Martinsburgh gazette. [volume] (Martinsburgh, Va. [W. Va.]) 1810-1825, 1814-10-20

ment of the views and objects of Great
Britain upon all the points, and our willing
ness to discuss them all, in order that, even
II no arrangement should be agreed on up
on the points not included in our instruc-
tons, the government oft the United States
might be possessed of the entire and pre-
else intentions of Great Britain, respecting
these points, and that tie British govern
nett might be fully informed of the ohiec
tions, on the part Of the United States, TO
any such arrange ment.
| In answer to our remark that these points
had not been alluded to by Lord Castle
REACH, in his letter proposing the negocia.
| ton, it was said, that II could not be ex-
pected, that, in letter merely intended to
| invite a negotiation, he should enumerate
the topics of discussion, or state the pre-
| tensions of his government since these
would depend upon Interior events, and
might arise out of subsequent state of
things
In reply to our observation, that the pro
posed stipulation ofan Indian boundary was
without example in the practice Of Europe
an nations, it was asserted, that the Indi-
ans must in some sort be considered as an
independent people, since treaties were
made with them, both by Great Britain
and by the United States upon which we
| pointed out the obvious and important diff
| ference between the treaties we might make
| with Indians, living in our territory, and
such treaty as was proposed to be made,
respecting them, with a foreign power,
who had solemnly acknowledged the terri
| tory on which they resided to be part Of the
/ United States,
| We were then asked by the British Com
missioners whether, in case they should
enter further upon the discussion of the sc
veral points which had been stated we
codld expect that it would terminate by
some provisional arrangement on the points
on which we had no instructions. particular
| ly on that respecting the Indians, which
arrangement would be subject to the ratif-
cation of our government
! We answered that, before the subjects
were distinctly understood, and the objects
! in view more precisely disclosed, we could
not decide whether it would be possible to
form any satisfactory article on the sub.
ject nor pledge ourselves as to the exer-
else ola discretion under our powers, even
with respect to provisional agreement
We added, that as we should deeply de-
plore rupture of the negotiation on any
point, it was our anxious desire to employ
all possible means to avert an event so sc
rious in it's consequences and that we had
| not been without hopes that a discussion
might correct the effect of any CHROME Gus
information which the British government
might have received on the subject, which
they had proposed as preliminary basis
We took this opportunity to remark,
that no nation observed policy more IL
beral and humane towards the Indians than
that pursued by the u States that our
object had been, by all practicable means,
to introduce civilization amongst them !;
that their possessions were secured to them
by well defined boundaries that their per
sons, lands and other property were now
more elfectually protected against violence
or frauds from any quarter, than they had
been under any former government that
even our citizens were not allowed to pur-
| chase their lands that when they gave up
their title to any portion of their country TO
| the II States, it was by voluntary treaty
with our government, who gave them a sa.
tisfactory equivalent and that through
these means the U. States had succeeded in
preserving, since the treaty of Greenville
of 1895, an uninterrupted peace Of 10 years,
with all the Indian tribes; period of
tranquility much longer than they were
known to have enjoyed heretofore.
! 1t was then expressly stated on our part
that the proposition respecting the Indians,
was not distinctly understood. We asked
whether the pacification and the settlement
of a boundary for them were both made a
sine qua non 2 Which was answered in
the affirmative. The question was then
asked the British Commissioners, whether
the proposed Indian boundary was intend
ed to preclude the u States from the right
of purchasing by treaty from the Indians
without the consent of G. Britain, lands
lying beyond that boundary? And as re.
striction upon the Indians from selling by
amicable treaties lands to the u. States as
had been hitherto practisedf