The Delaware gazette. [volume] (Wilmington [Del.]) 1809-1810, 1809-12-23

lucid and mastery letter, the commencement
OF which exposes the frivoty of the exception
which MR. Jackson had taken to the prescrip-
ton OF written for verbal communicatons.-
Inc reader must be amused with the awkward
ana embarrassed escape which the new envoy
makes from the pcrpexity Of ignorance and
humilia'ion which he had rrcsumptuousiy
brought upon heiself No additional weight
can b. gwen, by any remarks in this place, 10
the overwhelming arguments by which Mr..
onhth demonstrates the proprlety OF Mr.. Jack
sons presenting Eur.nal explanation Of the
true cause of the disavowal of Mr.. Erskine's
arrangement, nor to the sagacity and Just rea-
sonlng with which the secretary of state points
out an untruth advanced by the represcn alive
OF bis Britannia majesty relative 10 that ex-
plantation haying been made in London 10 Mr..
Pinkney; nor any force added to the rcpulsicn
OF MIR. Jackson's insinua,ion that the govefn-
paent Of the United States had manifested no
dissatisfaction at the tisavowal of the arrange
ment.
1t is in his letter of the 18th Of Oct. Mr..
Smith states, that Mr.. Erskine - did present
Tor bis consideration the three conditions" con-
tanned in the printed dispatch of MIR. Canning
of the 23d Of January but that, fading they
were rejected, MIR. Erskine proposed others
which others were accepted. Ii is particularly
recommended to the reader TO peruse two or
three times, and with attention, tia. part Of
MIR. Smiths letter in question which irnns-
diately follows this statement; it places the
subject in SO clear light that 1t cannot be mis-
taken; and, IN special manner, let the ex-
preston OF the secretary of state be remark ed,
NJ: i" That he Mr.. Erskinel Ind. OF, at least,
fhat &c betieoed he had sufficient authorty TO con-
cluie the arrangement, his formal assurances
during our discussions svere such rs to eavc
% douhf" Upon this ground, then, the Amc-
!ican government acted, namely; Mr.. Erskinc
verbally suggested three propositions which have
since appeared to be the three conditions en-
braced in the dispatch from Mr.. Canning OF the
e3i OF January, and which we've rejected by
Mr.. smith; and, when the late British minister
proposed Others more consonant TO equity aad
OF course more agreeable, he gave fo,mat asau~
aaAceS TO the secretary of state, that he was az
Mo1ised to make them the basis of the arrange
nent. Mr.. Erskine did not tell Mr.. Smith nor
does Mr.. Smith say he did, and Mr.. Jackson
himself does not Openly assert t) that the th's-
conditions first suggested were the only ores
which his instructions contained. The secreta-
ny of state made 40 enquiry in that respect. 1t
was none Of the secretary's business. 1t WAS for
Mr.. Erskne to look to it that he did no, d;sobey
the orders of the king his master. Mr.. Smita
was treating with the British accredited minis
ter; minister with full general poorer to ace
for the British government. MIR. ETssiue never
Sat7uea his instructions to MIR. Smith, as Mr..
Jackson admits; but merely in a verbal way, as
any man in making oargaiu would do, propoa
sed them experin,entally. tIc did precisely what
an Individual does at market; wien he could
not make the arfangement, Tor, in other words
purchase what he wanted) a. one price, he gave
another If he tI;sobeyssi bis Instructions, that,
a. Mr.. Smith very Justly remarks, I" is qnes-
ton essentially between him and his government"
Mr. Ersline himself in his letter to MIR. Snn!h.
asserts unicscrvedly, that +" he conceived sc had
eonforned TO hs majesty's wishes; and to the
| spirit, 1T least, Of the insructicns." To this
opinion he adhered to the last moment Of his re-
| naming in the United States; and the only re-
vo!ution that appears to have taken place in his
mind III relation 10 the subject, was hai9faz
| conviction, occasioned by the d;savowal, 6 that
he had formed an erroneous Judgment Of his Tna-
jcsty's pieayc ard iateation," which is an cbser-
walton that Mr.. Erskins makes in his letter of
the l4h of August to the secretary OF state, and
| which il a severe reproach on the British gov
| eminent; fully implying, that although rne in-
structioas OF Mr.. jacksons predecessor JUSTIFIED
| the arrangement, yet that it was neither the
:. riew" nor the d" intention" of the British nln-
! stey that any arrangement on reasonable terms
| should have been entered into.
70 the testimony of MIR. Erskinc, and 10 the
reason of the case, is added the explicit decara~
ton of Mr.. Smith, that the circumstance that
the dispatch Of the esd of January from MIR.
| Canning to Mr. E.rsklne was the only one which
authorised him to propose conditions, = zses for
| The first time haown' TO the government OF the
United States by Mr.. Jackson himself, in his
| letter Of the lth of October I" and Mr.
Smith continues) need hardly add, that If that
dispatch had peea communicated at the time Of
The arrangement, or if it had been known that
the propositions contained ia it, and witch were