Portland gazette and Maine advertiser., 1809-12-18

laws af..f lis conversatioh Wit NJ Ca
ming, tha. you were 10 sail for the L. States
| within three weeks.
Although ii may MOI have been your IL
tention TO have given 10 this subject pos
ture which it would not have naturally as
i, sumed, yet such has been the tendency oil
some Of your remarks, and particularly OF
the conclusion YOU have drawn from the
two circumstances. 1st. That no trace oi
complaint from this government against tie
disayowai appears IN the records OF tic
British mission, or was distinctly announced
by me in or conferences, and Cd. that from
the Official correspondence ct Mr.. Easkine
with his government, 1t appears, that al
though he d d not communicate in extcnso
his original instructions, he submitted 10
me the three conditions therein specified
and received my observations on each.
If there be no trace of complaint agdnlt
the dflvowal in the archives IT the milf
lion, it is bccaufe this government could
not have entered fucb complaint before
the reAfons for il,e diisvowal lad been ex-
planned, and Especially rs the explanations
were junly and confidently expected
through the new funetionary. And as TO
the fnppoied referve on my part on this
iubieet in our ieveral conferences | did
imagine. that my repeated limitations to
you of the nect iliiy of satisfactory expla-
nations, as to the difavowal, were full
cient indications of the difiatisfaetion of
this government with rtfpect to the difa-
vowal itfelf.
The ftfefs you have laid on what you
have been pleaied to fate as the fubfitu-
ton of the terms finally agreed on, for the
terms frft propofed, has excited no fmall
degree of furprife. Certain it is that your
predeceilor did prefent for my confdera-
ton the three conditions which now ap-
pear in the printed document--that he
was difpoied TO urge them mere than the
nature of two of them (both palpably in
admiiiible and one more than merely mad
miiible) could permit, and that on finding
his frft propofals uniuccefsiul, the more
reipoDiible terms comprifed in the arrange
mept respecting the orders in council were
adopted. And what, FIR, is there in this
TO countenance the conclulion you have
drawn IN favor of the right of his Britannia
Majetty to diiavow the proceeding /? Is
any thing more common in public negoci.
ations than to begin with higher demand,
and, that failing, to defend TO a lower !.
To have, if not two fets of infruetions,
two or more than two grades of propoh.
tons in the fame fet of inffruetions, to be-
gin with what is the NOT de6rable and to
end with what is found 10 be admiilible in
cafe the more deiirable fhould not be at.
tainabe. This mutt be obvious to every
understanding, and II is confirmed by uni
verial experience.
What were the real and entire intlruc-
tons given TO your projection, is quef
ton ,iientially between him and his gov
eminent. That he had, or at leaf that he
believed he had fufticient authority TO CON-
elude The arrangement, his formal afuran-
ces, during our dl.cgflions, were fuch as
TO leave no room for DOUBT. His fubfe-
quent letter of the 18th June rene wing Ills
ailurances to me 4" that the terms Of the a.
agreement 70 happily concluded by the re-
scent negotiation w,il be trc.ly fulfilled on
"the part Of his Maielty," is an evident in
dcatlon of wha, his periuaion then was
as to his inhruttions. And with view to
| thew what his imprs iiions have been even
! free the dlfavowal, | mu6 take the liberty
of referring you to the annexed extracts
| (See c. from his official letters of the aft
| July and of the 18th of Auguf.
| The declaration that the defpatch
from Mr.. Canning to MIR. Erikine of the
a3d January is the only defpa,ch by which
the conditions were preicribed by Mr..
! Eriklne for the concuiion of an arrange
ment on the matter TO which il relates" is
now tor the frf time made TO his govern.
ment. And need hardly add, that if that
| defpatch. had been communicated at the
| time OF the arrangement. or if il had been
known that the proportions contained in
II aud which were al firit prefrnted by Mr..
Erikine, were the only ones, or which he
was authorized TO make an arrangement,
! the arrangement would not have been
made.
AS you have diicamed any authority
| to offer explanations for the diflvowal, a.
you have been willing TO aicribe the want
of fuch authority to the confederation, that
other channels had been preferred, and al
| you have even confdered the circumftan-
| ces under which the arrangement took
| place 10 be inch AS could only lead 10
| diavowal, and therefore as iupeifeding the
necefiity of any explanation whatever, it is
to be regretted, that you had not deemed
| it proper to render prccife and explicit,
| that part of your letter which ftems to I'M
| ply that you bad in your conversations,
in relation to the affair of the Chefapeake,
following the words of your initruttions,
| held out not only the manner in which
the reparation had been accepted, but even
the form in which it bad been rendered, as
warrantng his Majefy in even retraeiing
the offer OF reparstion, and that you had
calculated the obfervation by reference
to the particular expeditions which at all
events, put il totally out of his power to
confirm any act containing them.
| Whatever may have been your intention
Natf Of h..