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


Americans to the Fisheries generally, or in
the open seas, but that the privileges for,
merly granted by treaty 10 the United
States, of fishing within the limits OF the
British jurisdiction, and oflanding and dry
ing fish on the shores of the British terrific
ries would not be renewed without an egai-
valent
The extent of what was considered bv
them as waters peculiarly British, was not
stated. From the manner in which they
brought this subject into view, they seemed
20 wish us TO understand that they were not
anxious il should be discussed, and that they
only intended 10 give us notice that these
privileges had ceased to exist, and would
not be again grained without an equivs lent
nor ualess we thought proper to provide ex.
pressly in the treaty Of peace for their re
newal
The British Commissioners having stated,
that these were all the subjects which they
intended to bring forward or to suggest, re
quested to be informed, whether we were
instructed to enter into negotiation on these
several points, aud, whether there was any
amongst these which we thought it unne
cessary to bring into the negotiation and
they desired US to state, on our part, such
other subjects as we might intend to pro
pose for discussion in the course of the ne
gotia'ion. The meeting was then adjourn
ed to the next day, in order to afford as the
opportunity of consultation among ourselves,
before we gave an answer.
Ia the course of the evening of the same
day, we received your letters of the 25th
and 9th Of June
There could be no hesitation on our part,
in informing the British Commissioners,
that we were not instructed on the subjects
of Indian pscification or boundary, and of
fisheries Nor did it seem probable, al
though neither of these points had been sta
ted with sufficient precision in that first YER
bal conference, that they could be admit
ted in any shape We did not wish, how
ever, to PREJUDICE the result, or by any has
ty proceeding abruptly to break off the ne
gociation. 1t was not impossible that, on
the subject of the Indians, the British 60
vernment had received erroneous impress
sicns from she Indian traders in Canada,
which our representations might remove
And it appeared, at all events. important,
to ascertain distinctly the precise intentions
of Great Baitain on both points. We,
therefore, thought it advisable to invite the
British Commissioners to general con,
versation on all the points stating to them
at the same time, oar want of instruction
on two OF them, and holding out no e@pec
tation of the probability of our agreeing to
any article respecting them.
At our meeting on the ensuing day we
informed the British Commissioners, that
upon the first and third points proposed by
them we we're provided with Instructions,
and we presented as further subjects con.
sidered by our government as suitable for
discussion
LIST. A definition of blockade; and as far
as might be mutually agreed, of other neu
trail and belligereat rights.
cd. Claims of indemnity in certain cases
of capture and seizure.
We then stated that the two subjects, LIST
of Indian paciication and boundary, and
cd of fisheries, were not embraced by our
instructions
We observed, that as these points had
not been heretofore the grounds of any con
troversy between the government of Great
Britain and that of the United States, and
had not been alluded to by lord Castlereagh,
in his letter proposing the negotiation, it
could not be expected that they should have
been anticipated and made the subject of
instructions by our government /; that it
was natural to be supposed, that our in
struc,ions were confined to those subjects
upon which differences between the two
countries were known to exist; and that
the proposition to define, in treaty be-
tween the United States and Great Britain,
the boundary of the Indian possessions
within our territories, was new and with
out example. No such provision had been
inserted in the treaty of peace in 1888, nor
in any other treaty between the two eoun
tries No such provision had, to our know
ledge, ever been inserted in any treaty
made by Great Britain or any other Euro
pean power in relation to the same descrip-
ton of people, existing under like eircum-
stances We would say, however. that i,
4. LIZ al mil ha