The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-04-05
(caatinned from 6rst nae {. J

cularly required. l observed that as the aggres-
sion and the principle on which 1t was founded
had been frankly disavowcd as soon known,
by his government, l was persuaded that there
could be no serious objection on its part. to any
of U,e acts which it was desired should c0nsti-
tute the proposed PREPARATION; that TO the first
act, the restoration of the men, there could doubt
less be none, tire least that could be done, af
ter such an outrage, would be to replace the u
nited States, as far rs it might be practicable on
the ground they held before the injury was receiv
ed that the punishment of the officers followed,
q necessary consequences, to the disavowd OF
the act that the suppression of the practice OF
inlpressincnt from merchant vessels had been
made Indispensable by the late aggression, for
reasons which were sufficiently we'll known to
him. ! statedto him that the mode in which it
was desired that the PREPARATION should be made,
by special mission, was that which had been a
doped bv other powers, and by Great Britain her
self, for injuries less severe than the one alluded
to, of which gave him the examples furnished
me in your letter of July 6.h-Nir. Canning took
anotc of what had stated, and made some ge
neral remarks on the whole subject, which were
Intended to give his view of it, on each point, but
without compronittng himself in a positive man
ner on any one. He said that, by the Procla-
nation Of the President, and the seizure and
detention OF some men who had landed on the
coast to procure water, the government seem
ed 10 have taken redress into its owu hands he
complained of the difference, which he said, had
been Iaade between France and England, by res.
toring deserters to the vessels of the former and
not the latter he insisted that the late aggressi-
on was an act different in all respects from the
former practice, and ought not to be connected
with it, as it Showed disposition to make par
ticuiar incident, III which they in the wrong,
instrumental TO an accommodation in case
where his government held u different doctrine
I urged in reply, that the proclamation could not
be considered act of hostility or retaliation
for injuries, though the aggressi sion had provoked
and would have justified any the strongest act of
rcprisal, but as mere measure OF police, which
had become indispensable Tor the preservation Of
order within the limits OF the United States l
informed him that the men who had landed from
the squadron, in defiance of the proclamation,
and of the law on whichit was founded, had been
restored to il that with respect to the other
point in difference, said TO be made in the case
Of desertcrs from British and French ships, was
unscquainted with the fact, but was satisfied,
the statement was correct, thatthe difference was
imputablc to the local authorities and not to the
national government, because as the U. States
were not bound by treaty to restore deserters
from the service of either nation, il wasnet pre-:
suInable that their government would interfere in
the business. observed, however, that if such
aprcferenoe had been given, there was natural
and justi6able cause for it, proceeding from the
conduct Of the squadrons of France and England,
vT t,e coast of the United States and en- the main
ocean, il being a we'll fact that the former
did not maintain as right adopt in practice
the doctrine ofthc latter, to impress seamen from
our merchant vessels. / then discussed at length,
and urged with great earnestness the justice and
Poicy Of his terminating at this time all the diff
fercnces which had arisen between our govern
ments from this cause, by an arrangement which
should suppress the practice on the part of Great
Britain, and remedy the evil of which che com
planned.
:, aid of those reasons which were applicable
to The merits of the question, urged the exam
pie given by the late ministry, in the paper of
Nov. 8th, presented to Mr.. Pinkney and myself
by the British commissioners, which had, as
thought laid the foundation of such an arrange :.
ment. stated that as it was stipulated by that
paper, that the negotiation should be kept open1
for the purpose of arranging this great interest
without prejudice to the rights of either power,
it fairly to be understood the sense of both
parties, that rights to be respected, till
that arrangement was concluded whence it
would follow that the same effect would be pro-
'duced in practice, if it had been provided for
by treaty. relied this paper andt the construc
ton which thought it admitted, with which,
however, the practice had since inno degree COR
responded, to shew the extent TO which the for
mer ministry had gone in meeting the just views
OF government, and thereby to prove that
the present. ministry in improving that ground,
had nothing TO apprehend from the preceding one.
Nir. Canning admitted tfat the Vie" winch tlau
taken Of this paper derived much support from
its contents and the time and circumstances I'M
der which it was presented, but persisted in his
desire to keep the subject separate proposed
as an expedient to get rid of his objection, that
we should take up and az range both points infor-
1n,llT, in which case, provided it was done in
manner to be obligatory, offered to frame my
note which should demand reparation for the out
rare, in general terms, so that it should not
appcar by official document, that the subjects had
ANY connection in the negotiation. urged that
unless it was intendcdto make no provision a
ga;fst iInpre sSment from merchant vessels,
could see no objection to his meeting me onthat
ground, as after what had passed, it irnpos-
srble to take up either subject without having the
Other in view, and equSlly so to devise any mode
which should keep them more completely sepa-
rate, than that which proposed Mr.. Canning
still adhered to his doctrine of having nothing To-
do with impressment from merchant vessels. till
the affair OF the Chesapeake was disposed OF, af-
Ter which he protested his willingness to proceed
to the ether object In this manner the confer
eace ended, without having produced the ar
rangement which had hoped from it. Mr.. Can
nings conduct was in all other respects concilia-
tory.
My note to Mr.. Canning was founded on the
result of tiis conference. AS it had not been in
my power to come to any agreement with him
Tire general subject of mprcssment from mer-
clSnt vessels, considered it my duty to combine
1t with the affair Of tie Chesapeake in the paper
which Iprcseped him to claim repatriation for the
outrage. 1 thought it best, however, to omit the
other acts of which IL WAS desired that the re-