Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-12-19

|ceive any animadversions from me
Iyet as my sole object is to get at the
true exposition and meaning of the
correspondence, if should uufortu.
nately omi-, misconceive or misinter-
'pret any material part Of it, shall have
the consolation to reflect, that by pre-
sentlng the whole, the means of my
correction in either case will be pre-
scented to the Senate and the world
|it the observations I propose now to
make should ever find their way out
OF the walls of this chamber. 1 shall
also present this correspondence In its
responsive order, which will be found
to be Indispensable to the due compre.
henslon OF some of It's most essential
parts.
Permit me, then, sir, to call your at
tentien first to the letter of Mr.. lack.
son to Mr.. Smith, dated the 18th Oc-
tober, 1909, page 80, 80, of the printed
documents. For, Sir, although this
letter is not mentionedin the resoluti-
on, yet it furnishes the original often
sive insinuations, and is referred to
and reiterated in the letter of the Esd
of October, which is noticed in the re-
solution, and therefore the offensive
expressions of the letter of the 18th
are entitled to and shall receive the
most accurate and critical attention
and analysis.
The expressions alluded to are the
following -
"You have not in the conferences,
we have hitherto held, distinctly an
nouuced any such complaint, and
have seen with pleasure, in this forbear-
ance, on your part, an instance of tn 1t
candor, which doubt not, will pre-
vail in all our communications, mas
much as you could not but have tho'ti il
unreasonable to complain of the dis
avowal of an act, done under SUI h cir.
cumstances, as could only lead to the
consequences that have actually fol-
lowed.
1t was not known when left En-
gland, whether Mr.. Erskine had, &C.
cording to the liberty allowed him,
communicated to you in extenso his
original instructions. 1t now appears
that ne did not. But in rsverting to
his Official correspondence, and part
cularly to despatch addressed on the
20th OF April to his majesty's secretary
oss'ate for foreign aG 'irs, I find that he
there states, that he had submitted to
your consideration the three conditi.
ons specified in those instruction, as
the ground work of an arrangement
which, according to information re-
ceived from this country, it was tho't
in England might be made, with a
prospect of great mutual advantage.
Mr.. Erskine then reports verbatim ct
lseriatim your observations upon each
of the three conditions, and the rea-
fons which induced you to think that
others might be substituted in lieu of
them. 1t may have been concluded
between you that these latter were an
equivalent for the original conditions !;
but the very act of substitution evil
IDENTIFY shews that those original con-
ditions were in fact very explicitly
communicated to you, and by you of
course laid before the President for
his consideration. need hardly add.
that the difference between these con-
ditlous and those contained in the ar
arrangement Of the 9Th and 10Th Of A.
pril, IS sufficiently obvious to require
mo calculation; nor need draw the
conclusion, which consider as admit
ted by all absence ofcomplaint on the
part Of the American government, viz.
that under such circumstances his ma
jesty had an undoub;ed and incontro-
vertlble right TO disavow the act of
his minister. / must here allude to 2
supPosition, which you more than once
mentioned to me, and by which. If il
had any the slightest foundation, this
right might perhaps have been in some
degree Affected. You have informed me
that You understood that Mr.. Erskine
had two sets of instructions, by which
to regulate his conduct and that uDon
one Of them, which hal not been com
munlcated either to you or to the pub.
nc, was to be rested the Justification of
the terms haally agreed upon between
YOU 40 J him. It is my duty, sir, SO.
.