Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1810-05-01


RIGA.
Correspondence between Mr. Secre-
tary Canning and the Hon. D.
M. Erskine.
(Laid before Pariiament.)
EConthuued fran our hst.1
Dispatch from the Honorable d. M.
Erskine, to Mr.. Secretary Canning,
dated Washington, August 8, 1909.
SIR,
I have the honor to acknowledge
the receipt ofyour dispatches, No. &c,
II, 12, of the 22d. cad, and 3oth of
May, original and duplicates, the for
mer brought in his Majesty's packet
Windsor Castle, which arrived at New
York on the 25gh ult. and the latter
which were delivered to ne yesterday
by Lieut.. Gregory, commanding his
Majesty's gun brig Confess, which ar.
rived In Hampton Roads, in the Bay
of Chesapeake, Oh the 29lh ult.
L lost no time in complying with
your Instructions contained in your
No. IS, TO deliver copy of his Ma
Jesty's Order in Council of the oath of
May last, to the Secretary of State of
TINS Government, which l accordingly
seat to MIR. Robert Smith in a written
note of which the inclosed is copy.
In obedience to your commands, | al
so used all the means in my power
to make the above mentioned order
publickly known throughout the Uni.
ted States.
1t IS with the deepest regret that
find from your dispatches, Nos, 10
and II, of the 22d ard a3d Of Nav,
that his Majesty has disapproved OF
the manner in which 1 executed the
instructions which you sent me by Mr.
Oakley, and has been compelled to dis
lavow the provisional agrecment which
had lately entered into with the 90.
vernment, under the persuasion that
iitwould have met with his maiesty's
appreciation.
The duty and high respect which 1
owe to his majesty, would restrain me
from making any reply to the animad-
versions upon my conduct, which you
have conveyed to me by his maissty's
command, but consider that il is in
cumbent on me to offer some observa-
tions upon certain points OF my neeo
citation, which appear to have been
misunderstood, in consequence, sup
pose, of my having given them an in.
sufficient or imperfect explanation. L.
is stated by you in your No. 10, O!
the 22d of NJ ay, that with respect to
the instructions relating to the Chesa-
peake, which formed the subject of
your despatch, No. 1, Of the 23d Ct
January last. 1 omitted a preliminar,
OF the most material Importance, as
the condition of "his maiesty's nc
longer insisting Upon the recall of the
proclamation of1so7, as a prelimil. a.,
to adjustment ofthe difference arising
from the affair Of the Chesapeake, tina,
the ships of war, shall, in point of fact,
have been excluded from the ports oil
the United States, and such ships OF
that description as were in those ports
shall have been warned to depart"
OF this condition you OBJ .crve, that
l appear to have taken no notice what.
ever ) you add also that the non inter
course bill operated to the prospective
exclusions.
beg leave to refer you to the first
section of the n-intercourse law.
which you will find excludes the ships
OF war, from the passing of that act or
The first of March the prohibition
therefore, was not prospective but i'm.
mediate, and in fact had been in ope.
ration SIX weeks before 1 commenced
the negotiation.
Upon the subject Of the warning
which should be given to any French
ships, liz the ports of the United States.
the Secretary of State Mr.. Rober.
Smith, inrCimed me, that there were
no French ships at present, within the
waters Of the United States, and thai
it was to be presumed, that the govern.
ment would cause their laws to be ex.
ecuted; IN the propriety and Justice
of which sentiment, | fully acquies
ced.