The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-01-20

5. That the execution is possible.
Pid M4rtiR. Book 2, Ct 1 Sec s.
The arrangement is not disavowe, for
want OF power Oil the part OF Nj. E,sl.ine,
but for departure from Instructions. It is
admitted by Mr.. Jackson that E.r iIysbfne
had power IL pegc CO o. the Correspondence.
Nh Jackson deciares--"I must beg vCnr
very particular attention to the crcu issuance
that i,is maJcsty's ratification has been Vita
held rot because the agreement was con-
Guided without full power but because it
was altogether irreconcilahle to the ins,ruc-
tons on which it was proessedly founded:
The question cf the full power was introdu-
ced by Yourself, 10 give weight, by a quota
ton from highly respscted author, to YOUR
complaint Of the dis4vowal; in answer 10
which observed, that the quosaton did
no. Apply, rs Mr.. Erakine mad no full po,Aer.
Never did imagine or any where attempt,
| to rest the right III disavowal upon TINT Cir
cumstance." According tn Mr. jackson
then, ] Mr.. Er'}i inc had power to CONSENT.
I z He did consent.
8 He consented freely, for the proposition
| 4 Tie coosent VIZ mutual, for it is in
written form and signed by both.
5. The execution was net cnly possible,
but just and easy.
| The I've essentials OF contract were
coupled with the contract, so far as it re-
| spected thl u. S executed with good faith Z:
| no future ratification was CT could DE rcser-
we'd the affair II the Chesapeake was tj be
concluded here; the stipulations as to the
orders in councii were TO be carried into in
mediate effect. Tousc the language Of MIR.
Canning, the orders in council and tho cm-
| barge were 10 be outemporaneousy with
drawn, and Mr.. ErSkine was authorised 20
fix the time-No notice Of departure from
instructions was given at the time of making
the arrangement.
70 dissyow with honor the act OF It's az
Credited agent, it is incumbent on a govern
ment Tot only to shew & palpable and mani
test departure from instructions on material
and Important points. but also to produce
such strong and solid reasons, rs rranifestIy
outweigh not only the general Obligation to
abide 10y what has been done, but also the
disappointment and injury accruing to the
other party. This principle applies 10 cases
where mutual ratification is reserved The
Case before MS is OF Il higher characteristic
refusal of The British ministry is not simply
to fa'ify what had been ratified by the other
party, but TO carry into effict on their part
IAN arraoga ment which had been carried into
tuii eitcct With COCA jaith 0n the ia:. Of the
UHifrd States
! viii nov prncsed to examine,
Whether there has been such decar.
tu"e from instructions as 70 warrant d.sa-
vo"ai of the arrangement ii. hout breach
OF good faith on the part of the British min
istrv (?
The arrangement entered into with Mr.:
Els.lrc, consisted Of .hree parts
l. Preparation for the affair OF the Chesa-
peasc.
2 withdrawal OF the orders in coun-
Gil.
3 a promise to send over minister with
iull powers TO conclude a treaty on all the
subjects Of difference between the u. S and
@ Britain.
Let us pass in review the several parts of
the arrangement. and see how far on each
there has been such departure from in.
structions, rs to warrant the course pursued
by the British ministry.
L The PREPARATION for the outrage on the
Chesapeake
The instructions of MIR E.,,akine on this
subject are not known TO us; Mr. Jackson
has not pointed to any despatch in which
they were contained. There is strong
| ground indeed for believing that rs 20 the
Chesapeake, there has been no departure
| from distinctions; the instructions on this
| subject aud indeed on he orders in council
are said to have been founded on g ~cpressn
tation made by Mr. Erskine to the British
minister, Mr.. Gaming There is perfeCe
agreement between what Mr.. Canning sta
/ W. ~ Ihi' inhhey Us tne lep3rdllOn which
! Mr.. Erskne said would be acceptable to the
American government and the rcparatiou
actually rendered. In page Z Of the last
message containing extracts from M Pink
ney's letters Mr. Pinkusy says, ain the in
! terview which took place ION Nav 25) Mr..
! Canning said, that the British minister had
acted In the late negotiation and engage
| rnents with you, not only without authority,
but IN direct opposition to the most precise
instructions; that the instructions actually
gwen to him had been founded on his own
letters received here in January, in which
were set forth the particulars Uf severalcan-
versations that had passed between him and
Mr.. Madison, Mr.. Gahatn ana Yourself,
lax especially the two last; that il 2 ppeared
from these conversations that, ~ the opinion
OF the persons with whom thev were held.
the government of the u. 5 would be wiling
that q. Britain should consider the measu, es
then contemplated by Congress SIS, relative 20
non intercourse, and Jhc iuG,scriminate eX-
clusion If beligerenk vessels ron our wa.
tiers, as pre- -n!iug an opening for the renew
al OF amicablc discussions with this country
that it would be disposed, in the case Of the
| Chesapeake. 70 receive as Sufficient repsra.
ton, in addition othe prompt lisavowal ard
recall OF Admiral Berkeley, the restoration
OF the seanen foroIbly taken cut OF that YES.
SELL
In The next page Of the saue letter, Mr..
PInEnty says, MIR. Canning proceeded to
inform nc that IN consequence of these ~.
Veacntiuons or TIE parc OK Elr. ErsLinc.
tNo acts OF instructions had been forwarded,