The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-01-18


ton. What is the frs. language we find
in his first letter? Petnlant and recrimina-
ting Protesting against the proceedings
OF our government, as Unprecedented in re-
curing his communications to be in writing !;
affecting to view {" il as violation in his
person, of the most essential rights of a
public miaister." He approaches the sub
Ject of the disavowal, by iDsinuaiing that our
government, from knowledge If the cir.
csmstances. under which the arrangement
was concluded. could have expected no o.
Their result. than refusal on the part of his
government to ratify it. His language to the
Secretary of State, is YOU could not but
have thought it unreasonable to complain of
the disavowal of an act, done under such Cir
cumstanccs, as could onty lead to the Con-
sequences that have actually followcd"---
What circumstances? He has not mention
cd them. Such as were known to orr gov.
ernment-our government knowing the ba-
Sis upon which the arrangement was made.
had no reason to expect it would be ratified,
and therefore are to be made parties to the
disavowal, which excludes all pretence of
complaint And in the same letter, page
So, he enters into n train of reasoning to
prove that his position was correct He la
bors to establi..h the fact so material to his
purpose, that our government. knew the in
structions under which Mr.. ErsSine acted.
For, he says, '' Mr.. Erskine then reports
Uer6afinl ct seTiatin,, yoar observations upon
each OF the three conditions. and the reasons
which induced you to think that others might
be substituted in lieu of them. 1t NAV have
been concluded between You that these lat
ter were an equivalent for the original con-
diticns; but the very act of substitution evil
IDENTITY shews that these original conditions
were-in fact very explicitly communicated
ltoyou, and by you of course LAID before the
President for his consideration Here we
see Mr.. Jackson assuming premises, for the
purpose OF establishing conclusion that he
determines to make. a substitute is one,
getting for another-and without attempting
TO shew that other conditions were sub<,;tu-
ted he proceeds TO shew what the act Of
substitution would prove but he ought first
to shew this act, before he draws his conciu
slons. But he contents himself with this ne
.cuiar mode OF reasoning, and declares
g that he need hardly add, that the differ
ence between these conditions and those con-
tanned in the arrangement of the 18th and
/ 18Th of April, is sufficiently obvious to re
quire no e'ucidation, nor need j. he adds,
draw the conclusion, which consider as adj
mitted by all absence Of complaint OH the
part of the American government, viz. that
under such circumstances his majesty had
an undoubted and incontrovertibe right to
disavow the act of his minister Are we
| to take this which is neither reason nor ar.
gumcnt, but perversion of both, as salts
factory explanation OF the disavowal? No,
sir, Mr.. Jackson seems unwilling To leave
it here. He is not satisfied with his own
conclusions, Int he proceeds to add, in page
So, g 1t Isl my duty, sir, solemnly to declare
| to you, and through you to the President,
that the despatch from Mr.. Canning
ITO Mar. hrskine, which you have made
the basis of an official correspondence
with the latter minister, and which was
rer->. by the former to the American minister
IN London, is the only despatch by which
the conditions were prescribed to Mr. Frs
kline tor the conclusion of an arrangement
with It's country on the matter to which il
relates" Here Mr.. jackson adroitiy sub
sstutes tor th3 three conditions. the " des-
patch, which contained the instructions and
,ells the Secretary Of State " and through
him the President" that &" YOU intending
the President and Secretary of State, have
made Lsas deSyhdtch the basis Of the arrange
ment with MIR. Erskine. 1t is his duty, he
says, to make this declaration. If it was
his duty, it Could only be so, because he was
SO Instructed. And it will be remembered,
that Mr. Canning Informed Mr.. Pinkney
that the successor OF Mr.. Erskine would be
charged with 6 observations" TO our govern
ment, upon this point. Here then we have
the observations he Is instructed to make
In the next paragraph of this letter he pro-
ceeds tosay TO the Secretary of State, :" If,
S:r, a. he your intent ~ 70 state, that no ex-
piana1on Whatever has been given to the
American government, OF the reasons which
INDUCED his M.jss!y to disavow the act OF
my predecessor, must in that case observe
that IN the instructions convSyingto him his
M;Jesty'S intentiors, rnOsc reasons were very
FULLY and forcibly stated cnd if lie has not
transmitted them to you. l can only sttri
butte 1t to ,he peculiar tielicacy and enibar-
rassment of his situation, and he might the
more Reasonably be led to that reliance on
1t. as full and ample communication was
also made upon the subject, by his Males.
ty S Secretary o. State for foreign Affairs to
Mr.. PiHkncy."
Let us for 81 moment look a. the prevari-
Cation, to which the British minister's resort.
Upon che disavowAl being iuaGe, Mr. Pink
"ey IS informed By Mr.. { ming, that all ex
piana'ion will DC given By the successor OF
". Erskine. lhis successor tells our 20
vernment that Mr. FTskiBe was instructed
to eXplain. anal ii he has not, it was because
" ful aid ampie" communication was
made upon the sI1ject by his majesty's SC
Cretary for foreign affairs TO Mr.. Pinkney'
In London we are referred to Washington
and here we are directed TO London, fOr the
explanation o. reasons OF this disavowai.
"As TO the expectation entertained here"
continues Mr.. Jackson. page 81. "that the
expianation Of bis Majesy's saarc in this
transaction should be made through me,
ght content myself with simply observing
4