Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1809-06-28
[coNT1NuED.1
1 III. GARDENERS Speech continued.]


Now. sir, to carry you with me a little IN
the order of time, would call the attention
of the<house to letter dated at London on
the ed of April, 1907. Ifsmy frequent
recurrence to documents shall fatigue the
house, / beg them to bear in mind that IN
these documents they may find truth as well
as the arts of able diplomatists. On the
S1st of December, 1906, then, the note was
annexed to the treaty. On the 22d OF April,
1907. Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney, in
their letter 10 the secretary of state, intorm
him that, they had an interview with MIR.
Canning. S AS soon, however (say they
as we glanced at the objects of this inter
view, he observed that he had just received
intelligence, which, if true, would make 1t
unnecessary for as to enter at present on
any of the topics alluded to-; that it had
been represented to him, that an officer,
lust arrived from America, had that morn
1ng ;nsormed the admiralty that the treaty
which had been lately concluded here had
been rejected by our government, &c.H he OBJ
served that such an event would place the r7-
lations of the countries man embarrassing ST.
tuation, &c. Here now it will be proper to
bear in mind that this treaty was framed
by the ministry one Of whom made that hne
speech in Parliament which the gentleman
from New-York read, the ministry most
friendly to this country, if there be any
such thing as friendship towards us. which
I yerv much doubt. This treaty thus made
was sent back .immediately after the issuing
of the Berlin deere e, which so closely con-
nected in one Il spect, the interests of the
two countries. Was this not fair cause OF
suspicion? Well might Mr.. Canning hesi-1
tate as TO what he should do in this new
state of things. But TO complete his di'ap-1
Dointment and confusion on this subject, the
American ministers on the oath OF July,
1907, addressed to Mr.. Canning another
note. This was the first answer which was
ever given in any way whatever to .1he en-
curry as to what the American government
meant to do in relation to the Berlin de-
cree. Itwas as follows:
There is another object to which the
undersigned havesthe orders OF the Presi-
tlent to invite the attention of his majesty's
government, as affecting materially, and
giving new and unexpected character to:
the proposed treaty. They allude to the.
written declaration, relative to the French
decree Of the aIst November last, by which
his majesty plcnipotentiaries accompanied
their signature of the treaty a declaration
which in its actual form creates unnecessary
en1barrassments In the way of an acceptance
of the treaty4by the United States. The
undersigned persuade themselves that as
this proceeding, to which no sanction was
given on their part, imposed on the United
States no new obligation, could only be IN
tended to declare that in signing or ratify-
ing the .treatyif was understood by Great
Britain that nothing contained init would
be bar to any measure, which It no such
treaty had been signed, would be lawful as
measure Of retaliation against her enemy,
and as the.occasion which produced it does
not now appear to exist as then supposed,
it will not be thought that any thing Is sa-
crifced by withdrawing it as unnecessary"
Yes, sir; an enquiry made by G. Britain
in most perilous conjnncture was answer
ed by cool and very sarcastic desire that
her enquiries on that subject might be with
drawn. This was the answer which they
received to an enquiry as to any disposition
ofthe American government to acquiesce
In the Berlin decree. !. It is not to be Won
. dered at that this answer was unsatisfacto-
~. It cannot be wondered at. There is
another from the same gentleman of the 22d
October, 1907 to-the secretary OF state, to
which will refsrs in whish it II, stated that