The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-05-22


further discu:sions n written form, Mr..
Jackson dlsposes himself to Conform, To il /;
andi speaking in the same letter OF The dis
avowal OF the Arrangement Of April, he de-
ciares. that he was not provided with in
structions to explain the motives Of il; ant!
he seems to intimate that explanation
through him was unpscess% >, pSt only be-
causeit had already been made through o.
tier channels. but because the government OF
the United States had entered into the ar
Management with knowledge that it could
only lead to the consequences that actually
followed" In the conclusion of the fourth
paragraph of the letter he informs Mr.
Smith, that the despatch of Mr.. Gaming to
Mr., Erskue, (which Mr.. Smith had made
the basis of AN official correspondence with
the latter minister, and which had been read
to the American r3iuisicr in London" was
the only despatch hy which the conditions
were prescribed to Mr.. E.rs&inc for the con-
c'usion OF An arrangement with the United
States on the matter to which it related.
Mr.. Smiths answer to this letter bears
date the 10Th Of October; and beg your
Lordship's permission to introduce from it
the following quotation - The stress YOU
have laid on what you have been pleased to
state as the substitution Of the terms finally
agreed on" Gin the arrangement of April
on the orders in council) j. for the terms first
proposed" (by Mr. Erskine) +" has excited
no small dsgree of surprize. Certain it is
that your predecessor did present for my
consideration the same condition which row
appear in the present documents that he
was disposed to urge them more than the
nature Of two of them Doth palpahly mad
Missile. and one more than mer, W mad
missble) could permit-anc that, on finding
MS hrst proposal unsuccessful, the more rea
sonable terms, comprizcd in the arrange.
nent respecting the orders in council, were
adopted-And what's there in this To coun..
tenapce the conclusion YOU have drawn in
favor of the right of his Britannia majesty
to t'isavow the proceeding Is any thing
more common in pubic negotiations, than
to begin with higher demand, and that
failing, to descend TO lower? 20 have,
if not two sets of instructions. two, or more
Than two grades of propositions in the same
set of Instructions; to begin with what is
the most desirable, and TO end with what is
found to be admissible, in case the more
desirable should not be attainable? This
must be obvious to every understanding, and
is confirmed by universal experience.
What are the real and entire inStruc-
lions given to your predecessor, is a question
essentially between him and his government.
That he had, or at least that he believed he
had, sufficient authority to conclude the ar
rangement, his formal assurances during cur
discussions were such as to leave no room for
doubt. His subsequent letter OF the 18Th
of June, renewing his assurance to me,
: that the terms of the agreement 50 happi-
ly concluded by the recent negotiation, will
be strictly fulfilled on the part OF his maies..
ty,' is an evident indication of what his per
suasion then was, as to his instructions. -
4. ~.f,.. l..
tons have been, even since the disavowal,
I must take the liberty of referring you to
the annexed extracts (see Co. from his Off
cial letters Of the S1st OF July, and Of The
14th of August
The declaration. thatthe despatch from
Mr.. Canning to Mr.. Erskine, OF the Esd Of
January, is The only dispatch, by which the
conditions were prescribed NJ. Erskine lor
the conclusion of an arrangement Oil the
matter to which it relates, is now, for the
first time, made to this governmeEt.---
And | need hardly add, that, if that dispatch
had been communicated at the time of the
or if it had been known that
the propositions contained in it, and which
were at first presented by MIR. Erskine,
were the only enes on which he was author.
zed to nake'an arrangement, the arrange
ment would not have been made
~
bic. to discaim for the American govern
ment, in more precise and ineligible Ian.
guage, than is found in this quotation, all
of Mr.. Erskine's Instructions in
with sincere, honorable and
justifiable belief that he was, as he pro-
fessed to be, fully authorized TO make the a
greement in which he undertook to pledge
the faith of his majesty's government.--
Yet in Mr., Jackson'S next letter (of the 23d
Of October) 90 Mr.. Smith, he says:-"I
have therefore no hesitation in Informing
you. that his majesty was pleased to disa
vow the agreement, concluded between YOU
and Mr. Erskine, because it was tn UtoEa
lion of that genienlGn's iH8t1uc,ioH8, and
altogether without authority 90 subscribe
to the terms of it. These inatrucl;0ns
now understand by your letter, "a well as
from the obvious deductions which took the
liberty of making in mine of the 11th inst
were at the time in substance made known
to you. No stronger illustration, therefore,
can be given Of the deviation from them
which occurred, than by reference to the
terms of your agreement.
Your Lordship will allow me to- take for
granted. that this passage Cannot be mis-
understood. It's direct and evident tendency
is to fasten upon the government of the u.
States an imputation most injurious to It's no
nor and varacity. The charge, that it had
all along been substantially apprized, how
ever it might affect tobo ignorant, of the in
structions which MIR. ]Srskine's arrange
ment was said TO have violated, had before
been insinuated but ii is here openly made
in reply, too to paper, in which the con
trary is formally declared by the official or