The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1821-1823, 1822-07-17

that WAS pcInhtteu 10 make those corrections
of the copy IN possession, which appeared TO
me to be proper to exhibit my case most. adj
vantag~ously before that tribunal. The more
confidently entertained this opinion, as the pa
per Was not to be there exhibited without the
previous examination and consent Of the adj
verse party. Such were the views with which
It was unreservcdly confided to Mr.. Adams
But he communicated my private letter, as the
paper called for, and, whit, he disingenuous-
ly communicated the paper entrusted to him,
not as the paper called for, but as convenit mt
vehicle Tor passionate invective and intemper-
ate personal abuse against me-"
Mr.. Russell next attempts to show that there
is no contradiction in the two parallel passages
selected by Mr.. Adams.
"The original letter refers exclusively TO the
instructions of the 25th of June, 1914, oA which
the majority, in the despatch of the 25th of
December, of the same year, solely relieds
when they said, sour instructions had forbid
den us to suffer our right to the fisheries TO be
brought into discussion, and had not authorized
us to make any distinction sn the several pro-
visions Of the Sd article of the treaty of 1888"
Tie duplicate also refers to the same instruc-
tons, and perfectly agrees, so far as it does re-
Ier 10 them, win the lnterpTc tatlon oil them III
the original letter.
The original letter The duplicate Says,
says, 'sTLe majority be-
q The majority be- lievtd themselves to
heved themselves to permitted, theirown
be permitted TO offer construction to the
very explicit PROPOSE contrary notwiths,and-
ton, with regard to the ing, to offer a very ex-
navigation Of its prin- plicit proposition with
ciPai RIVER. 6eliertd regard 10 the naviga-
et9h mem mat we were ton OF its principal riv-
so perhlitted, and that sr:now this offer con-
We were likewise per- sidered. for the reasons
mltted 10 offer prop just suggt sted, not 10
o>itlon relative TO the be Rotation of The
hshing liberty, 'r&c. instructions in ques-
tion," &c.
Is instead OF any contradiction or inconsistcn-
cy, there is here a perfect accordance in the
sense of The two papers, in relation to the in
structions of the 18th OF June.
will mere observe that my lettor, written at
rams. IN 1915, was, a. may be realty ascer-
tanned, confined to discussion Of the grounds
winch the majority assigned or suggested, in
the despatch OF the 25th of December, for the
offer OF the navigation of the Mississippi for
the fishing privilege. To Justify my own con-
duct to my government, in opposing that offer,
believed that it would be sufficient, at the
time, to show why the reasons of the majority
had not satisfied me. In preparing the paper
which left at the department of State. | be-
iieyed it TO be proper, for the causes already
suggested, to assign for my justification, an adj
ditional reason which had induced me in the
course which pursued at tie time. The pa
per, therefore, says, in speaking OF the offer,
:" but | considered it to be against the letter
and the spirit of our Instruction of the 18th of
April, 1873"
With regard to the instructions of the 18th
April, it will be recollected MIR. Adams saws
they were done away by instructions OF the
18th October, received on the 24th Nov
that the proposition relative to the Mississippi
and the Fisheries was discussed by the Ameri-
can Commissioners on the 23th and 29th of
November, and was made to the British pleni-
potentiares on the 1st December-and that.
at these discussions, Mr.. r. could not have
forgotten the instructions so recently received.
Mr.. RusseH con'rauIcrs InIs statement.
his statement is incorrect. The sense of
the mission was not distinctly taken on the
18th and 29th OF November, in relation 20 this
proposition, nor did any majority, at that time,
agree to offer it.''
He asserts that the proposition alluded 10
was discussed between the 1st and 10th Nov.
and decided on, before the latter day.
From these facts il is manifest that the
solution afforded by Mr.. Adams for g the differ
ence IN nay mind between the writing of the
original and the duplicate" is not correct, A
despatch, received on the 9th of November.
could not well have had any influence on nv
reasons for opposing a measure, previous to
the 10th ofthat month"
" The meetings Of the American mission on
the 28th and 10Th of November, were not in
consequence of the despatch received on the
Gath of that month. They were convened for
the purpose of discussing g the alterations and
suggestions" of the British Ministers on our
project which they had returned to us on the
9th, with an explanatory note of the 26th.-
Whatever might have been said at these meet
inss in relation to the Mississippi, on account
OF the alteration, respecting it, made in the
Btu article cfour project, by the British pleni-
poteutiaries, no new resolution was there taken
by the American mission to offer the nayiea-
ton of that river for the fishing privilege
This offer was made on the 1st Of December,
~ virtue Of the vote taken before the 10Th of
November and which, although suspended,
had not been reconsidered or cancelled. /
am the more confident in this statement. as Il
distinctly remember that when that offer was
actually made, it was unexpected by ma
jority of the mission. Mr.. Bayard, in return
ing home from the house of the British minis
tiers, where the conference Of the lst.of De-
cer1ber had been holden, very explicitly de-
clared 10 Mr., Clay and to me, his dissatisfac-
ton that this Offer had been made wiH.o,a
hes haring been recently. consulted in reLation