The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-12-05

Canning, IN the case of the proposal by Mr..
Pmkney on the subject Of the Orders IN
Council and the Embargo. that the discussi-
ors which had been previously verbal must
thenceiorth take written form. And with
this view take the liberty ot recalling your
attenti n to the subjoined extracts (oee ~
aud % " letters that passed ON that occa-
sion.
On the present, as on that occasion, the
Grange from verbal 10 wr., 81 COMMUNICATE
ons WAS requested after two conferences. anil
when the subject appeared TO one of tns par
ties to nave, by ti,use verbal discussi1ns,
been brought to 4 point. WHICH required !,
precise unae ratarding OF the views and Dr,,-
positions of the other.
You will. sir, hence perceive, that an
maintaining the right, which every govern
nent has AS to the rules of intercourse with
foreign functionaries near it, no encroach-
! ment has been made or intended on any right
or customary privilege belonging to you in
| that character, nor any thing done to impede
the proper and usual course of negotiation.
You have been sufficiently appraised, by
my letter of the 9th, of the light in which
the president views the arrangement la,ery
| 'adc by your predecessor with this o.
vernment, and OF the grounds on winch pc
mas expected formal and satisfactory ex-
PLANTATION of the reasons for the refusal OF
his Britannia Majesty to carry it INFO effect.
| lie persists in that expectation, and In the
opinion, that there has been given no expla-
ton thas is adequate, either as to the matter
| or as 10 the mode.
| When one government has been solemnly
pledged to another in mutual engagement
by its acknowledged and competent agent
and refuses 10 tu!lii the pledge, It's perfect
| ~ clear, that't owes 1t, both to- itself and to-
| the other party, to accompany it's refusal
| WIN formal and frank disclosure of suffici-
ent reasons tor step, which, without such
reasons, must deep.y injure its own charac-
ter, as we'll as the rights of the party conii-S
ding in its good faith
To refuse with honor (says high au-
shcrity Oh public law,) to ratify what haS
been concluded on by virtue of a full power.
1t is necessary that the government shoul,i,
have strong and solid reasons, and that h,,
| shew In particular, that his minister has VII
oiated his Instructions"
| Although tits particularly incumbent ~,
the sovereign in such case, to shew that his,
| Instructions have been violated, vet it is noc
mere violation OF them on immateral points
ihat will be sufficient 1t is Indispensable
| requisite, moreover, that the reasons be,
strong and solid, that they manifesty out
weISn not only the general obligation to abide
/ oy what has been 30 done, but also the dis
| appointment and injury &C cruing To the O her
4
! case under discussion is of Il higher charac-
ter. and appeals with greater solemnitv :,
the honor and justice ot the refusing part,
| than the case stated in Vattei, masmlch 80
| the transactien, now Gisavowed was not 3
treaty or convention 70 he ratified by bo,n
| parties, previous to an execution by either
| it mao according to the terms OF il (and this
/ Pecunarity appears to have been cCHtemplat
cd by your government been actually ana
! "a iaI inf,
part oil the United States. The refnss! If
ms Britannia Majesty is, therefore, not sim
ply to ratl'y what had been lifted by the.
other party, bur TO carry into eject on his
part An arrangements which had been car,i
ed iniotul elect, wluI good faitn. ON the
part OF the United States Nay, the case,
1 Is strengthened by the further REGULARITY.
'hat SOME OF inc circumstances attending INC
! execution OF the arrangement on the Da,.to IF
! the u. States, render it unsusceD,bie - a
! toll equivalent for the refusal to execute &
/ on the other side.
| II has net escaped observation, that ,ha
obligation OF your government to tender ex-
plantations on This occasion is admitted Nv
! your attempt to shew, that it has been sut-
! fciently done IN what passed in conversati.
ON between MIR Canning and MIR Pinkney.
/ and by the instructions gwen to Nj. Erskine
to communicate such explorations.
/ WISH every disposition to view in the n n:
/ favorable light Whatever may afIact the re J
/ tons between the two countries il is INN,
sib'e to mistake the conversations OF tlos,
ministers for discharge of sucn debt r..
the god faith and reasonable cxnectatioas
| OF tie United a'es. Besides, that they
were mere conversations in case recurring
the precision and respect of formal com
mun'cation, tits certain, that it was neithers
understood by Mr. Pinkncy, nor intended by-
Mr. Canning, that those conversations were
so to be regarded Mr.. Pinkney is explicit.
on this point. And MIR. Canning himself.
| after declining to recapituate in writing.
what ne had verbally remarked, sirnifed
to Mr. Pinkney, in letter dated MAY 81 h.
that his observations on the subject wOul1 be-
more properly made through the successor
OF Mr.. Erskine, who was about to proceed
to the United States.
| With respect to the Instructions on thiS
point, given TO Mr.. Erskine, it might g s,,E.
hcient to remark that they were never car
RED into execution but it may be asked
| whether it was mark of friendly esus or
to the U. States to employ for such . mr.
pose, minister from whom his government
had thought proper publicly to wit tIraw
its confidence, and to the peculiar de,icacv
| and embarrassment of whose stunt i'm vou
have yourself referred. rs accounting lori,i:
not having executed tue task imposed UPON
him.
must here repeat, what was suggested
IN my former letter, that the successor OF
| Mr. Ersklne IS the proper fuactionary for a
! proper explanation. Nor can / perceive.
| the force OF yrur remark that th- Jeta, Ia,