The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-12-14
mo. Ga.

IN council be continued, or an nrr,npeu,. mn
oy mutual consent substituted in it's room. =
A"oriei, MT. Jackson was not authorized "a
renew tue three conditions. becan.e they
would not be accepted by the President |:
and ne was instructed to propose no new
ores, because the British government would
yield to nothing but the three conditions. IL
doubt exists upon the subject, let the rea-
DER inspect the new: envoy's letter of the 9TH
OF November, wherein he says, "before the
orGers IN Council can be revoked, their oh
Ject must be obtained IN some other wav.''
And one of those orders to wit, that of tie
10th OF April, theSnne which is row in one
rative existence, Mr.. Jackson aiiirms. :. is
more restrictive than those of November
1907 These declarations on the part Of
the discarded minister, ertlqiu eyhot hr
means in his letter of the 23d October. when.
IN spes king of his'ir4truc,ions, he announces
tnat they look to substituting for NOTIONS
OF good understanding, erronepusly en,cr.
t"EnSd, PRAcfIcAL SrIPULdTloNS On which
real reconciliation Of all differences nsy
be substantially founded" That is, Tho. p
quita5le and lawful claims of the United
States are considered as mere woqyoYs."
tor which motions Mr. Jackson's instructions
empower him 10 "Su6Stiuke" "PR5crycnI
S7IPVLA7'EoNS," which Practical ylihxkaEi-
onS are the three conditions Of the despatch
-ot the Esd OF January, or "tle order in conn
Gil of the Goth ct April, which is more rcs
fTzcttUe, than those of Tovember, 1902 +"
and which. in principle, (and in practice
too. with occasional vs.Iiations,) his B.itan.
nc Majesty lean FeUer cease to maintain >"
Mr smith, in his letter 70 Mr.. Pinkncy
OF N osember the Esd, has placed the SUBJ
Ject OF the disavowaI Of Mr. Erskine's ar
rangeneut in so fair light. and exposed So
completely the frivolity of The pr. fences M.
on which 1t was disavowed, that but VERT
lew additional structures, in that particular.
will be introduced into this exposition; ana
these will be confined TO the tenor Of the de.-
patch OF the 23d of January. which Mr.
Erskine is said to have violated. One Of the
conditions prescribed in that despatch. was
in the following words:
g I'd. Great Britain, for the purpose of
securing the operation Of the embargo, ard
of the bone tide intention of America To nre
vent her citizens from trading with France.
and the powers adopting and acting under,
the French dctrees, is to be considered as
being at liberty to capture all such Ameri-
can vessels as may be found attempting to
trade with the ports of any of these ,,owers
without which security for t.ie observance
OF the embargo. the raising it .nominaily
with respect to Great Britain alone, would.
in fact, raise it with respect to all the
world"
J" In urging TINS condition, Mr.. Smitk
very properly remarks, Mr.. Canning has
taken ground forbidden by thoSe principles
OF decorum which regulate AMI mark the
proceedings of governments towards cac:.,
other" 1t was not only to obtain q hle1re
against the bad faith of the intention OF the
American government, as the Secretary re
State says; but the liberty to catfure which
the condition required plainly implies, tina,
even IT the intention Of he American soyero
ment be an intention ofSeod jaitH, vet there
would be 40 security 10 Great Britain fer
the fultiUent oft by the citizens of the Uni;
ted States, unless the British navv were AZ
liberty to make prize of the vessels and goods.
of those citizens, VINO are by tine condition
supposed 70 be SO prCRigate as not to obcythe
laws OF Their country, and the constituted.
authorities so imbeCile as not to be able IL
compel them TO respect the acts Of ongress
la effect, thit the fe0hle of the United
States are kDaves and law hrea kers. ard
their Congress and President q mare cvnj,e,
The navy of Great Britain was 20 streneth.o
the latter and to make the Forme, vi,fno,s1
And TINS nation, and the EhCle dcspatch
was to be communicated in rrtenso, I'm al
its parts) to the chief Magistrate of the natl
OH
tseems to be of some importance 10 the
merits OF the case in question. TO oiscrim;
nate clearly between the act of A minister
concluding an agreement in virtue of = fin
ifoZver In relation to the terms of the apTer-
ment, and the act OF minister concludup
such agree by the authority of a penerui
foaoeT (or letter of credence) to act tor his
sovereign IN any matter respecting which
he should he instructed. In the. first in
stance, the minister would have to produce
hisf"H fozocr to the government with which
ne was about to negotiate; in the second.
the minister being resident near the govern
meat, and his. general letter of crecience
being IN the Possession Of the government.
he would not be under the necessity Of pre-
senting any new power nor be compelled 10
shew his instructions, but actirgin his usrai
enToynt and fienfhotentiai character, full
faith and credit would'be given to him i,
taat shape by the governments with which he
treated MIR. ErsSine appears 70 have act
ed i'll the latter way
! He made this arrangement n vire,4 cf
MS general letter of crrGencc, ana kent
his "seperaP' letters Of instructions ont of
view, " Su6jcet 10 hia Ogvn disere,ioo.o p.t
! u a./nH fo5Der had been necessary to cu,l,',..
Mr. Ersklns to conclude the arraur. mint
/ MIR. Jackson acknowledges that he IoR ,hst
| iuii power III his possession. for, saTshe. in
his letter Of the 4th of Nov. 4" the INsyRyc.
| 7IoNs IN this (Mr. Erskine's) case fook fls
iftace II q FULE PoHEB." And, if n mn
ho7oer had not been requisite, Mr.. JscIson.
gives very substantial reason why It was
not necessary: No full power (he obse rves.
IN his letter OF Nov. 4th) was given in the