Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-04-22

zsns gained foot held Ihey never lost il.
Without distrnstlng her own means, or
the hardness and ACTIVITY of her people
she i15s that our position, remote from
Europe, contiguous 10 the West ladies'
and the southern continent, and as near To
India as herself, give US advantages, a.
gainst which she cannot cope. Tiis ei-
fort which we made and persevered
in Tor seyers! moo,bs to gain admission,
Into British India, on more favorable terms
and he disposition which Was shewn
by she British commissioners to yield. excited
a sensasion, or more property speaking, alarm
in the beard Of India directors and OF the COM
Eie'cii ,,t u.,le ia general, even among those
who hs,i no particular interest in the question,
which Was extremely obvious Had we made
TO provision IN the treatyto secure Our admit
tanec into laGia, on CERTAIN conditions, we had
mach reason to believe that that commerce
wo,ild hive been tettered To an extreme de-
gree, and III every Form.
We were extremely anxious to provide that
our Citizens might take their shipments frcn,
Europe, TO t iSc specie from Spain and Portu-
gal, goods from Eugl@nds &c. and that thsy
might tcacu at the cape OK Good Hops, 1T the
isle of .,nurboi, at The Mauritils, &c that they
might carry On the coastins trade al India, and
lie permitted 70 pass from Calcutta to China
These advantages were insisted on, but the
tressure which we usssie produced reports
from the board OF dircctc-s, II the instance Of
the government, AID from patitcai men con-
vsrs:.nt il tacse topics, which Fixed the govern
Inemt III its decision mol to grant them. l re-
peat, however, hat it wo;iId have been easy to
have omitted The egniatioa from the treaty,
and pi.ced the trade on the r)oting O: the most
favored na:iun, IS II wo0ld have been at any
tune AT ergarcs, had the state OF ai.:iIs in o
ther respects permitted it.
~ your instructions, Z provision in favor
OF Indemnity was not made an indispensable
condi,iou Of teaty. We were authorised
to conclude one " ,hous It, We were,
therefore, persuaded that the ground on
which that interest was placed, could not
fill To be approved. file arrangement
" Itch We made authorised Just claim to
e1Yect disrniasion OF I'll the causes shat
were depending III The courts admiralty, and
even 10 H.. indie ripi;y iii the cases CT CO dem
nation The dncurents which We forwarded
TO vuu ". our icint letter of give full
view cfihis subject and 20 them beg u refer.
Your 5sa objection applies to the 1871
ard II articles OF the treaty, and IN the
first mat ,nce 20 the prohibition il contains,
OF extending The privileges which are made
reciprocal rctween the parties, TO other
nations, which is supposed to be a breach
of neu rality. Had conceived that those
articles were Justly e&sohsd to that inpu-
tauon, should cert0iniY not have assen.ed
to them. But saw no foundation for the
imputation. With Spain and Holland we
have treaties which secure. them ali
the rights to which they are entitled. Ii
10 usual, and certainly proper, for a nation
in estimating It's claims on other powers,
TO examine its treaties with them, and not
to think of setting up pretensism beyond
the limit of such treaties. BY treaty,
neither of those powers have ght
I'm ths case III question:, nor have we
in the ports OF either. By treaty, Great
Britain had enjoyed those rights in the
ports of the United States, as we had in
her ports from the year 1884. Spain and
Holland knew The conditions of that treaty,
which was in force at the commencement
OF the present war, and something after
wards, and wculd have been in force till
late in The last year. had a special condi-
ton of the I2.h article been carried jDto
effect. 10 rene W the treaty in the express
terms, CT the former one, a treaty which
deprived 80 on, power of any existing con-
vcntionaI right; which subjected none 10
conditions 10 which they had not been al
ways subjected which nNoycG To Great
Britain, on principles ot recip0CHy, pri-
Yilegc which tbei2 Was no reason to prc-
sumo that Gry Osiier power, speciailySpain,
would copSt ut 20 &c Cipi oCaIe wi,h the u
lection stated TO IL. The general principle
which you advance, of extending those
privileges 10 SIS small number OF powers
as poss,Oie, had also some weight ia :ndu-
ciug US 10 acCeGe To the arrangements
France IS admittedto an enjoyment Of the III,
in the same extent with Greet Britain
She, therefore, has no cause Of complaint.
10 net think that the stipulation sarb Is
any arTafgemeit ofthe government, rela-
tive To tic rlm5cr OF ships of war, that
shall he Omitted mo the ports of the u
5tacs at one time, or any regulation reld-
tive to their conduct while within the ports
of the Uuced States, provided it be gene
raj and equally applicable to both powers.
Il stipulation that the ships of war Of each
nation shall be Hospitality received into
the ports Of the o.hcr, does not necessari.
lyimp,y that there is 10 be no role rs to tho
numbers 70 Je atmiltcd into The ports To
which tey shall be confined, or the order
they shall observe While in port. All these
topics have been at all times, as / have
reason 70 belieye, the object Of regulation
by Great Britain, and Ihave ee"1l reason
TO believe that her government did not
consider itsef IS having abandoned its RICH,
to regulate them by this article.
Y0ar neN objection applies 70 the last nara.
graph OF the iy,h TAFT IN connection with the
1zLli article. BY y0sr construction 0f hose
pats 81: tnc trcty Che s volta he bound