The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1814-10-15
DCGUnfENTS.

Cory ofa letter from Ihessrs. .4dans, Bay
ard, Clay aid RusSsu, 10 DLr. M9aroe,
Secretary Of Stale, dated
Client, 18th Aug 1914.
Strive have the honor to inform
you that the British Commissioners, Lord
Gambler, Henry Goulburn, Esq. and William
Adams, Esq. arrived in this city on Saturday
evening, the 9th instant. The day after their
arrival, Mr.. Baker, their Secretary, called
upon US to give us notice OF the fact, ard to
propose meeting 1t 4 certain hour, on the
ensuing day. The place having beea agreed
upon, we accordingly met, at one o'clock, on
Monday, the eighth i.st.
We enclose, herewith, a COPY Of the full
powers exhibited by the British Commission.
ers at that conference which was opened on
theirpar by AN expression of the sincere and
earncst desire OF their government, that the
negotiation might result; in q solid peace, ho-
norable to both parties. They, at the sHnc
time, declared, that no events which had oc-
carrcd since the first proposal for this nego-
citation, had altered the pacific disposition of
their government, or varied its views as to
the terms upon which it was willing to con-
Clude the peace.
W. answered, that wei heard these declare
rations With great satisfaction, and that our
government hid acceded to the proposal OF
negotiation, with the most sincere desire to
put an end to the differences which divided
liberal grounds the foundation of peace which,
securing the rights and interests of both ma
tious, should unite them BY lasting bonds Of a.
nifty.
The British Commissioners then stated the
following subjects, as those upon which it APP
peared to them that the discussions would be
likely to turn, and on which they were instruct
cd
/. The fcrcible seizure of mariners on
board of merchant vessels, and in EXON
with it, the Claim of his Britannia Majesty to
the allegiance OF al the native subjects Of G.
Britain.
We understood them to intimate, that the
British government did not propose this point
as one which thev were particularly DESTROYS
of discussing but that, as It had occupied so
prominent place in the disputes between the
two countries, it necessarily attracted notice
and was considered as q subject which would
come under discussion.
9. The Indian allies of Great Britain to
be included in the pacihcation, and q de-
finite boundary to be settled for their terri
tory.
The British Commissioners stated, that an
arrangement upon this point was size gua
mn: chat they were net auth lrized to conclude
q treaty of peace which did not embrace the
Indians, as allies of His Britlnnic Majesty !;
and that the establishment of a deiinitive
boundary of the Indian territory was necessa-
ny 70 secure permanent peace, not only with
the Indians but also between the u. S. and G..
Britain
8. A revision of the boundary line between
the Unted States and the adjacent British CO.
lonies.
With respect to this point, they expressly
diSclaimed any intention, on the part of their
government, to acquire an increase Of territory
and represented the proposed revision as in
tended merely for the purpose of preventing
uncertainty and dispute.
After having stated these three points, as
subjects of discussion, the British Commission
era added, that before they desired any an
swer from US, they felt itincumbcnt on them
60 declare, that the British government did
not deny the right of the Americans to the
fisheries generally, or in the open seas but
that the privileges, formerly granted by trea-
~ to the United States, of fishing within the
limits Of tise British Jurisdiction, and of land
ing and drying fish on the shores of the Bri-
fish territories, would not be renewed without
an equivalent.
The extent of what was considered by them
as waters peculiarly British, was not stated.
From the manner in which they brought
this subject into view, they seemed to wish
us to understand that they were not anxious
that it should be discussed, and that they on
ly intended to give us notice that those pri-
vilcges had ceased to exist, and would not be
again granted without an equivalent, nor
unless we thought proper TO pr ivide ex-
pressy in the treaty of peace for their renew
sIl.
The British Commissioners having stated
that these were ali the subjects which they
intended to bring forward or TO suggest, re-
qested to be informed, whether we were m
structed to enter into negociation on these Sc
veral points? and whether there was amongst
these which we thought it unnecessary TO
bring into the negotiation and they desired
us 20 state, on our part, such other subjects as
we might intend to propose for discussion In
the course of tie negotiation. The meet g
was then adjourned to the next day, in order
to alf,rd us the opportunity cf consult ton a
mcng ourselves, before we gave an answer.
In the course of the evening of the same
DAY, We received your letters OF the 18th and
9th Of Juno.
There conld be no hesitation. on our part,
in informing the British Commissioners, that
we we're n7t instructed on the subjects of In
dian pacEcaton o. BOUNDARY, and of fisheries.
Nor did it seem probable, although neither of
these points had bsen state, with sufficient
precision IN that first verbal conference, that
they could be admitted in any shape. We
did not wish, however to PREJUDICE the result,
or by any hasty proceeding abruptly to break
OFF tlie negotiation. 1t was not impossible that,
on the subject Of the Indians, the British pc
,,eru,nent had received erroneous imDressiorS