Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1810-05-22


was atiAiaa''e, c,.'.lii, under sueh cir
cunissaaces ana uTaa sach topics, be
coiitiau@d, Il wo ~, noc b. easy 10 dis.
cover; and think l may venture to
assume thai Inc subsequent written
CORE popdeace has completely shewn
that they could not have been other
WISE than f:li,isss, and that they were
not TOO soon abandoned For that more
formal. course, to which from the be-
ginning ,hsy could only be considered
as preparatory.
Alter demonstrating against the wish
of she American govern .ncnt to give
TO the iurihSr discussions written
form, Mr. Jackson disposes himself to
conform to il; and, speaking in the
same letter Of the disavowal of the ar.
Engagement of April, he declares, that
be was not provided with instructions
| Y explain the motives OF it; and he
seems to intimate that explanction
through him " as unnecessary, not only
because /. had al eady been made
through other channels, bu- because
the government of the Uai,ed States
had entered into the arrangement with
a Knowledge ''that it could only lead
to the consequences that actually fol.
lowed." In the conclusion of the fourth
paragraph of the letter he informs Mr..
Smith, that tn dispatch OF Mr. Cam
ming TO Mr. Erakine, " which Mr.
Shniln hal made he basis Of an ofIici.
al correspondence with the latter min
Ister. and which had been read TO the
American minister, in London" was
the only despatch, by which the con-
ditions were prescribed to Mr. Erskine
Tor the conclusion of an arrange m ent
with the Un ted States OH the matter
to which it related.
MIR Smiths answer to this letter
bears date the 10Th OF October and
| beg your Lordship's permission to
Introduce from it the following quota
; tion:-" The stress you have laid on
what you have been pleased to stste
as the substitution of the terms finally
agreed on" GIN The arrangement OF A.
! pril on the orders IN councii) " for the
terms first proposed" (hy Ny Erskine)
/" las excited no small d gree of
snrprize. Certain il is that your pre-
decrssor did present for my consider
alton the same donditions which now
appear in the present document-that
ne was d srosed to urge them more
than the nature OF two OF the IN (hoth
] palPably inadmissib!e and one more
than merely inadm;ssbie) could permit;
and that, or tndipg his FIRST proposal
unsuccessful, the more reasonable
terms, compriz.d in the arrangement
Prospecting the orders III Council, W re
adopted !; And what is there in this
10 countenance TIE conclusion you have
drawn in favour of the right of his
Britannia majesty to disayow The pro-
ceeding! Is any thing more com.non
! in public negotiations, than to begin
with higher denard, and. that lni-
ing, to descend 10 a loigeri 20 have,
If not two sets Of Instructions. two, or
more than TWO grades of propositions
in the same set OF Instructions to be-
gin with what IS the most desirable.
and TO end with what is found % be
admissible, III case The moe desirable
! should not be attainahl= This must
be obvious to every understanding, &
is confirmed by unive al experien e.
g. What are the real and entire in
struc,ions given to your p -cIecessor,
is question essentially between kim
and his government. That he had,
or at least that he believed h had,
sufficient authority to conclude the ar
rangement, his formal assn ance. du.
| ring our discussions were such as to
leave no roo for doubt. His subse-
quent letter of the 15ih of Iune, re-
neEing his assurance to me, Z" that the
terms OF the agreement so happily
concluded by the recent negotiation
will be strictly fulfilled on the part of
his majesty,"is an evident indication
of WHAT his persuasion then was as to
his inst uctions. And 3 ith view to
shew what his Impressions have been
even since the disavowal, must take
the liberty of referring you to the an
nexed extracts (see c. from his OIL
cial letters OF the 3ist OF July and of
the 14h Of August.
|" The declaration, that the despatch
from Mr. Canning to Mr. Erskine of
,he Dad of January is the only die