Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-06-30
SELECTIONS.
Iron, The Da.;en 40. } Ga-ette Nun, Is


Den, Esq. oil the city OF Washington, and has given
US permission to publish so much of i, he deems
interesting 10 many OF our readers The following
Is an extract from the letter.
y" The delay which has taken place in relation to
these claims, has been extended beyond the calcu-
!aton OF any one, and has become very vexatious.
IL has arisen principally out of difference Of opn-
ion between the two commissioners, as to the prin-
cipIes upon which, several points growing out Of
'he cases, as they have come up, should be disposed
loi-Ihe first of these was the subject of the are
rage raiue of the sidres, which after much difficult
! " and time was agreed upon. The next was the
charge Tor interest upon the different claims which,
all the agents, as well the American Commits
sloner (under the construction given by the Empe-
ror OF Russia) contended for, and conceive CON
seiehtiousiy and properly too for the opIion
expressed by the Emperor OF Russia on reference
OF this article Of The Treaty OF Client, is g That
Inc parties claiming entitled 10 fxH conpe5iSd-
non and indemnity ioI all property taken and
carried away in contrary eniion OF said Treaty.
| Sc
The American Commissioner contends for this
construction (and entirely agree with him in
opinion) - that tiU compensation and indemnity
means, that the party having right to claim shall
be paid by the other contracting party the full va
lue OF the article at the time il was TAKEN with such
additional compensation will be an equivalen.
Tor the loss or deprivation of it, until it is paid for
which equivalent or compensation, can be comput-
ed by award of interest only
| - he British Commissioner. on the other hand
contends, that we have right 10 claim interes,
because there is nothing said about 1t either in the
Treaty or convention, and if any such hing can be
implied II certainly merged in the ratio of
average Value of the sIaues'' Tits is certainly
narrow and Liberal construction. The Amer
can Commissioned, al length finding argument of no
avail, proposed the alternative, which seemed TO
every body, 10 provide Tor such contingency.-
10 wit " That when the Commissioners should
diher ABOUT the construction OF any article OF the
treaty or convention, that one OF the albitrdforS
should De drawn Tor to act umpire in the case
To this proposition, which seemed SO plain and
I reasonable, the British Commissioner objected
alieaglas, that as nothing said in the treaty
ABOUT Interest he DID not consider subject for re-
ference, and that he could not consent 10 it, In
tins state OF things, all further proceedings before
The board, have been suspended ever since and The
| subjects, upon which the two commissioner h. q
differed, Were referred own Government,
who forwarded the arguments and dis customs on
both sides, 10 our present Minister in England,
MI klns, with instruction 10 eBdeavor to remove
by negotiation with the British Government the
existing difficulties. As far as / can learn No
change has taken place by this reference and if is
understood that the British Gov eminent has done
nothing more than to authorize and instruct their
minister here, TO discuss ;he matter with our Co
vernment. l. is beliey led that the negotiation ha.
already, or soon will be commenced betGeen th.
, Secretary OF State, (who was one Of The Commits.
sloners who made the Trea,y) s. MIR. Vaughan the
Br. Minister here. Although the subject of inferes
is one for which 1t is well worthy TO contend bo,l
on account OF the amount which il involves as wei
as the justice OF the claim, am not al all sansuin,
oil succeeding IN It, 1t is all important, however
in proceeding to the settlement of these claims tba
the poiceTs OF the Commissioners should be defnet
ana expressed so that when they may difer abou
Fnfnf
Commissioners shall not be able 10 defeat the exc.
cution the commission by saying when a confer.
ence Is proposed, disputed point that il is not
4 subject for reference.
The Commissioners now in session, but thew
will adjourn in day or two, probably until mex
winter, as there IS no chance of their doing any
thing until the subjects referred as above shell N,
: finally disposed of. Ii thought it would NEE
the appreciation of those whose interests in thes,
claims, represent, and that it might moi effect OF
leopndze the interests of other claimants / yyouIf
come INTO measure offered by the British Commits
sIoner, VIZ: 10 proceed to settle and determine ih
validity Of the clainIs and 10 award compensatio,
Tor The principal, and let the charge for interest BIZ
= subject OF future negotiation between The tyyc
? governments, with the express understanding tina
the settlement and payment of the principal rsu
should IN no manner hereafter affect the right Il
claim interest. This l could do, but | am afrai,
to act without knowing whether or not 1 vyoul.
accord nth the wishes Of the claimants generally
There TWO other difficulties existing between
/ the commissioners which are also TO be dispDse,
OF by the same reference, and which will probabl-
occupy some time. The one is as 10 the Terrific
rial Jurisdiction over that part of Florida wbenc
the slaves from Louisiana taken after lh
peace, principally, believe, from Daphne Islafl
The slaves from Louisiana fled to this part OF yygs
Florida, and taken from thence by the Briiisl
forces after the ratification Of the Treaty Mr.
Jackson contends " that these slaves were out O
the Territory and limits Of the United States at tn
time, and that, therefore, the Treaty does not pro
u vide for such cases. We consider II 10 have BEEF
al the time Spanish Territory and that the Unite
States had right TO exercise iursdiction over il >
The American Commissioner contends that Obi
portion of West Florida, embraced in the ces
sion Of Louisiana by France to the u. STATES, an,
that the u. s. had before, and did at the time exer
else sovereignty and jurisdiction over i,and If ther
was any contest about tie right TO it, the conte-
Il was between Spain and France; It was gusrsnii
- ed to us by Francewe were IN fuii pos. e.sion AMI
in the exercise Of sovereignty over il, the pero
4 when the treaty OF Client was concluded
Another point Of difference is about laying befor
a the claimants, the documents relating 10 slaves am
(. other property, taken and carried away by the Bri
fish forces du-ing and after tie war. which hav
been transmitted to the British commissioner here
and which by the 4th article Of the Convention VA
r British Government required 10 furnish to si
n the parties establish their claims These docu
10 ments are supposed TO contain register OK let
eli the property which was taken away at the DIFF
fereni periods during and Immediately after the war
& they would doubt, be very ssryiceable in dis
{, closing great deal OF important information an
. proof relative TO the several claims and they WEI
furnished as suppose in good faith Of he stipulation