Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1828-11-07


friend, this long letter, to freshen your memory
anu 70 throw myself on your Justice and ire ndsbip
TO do all you can, with truth and propretv to res
cue me from the viruencc and falsehood of my una
lisnant ard mean caumniaior.
II consoles me not little that Mr. Adams nv
avowng IN his rage that the free navigation OF the
Is OF no more importance than the ri q hit
to Us OF navigating the Bridyewater canal, or the
Danuie, has settled his fate in your quarter, and
wii' gain him nothing here. A line from yoi, I'M
der existing circumstances, would be particularly
Faithfully and cordially yours,
(SignedO JONATHAN RUSSELL.
cannot close this letter without taking notice of
the conduct of Mr.. Adams in getting his remarks
before the public. After the first strange message
oil the President, Mr.. Adams, seeing that no call
in consequence of it was made, went on the 9Th Of
OF May to the Ill. OF r., in person, and applied 10
Eusti5 10 make the call, but he dcclined; MIR. Ad-
ans then procured little Mr. Fuller to perform this
task Fuller made the call the same day; the papers
were communicated on the 7th S the house adjourn
ell on the 7th. had left Washington on the 9Th
-" as IL 'a'r towards me. was it respectful towards
the House, thus to time the obtrusion of such a
scurr'ous paper on the House to abuse am absent
member: hope some member may be found pro-
per'y 10 notice this, next session.
Copy@ letter from III Clay TO M. Russell.
LExING TON, 9th July, 1922.
MY DEAR SIR Your letter Of the 9th nit.
arrived whilst was absent from home, at one of
the watering places, and hence the delay Of my
answer. had read the communication Of the
President TO Congress, of your letters and Mr.. A
dams remarks. And | must frankly say TO you ,
hat the variations between your two letters has
given, In the public Judgment, a great advantage
to Mr.. Adams, at least for the moment, and tina,
unless satisfactorily explained, il will do you last
ing pr sjndice. 1 saw it with very De ep regret,
ard snail anxiously look for an explanation.
Tn many OF the circumstances stated in YOUR
letter, my memory accords with yours; on one or
two only il does not 1 recoilect distinctly, that
me paragraph of.rei by and inserted in
our despatch to the British Commissioners of the
10Th Nov terminated, at that time, the discussions
respecting the navigation Of the Mississippi, and
the privileges concerning the fisheries within the
British jurisdiction. 1t prior TO the adoption of
that paragraph that it had been proposed think by
Mr. Galiaiin, to grant the one for the other, that
The discussion, which was long, earnest, animat-
ed often renewed, had taken place; that MAORI
ty consisting OF Messrs. GalIaiiu, Adams and Bay.
ard, appeared to be in favor of il; and that had
declared that would sign no treaty in which such
stipulation should be included. After this decla-
ration, Mr. Bayard came over to US, and made us
the majority 1t was thea necessary that we
should, as we were about TO send in to the British
Commissioners the project Of treaty of peace,
give some to'iffe', answer TO their notica ton of
the 9TH oil Aug concerning the fisheries. We were
forbidden, by our instructions, to suffer our right to
the ti>heries to he brought into discussion The
majority had now determined not TO offer for the
renewal OF our right to the navigation Of the Mis-
siss'pp We had, in short. no equivalent to offer.
We mad, therefore, no other ground to take, than
that which the above paragraph assumes. Whether
solid or not il was the best we could occupy and
had the advantage OF being in conformity to our in
Structions
After the British Commissioners returned our
project win an alteration, proposing renewal to
them OF the right TO navigate the Mississippi,
think the same question, tho IN form some what
different, came up in our commission We receiv-
ed their note, with their proposed alterations and
suggestions, on tbs 9th Of Nov. We had a con
ference with them Oh the LIST OF Dec think il
must have been between those two days that the
question was again considered. You and (such, at
least ~ my recoiectioD proposed 10 strike out that
part OF the British alteration of the 9Th article
which had Tor its object Gse renewal of their right
TO navigate the Mississippi; but the same majority
that was at first in favor of making the offer Of the
navigation OF that river, willing to accept
the British proposal upon the condition of their
newing TO US the fishing liberty within their iu-
risdicuon. The article proposed at the conference
on tie lst oil Dec. expressed the sense Of the
Jority. My determination on this subject, had
been deliberately formed, and comm unicated
frankly to my colleagues. 1 did not probably re-
peat the communication of my resolution, because
1t would have worn the appearance Of menace
have some recollection of Mr.. Bayard, on
turn from the conference of the LIST of Dec. bav.
ing expressed his dissatisfaction with something
which Mr.. G. = said or did at the conference;
but what it was do not recoilect. | cannot think
terence without being pr epared to say omethng TO
tie British commissioners on the subject of the
navigation OF the Mississippi, and my recollection
is very strong, that the above majority was in IA
vor OF accepting their proposal, with the condition
which have mentioned. | regret that I cannot
put my hands upon your letter from Stockholm,
mentioned in your last
Nothing can be more unfounded than Mr.. Ad
ans inference, or he intended to draw an nfe-
rence,) OF our assent to the doctrine of the inper
ytN.t,f - e
1853, and to the proposal in regard to the naviga
ton VI the Mississippi, from the fact Of sigma
iure to the communication, respecting those sub
jecs, TO the British commissioners and that of our
being present at the conference Of the LIST of Dec.
1. A. TO the durable character OF the treaty.
think all of US, Except Mfr. Adams,) concurred
IN believing that the provisions respecting the fish
ing grants Uithin tie British exclusive jurisdic-
ton and the navigation of the Mississippi, expir
ed on the breaking OFT Of the Why he calls
il the American doctrine Edo not know. re il be
true, IL is 6 doctrine of the public law. If he
means to say that il il American, because we
were most interested in maintaining it, he ia mis-
taken. Ii the superiority of interest should de-
termne the national character Of the doctrine, it
ought TO be called British. Then why did we
take the ground which we did, in our note Of the
10th OF November! For the reason already as
signed. IL was the best we could occupy II
was plausible, and might serve, probably il
subsequently did serve, 10 enable us to make
some satisfactory arrangement with Great Britain
in regard 10 the fisheries. We were bound 10 say
something, or acknowledge, by our silence, the
principle asserted by the British commission
ers, on the 9Th Of August By taking the ground
which we did, If it were not absolutely tensbe,
we we're better of than to have stood mute.
2. As TO the navigation of the Mississippi. that
the Offer Of it the work of majority, in
which we did not participate, cannot ne denied
What puts this matter coEclusivey at rest u.s. the
despatch signed by all the American commission
a. If. lrs ~