The Abbeville banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1847-1869, 1857-09-17
irom ~, Hi,hYv.i khYunt.
INTERESTING LETTER FROM Ex.rREs1DEr
TYLER

Mr,sns. Er,,,r-: Although have observed
profound silence III rrCari 10 ull public political
discussions nrc the c,rs" ot my official rcsijcn,r
nt Washington, yet it seems to me to BE- not only
rrorcr, but in some measure required Of mo 10
v.,rl,cutc IN uctinn OF my administration, for
which postcritr will hold mo accountable
against pLblc attack made upon il. Such an
occasion has occurred in the published debates of
the recent Commercial Convention ii, Knoxville.
wherein II member IL stated To have declared the
provision in the Treaty Of Washing, g,on STIMULATING
OH the part of the United Siutcs for the inane.
nance Of fleet Of eighty guns for the supp cssion
uf the slave trade under the American flag. was
an act Of di.courtcsy und insult to the South az
II reason for its abrogaton. The declaration thus
made seems to have met with the countcnacc of
II large mo- jurity Of the Convention in thu final
vote upon the subject. l propose to do more.
Nessrs. Editors, than revive with the public u
recollection OF the incidents which led 10 the in
corporation OF that provision in The treaty, and.
having done 80, shall be- content to leave the
matter to the aIbltrnmcnt OF the proper tribunal.
I shall, however, be permitted To observe, that
tn. remarks reported to have fallen from, nlrln-
hrrs OF the Conventions in debating the main
subject, are entirely varian; fiou the popular
sentiment entertained throughout the Southern
States. us believe, i'll leI!, as to occuson me
no little surprise Who, in 1872, even dreamed
that there would be- us early us 1857, Il prop"si.
tion seriously made to revive the slave ti:,dri
certainly cnio:laincd no such iLca nvr did | am
statesmen who were my constitutions! vaers
l really thought and often declared that the
3oulhcrn States were more oppnscd to the slave
trade than any portion Of our people. Tl,y had
voted with singular Immunity for tho nc, o
Congress which declared that all citizens of ih.
United States engaging, in that trad. should bc
regarded, and, if convicted, punished us pirates
How it happens, then, that provision in niroducc
ln.o treaty 10 enforce II law, for which the
South had voted, hc ri,htlully regarded as
t,)t f,.t tI,p Su,itl I
comprehcnSion Certainly such an idc:, never
entered into my head or heart.
My principal desire, however. is Ia call the al,
tcntion OF the country, in brief, to the facts us
they existed Immediately antccedcnt to the
treaty of Washington. The British Government
had insisted up"n the right, in virtue of various
treaties with the nations, 10 visit ships on the
conSt of Africa, sniling under the American flag
For The purpose of usccriaining the true nation.
"lty of the ships England had even ven,urcd
'" put their clam into practice. This called
strong remonsrances from Mr. Stevenson, who
was then our Minister at London, and ii most
able argument III pamphlet form appeared soon
after from the pen Of Gen. Cnss who was our
minister III Paris. The conduct Of our rc,rcs.u.
tniivc at Purs in this particular Was fully an.
proved by the administration and, in nv unnu-
al neSsase 10 Congress-, took decided ground
against the Claim preferred by Great Britain, and
made tile occasion to say, that, rs the United
htates Government was the first to declare the
slave trade to he piracy, far the citizens of
the United States wcro concerned so il was fully
able to enforce lis own laws witllou, The uid Of
British cruisers.
THUS, The two governments remained for Il
time n"tagonized cn the question. Great Britain
urged that sho meant no insult to tho American
nag. but that it WAS impossible, without Il visit
TO the ship, to asc"i tain whether she belonged to
the nation whose flag she bore, or assumed that
haE, merely tc deceive, thus seeking Immunity
under the American flag, when the vessel, oir.
GERS and crew might be French, Portuguese or
spanish, or some other nation, intent on the
slave trade, whose treaty engagements had Civ
cn Great Britain the right to visit un.l scarch-
Great Britain also urged on our government as Il
consideration FOR quirsccnce our part in the
matter that If vessel visited should turn out to
be truly American, bound OH peaceful nIercan.
tile voyage, she would d.mnifv all loss and
every damage sustained, as had been lonornbsy
dohe III nsl preceding cases. Lord Ashburton
was possessed with full power to negotiate OH
this us OH other suhjccts-unI upon conferences
reiterated my declaration made in my annual
message, that the United States Government
was able to cnforcc It's own laws, aud that I
should see to their enforcement, treaty. or no
treaty. under the obligations of paramount duty.
then suggested, by way of discllurgiuy this duty
OIL my part, that We should keep upon the Airi-
cal! coast a nnval armament sufficiently great to
S'sit all ships that might hoist the United States
hng ana tai! under suspicion; but that we could
not permit another nation to do so.
Upon this basis the stipulation in the treaty
has, in my mind always rested. Certain it is,
lint ior the atter-ti,ne Of my service, 10 visit
much less search, Of American vessel, occur.
rcd OH The part OF Il British cruiser What has
taken place since, will not undertake to say.
have nothing to do with what the Government
Of this country may deem it proper to do in re-
gard to this stipulation hut this will venture to
say that repeal when il pleascs that provision of
me treaty 1t will still find it necessary fer tho
enforcement Ht laws nfi i1,a1 rn;t ~.
we!i as for tho protection of The traffic of mer-
cha"t vessels on that coast-a traffic every Year
Increasing in value, and destined, in the end, to
!'e oi vast magnitude-to maintain II fleet of at
least eighty guns the coast of Africa. 1t
might be worthy of con liberation, by the mex,
commercial Convention whether, before they
ADVISE The canceng Of the provisions in qurs-
t!on and denouncc it az all nsu!, to the South.
they should not first repeal the law relative to
virac; in regard to the slave trade.
Very respectfully. your obedcnt servant,
August 81, 1857. JOHN TYLER.