Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-12-21
No. vi. III
mr.. Rush 10 Mr.. &. Casnioe.

N- "ao me honor to- receive, on the 2.;th inst
your noie of the Cd of this month. giving me
information that his Botanic Maiestv's cavern
,'' "'ci'hed, Tor the reasons you have ehu-
"n."'e"' advising his Majesty accent the ratifi-
catioh, by the President and Senate OF tb,, Uptcd
states, OIL the treaty for the suppression of fine slave
u"ut' iately signed On behalf of the two powers
III manner aud form that ratification had been
''aue known by me, to his Majesty's government.
HaVing already, sir, had the honour 10 In bcfore
you all the reasons that operated with my qovc,n
N'eht Tor giving way to the desire, and the hone
'"a' MS Majesty government might have felt able
10 accept the treaty with the alterations introduc-
eo oy the Senate as conditions of its ratification
.. o"'y 10 express my roget AT the disappoint
nient OF this hope.
All power over the instrument On my part, as the
fienipotentiary of the United States at his Males
~ court, ceasing by this decision it only remains
ior me TO say, thatl will, with promptude, trans
"'' 10 '.y government copy of your note, which
source IL VIII receive, am sure, all the attention
que 10 the high interests of which 1t treats.
have the hsnor TO be, with distingui con-
sideralioiI, sIr your most obedient servant
RICHARD RUSH
Inc Rt. Hon. GEORGE CANNING, His Majesty's
Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
No. VII.--nr. .4dams 10 Mr.. Rush.
NO. w. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, Nor. 10, 1924.
SIR: Your dispatches, To Nos. 1896, and ~ in
elusive, have been received. The proposal for the
negotiation of convention, for the suppres-
sion OF tie slave trade, will receive the deliberate
consideration of the President.
1t IS observed, with regret that the reasons as
signed in MIR. Secretary Canning's letter of 9th
August, tn you, as having induced the British Co
vernincnt to decline the ratification of that wbch
you had sigued, modified by tire advice and con-
seuf of the Senate of the United States appear IN
have arisen from impressions altogether erroueo,s
1t is stated, that, under the expectation thai tle
treaty would not he made subject of renewed dis
cusson IN the United States, il had actually beer
ratified on the part of ,Ic British Government as at
hrsf concluded; and hence argument Of jncop-
venience is deduced that second, and ounIifed
ratihcatoD, could not be given, without inpairiuo
the dignity of the Government by the irrp1ication
that the former ratification had been an act of the
Sovereign, performed in vain.
To give weight to this reasoning il would seen,
essential part of the facts, that The ratification
alluded TO had been transmitted to the United
States or at least that il was known have taken
place by the Government Of the United States, a
the tine when the convention under the con-
sideratiou Of the Senate. This however, was not
the case. That it had been ratified in Great Bri-
tain, was neither known believed. II appears
to have been an act altogether voluntary, aud in
wise referring that which was expected on the
part Of the United States. The argument, the re-
fore, rests upon facts other than those which were
really applicable ~ the subject.
While admitting that the knowledge of those pro-
visions Of constitution. which reserve 20 the Sc
nate the right Of revising all treaties with foreign
powers, before they obtain the force Of law
pTecludes the possibility Of taking exception TO any
particular instance in which that revision is exer-
cised, Mr. Canning urges that this part Of our sys-
ten operates UDfavorably upon the feelings of the
other contracting party, whose solemn ratification
he says, is thus rendered Of no avail; aud whose
concessions jr negotiation, having been made. (as
all such concessions must be understood to be
,7'tadf) condt9aaiy. sre '''vs sceepted positive