Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-12-21

found TO be admissible in case the NOR
desirable should not be attainable, This
must be obvious to every understanding
AID IT is confirmed by universal expert.
ence.
What were the real and entire instruc-
tons given to your professor is ques
t'op essentially between him and his gs
vernnent. That he had, or at least, that
he believed he had sufficient authority to
conclude the arrangement, his formal as.
surances, during our discussions, were such
as to leave no no m for doubt. Hts sub
sequeat letter Of the 18th June, renewing
his assurances to me " that the terms of
the agreement so happily concluded by
the recent negotiation, will be strictly full.
filled on the part of his majesty" is an
evident indication of what his persuasion
then was as to his st.uaions. And with
a view to shew WA, his impressions have
been even since the disayowal, must take
the liberty ofreterving rou to the annexed
extracts isee c. from his Official letters
of he 3lst July and o. the 18th OF August
The declaration IS that the despa Oh
from Mr.. Canning to Mr.. Erskine of the
23d Januaty,is the only despatch by which
VIC SOpNiiuhS NCNC i)IS5CflOCu I'D NAF LIE
skIne for the conclusion Of an arrange
| ,nent on the matter 10 which it relates"
| is now for the first time made TO this 60
vernment, aud | need hardly add that if
| sha, despatch had been communicated al
the lime of the arrangement, or if il had
been known tha. the propositions contain
ed in il, and which were at first presented
( by Mr.. Eyskme, were the only ones on
which ne was authorised TO make an ar,
rangement, the arrangement would not
have been made"
The language of this quotation is at once
Sc persp'cuous, candid aud in, elligen,, thai
II requt5es no explanation or illustration.
fron me. will therefore pass on to Nj
jackscn's reply, dated Esd october, ao9
pages So, 60 in the following words:
f" have, therefore, no hesitation in in
forming you, that his majesty was plea 5,
ed 10 disayow the agreement Concluded
betty een you aid Mr. Erskine. because /.
was concluded in violation of tina gentle
mans instructions, and altoge her wiihou,
authority TO subscribe TO the terms of
These INSTRUCTIONS, | now understand b.
your letter, as well as from The obviou.
deduction which took the liberty of ma.
king IN mine of the ll,h ms ant, were a
the time IN substance made known 10 you [;
no stronger illustration, therefore, can b:
given of the deviation from them which
occurred, than by reference to the terra:
OF your agreement.
! 8 Nothing can be rnore notorious thar
the frequency with which, in the course
IF complicated negotiation, minister,
are furnished with graduation of c,ndi
tions, on which they may be sUccessi,el,
authorised to conclude. So common i:
the case which you put alphabetically
that in acceding to the justice Of your state
ment, feel myself mpslled to make on
ly one observation upon it, which is, tina
I does not strike me, as bearing upon tn
, consideration OF the unau ,horised agree
men; concluded here, isasmuch as in pom
Of fact, nv. Erskine had no such gtadu
a.ed instruction You are already acqnAin
ted with that which was given and hav
had the honor Of informing you tina,
was the only one by which the condition
, on which he was to conclude were preset
bed. SO far from The terms, which h
was actually induced To accept having bee
, conte mpiated in that instruction, he him
/, self states that they were substituted b
( you in lieu OF those originally proposed.
E The first observation which occurs, !
reading this extract, is, that Mr. Jackso
, here attempts to ret 81 his Object by VIVA
4 [ suppose, he considers an ingenious col
cejt, shifting his yerbage--thc words, " cor
D di,ions pre- .cribed in tue despatch" al
h here dropped and the word s. Instruct
j. ons" subsu uled. Thus eGdcayo'iug
E shew, that Mr.. Erskiue's instructor
themselves were in fa6l known % ~
q Smith at The time Of thc arrangement -
. And how SIR, do you oppose hs temp
r TO gee a. THIS fsei Why, sir. he tel
D you from Mr. Smi rs letter iusi isa
which SO Ca tom ju-dlU1g 'hss coDcl
' SION that 1t positively denies ID aGd eve
, goes further, .. furnishes, ard refers
i extracts o. $3.50 letere, t,cm W., Erssir
n to Mr.. SMITH, ihe one dAted tht 81, lui
y he other The 18th August, 1899; il E
: ters also to one of the l5,h Jure, ol,
n ghich 50 ezpi CITY to sh0~, td4t lte ,
r strucs,o1s IN question were no Enosn
. | Nr. Smith and shat MIR. Ersk ne 81 eve
i period Of tine thought bis In.tru, uol