Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1809-12-02

AID the United States, and that he a,onght
,hst the obvious advantages which would
thereby result to both countries were asut-
hcient pledge Of the sincerity Of his senti-
inents.
>, These observations, sir, / beg feave 10
remalk, were made 70 me BY Mr.. Madl-
son about month after the intelligence
had been received in this country Of, the
rejection by his ma, A,y's government of
the proposition made through Mr.. Pinkney
by the President for the removal of the en-
barge a. respected Great Britain, upon
condition that the orders in council should
be Withdrawn as respected the Y. States !:
and his sentiments were, as | conceived,
expressed to me, in order that | might cor
vey them to his maiesty's government, so IS
TO lead to reconsideration Of the propesi-
ton above mentioned with aview 10 the adj
iustment of the differences upon that sub
iect between the respective countries. But
I never considered that Mr.. Madison meant
that the government of the United States
would pledge themselves beyond the pro
position respecting the embargo as above
stated-because that was the extent OF the
power Of the President by the constitution
of the y. States.
/ understood, very distinctly, that the
observations OF The secretary of state were
intended 10 convey an opinion as to wha:
ought and would be the course pursued by
the II. States, III the event Of: his majssty's
orders in couuc:! being withdrawn.
In these sentiments and opinions, you
cAcurred, as collected from the tenor Of
several conversations which | held with you
at that period.
With rsspec, to the second point stated
in your letter to he contained ia . des-
patch from Mr.. Canning" | beg leave to
Offer the following explanation:
In the course Of a private interview l
had with Mr.. Gailatin, Che secretary OF
tbs treasury he minated that the non-in-
tercourse law which was then likely to be
passed by the congress, might be consider
ed as removing two very important grounds
of difference with Greaa Britain, viz. the
non. importation act, as applicable to her a
lone, and also the Presid .n,'s proclamation
whereby the SHIPS of G. Britain were ex-
Guided from the ports of the 1. States,
while those of France were permitted to
enter-but that by the nonintcrcourse law,
both powers were placed on the same foot
ing. He did not pretend to say thar this
measure had been taken for any motives Of
concession 70 G. Britain; bet rs III fact,
those consequences followed, he conceived
they mightDe considered as removing tie
two great obstacles to eonciiiatlon.
He adyertsd also TO the probability OF an
adjustment OF another important point ia
dispute between she two countries, rs he
said he knew that it was intended by the
u. States to abandon the attempt To carry
On trade with the colonies Of belligerents
in time of war, which was not allowed in
time of peace, aid trust to the being per-
mtted by the French 70 carry on such a
trade in peace, SO as 10 enItle them 10 a
continuance of it in time of war.
as it may be very material 10 ascertain
what "trade with the colonies of bclliger-
ents' was, in my conception, meant by Mr..
Gallatin, as intended to be abandoned By
the United States, feel no hesitation IN de-
cla'ing, that supposed he alluded 10 the
trade from the colonies of bslligerents direct
TO their mother country, or to the ports of
other belligerents, because the right to such
trade had been the point in dispute where
as, the right to carry on trade from the
colonies of belligerents to the United States
had never been called in question, and had
been recognised by his majesty's supreme
court of admiralty; and the terms even up
on which such colonial produce might be
re-exported from the United States had
been formally arranged in treaty signed
in London by the ministers pleni2otentiary
of both countries, which was not indeed ra-