which
the several articles of treaty were under
stood by the parties to it, may in most case
tbe useful. it's also just to remark that some
circumstances occurred in the course OF this
negotiation, which. although they do not APP
pear Oh the face of the instrument itself,
vet as they may have no inconsiderable inf1u-
ence OH the future relations of the two coun-
tries, it is peculiarly important to explain.
We shall endeavort to give such explanations
where they may be necessary, in the best
manner that may be found compatible with
the dispatch which the occasion SO imperious-
ly requires, and we t1atter ourselves without
emitting any thing on any point that may be
deemed OF essential Importance.
The first article of the resent treaty which
lstipulates that peace shall subsist between
the parties is taken from that of IDA, and is
found in most of the modern treaties.
The second article confirms those of per-
tmanent nature in the treaty of 1894 The
British commissioners were very DESTROYS
to introduce the permanent articles of that
treaty in the form ofnew stpulations, in the
Ipresent one. They insisted with great ear
nestness that the article which relates to the
trade with the Indian tribes, should be SO "a
mended as to admit the traders of Canada
land the Hudson bay company to participate
with AS in the trade, with the tribes in Lou
lisiana. They seemed to admit that by a
fair construction of the article they could not
support such claim, but commended that it
was justified by its spirit. Their solcitude
on this point, which they had supposed was
Ion tat,to TO- he
led some embarrassment and delay in the bu-
siness They intimated that it proceeded
from desire to conciliate the public opinion
in this country i'll favor of the treaty
which became necessary in consequence OF
the concessions which they thought they made
us on other points. AS we were decidedly OF
lopinion that the article in the treaty of 1894
could not apply to territory afterwards acqui-
red, and could see nothing in its spirit which
entitled 1t to such an extension, and more
Especially as our Instructions contemplated
a different result, it was impossible for as
to adopt that proposal. They finally agreed
therefore, though not without evident reluc-
lance, to the article in its present form.
We regret to say that the third article
which regulates our trade with the British
possessions in India, which, with one essen
tial and most unfavorable difference, is the
same with the thirteenth article of the trea-
lty of 1894, is not what we had been led to
hope it would be practicable to make it. A
ware OF the importance attached to this COM
mercc in America, we have used the most
Jealous and preserving efforts, not only to
Iprevent the introduction of new restraints up
on it, but even to emancipate it from some
of those which the treaty eff 1894, had dis
ltinctly sanctioned The India company have
however been less accommodating than was at
first expected, and hence the rejection of all
the amendments proposed by us, one of which
sought to omit entirely, and (when that was
refused) to modify, the proviso copied from
the treaty of 1894, that our voyages from the
British possessions should be direct to the u
States. This amendment, in both its shapes,
was repealed III such manner as to convince
us that nothing would be gained by contiau-
ing to press it, and we gave itup at length
with great reluctance. In this stage of the
business, the British commissioners insisted
upon an amendment upon their part, BY which
our voyages to British India were required
to be direct from the u. States. This unex-
Ipected amendment was proposed, at the in
} stance of the India Company, after the pro-
jcct of the British commissioners (Which
with reference to this subject, was itera
copy of the 18th article of the treaty of 1894
had not only been presented to us, but fully
. 4 Il 4