RELATING TO AMERICA. (FIRST SET, PRESENTED FEB. 18.)

HC Deb 15 February 1808 vol 10 cc553-601

No. I.—Extract of a Dispatch from the hon. David M. Erskine to lord visc. Howick, dated Washington, March 2d, 1807.

I have the honour to enclose the President's Message to the Congress, which conveys the information of the adjustment of the negociation between his majesty's commissioners and the American ministers. Your lordship will also find in it, the Correspondence of the American Minister at Paris with the French minister of the Marine, relative to the effect that Buonaparte's Decree of the 21st of Nov. declaring England to be in a state of blockade, is intended to have on American Commerce.

(First Inclosure referred to in No. 1.)— Extract of a Message from the President of the U. States. Feb. 19, 1807.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the, United States: I transmit to congress, a Letter from our ministers plenipotentiary at London, informing us that they have agreed with the British commissioners to conclude a Treaty on all the points which had formed the object of their negociation, and on terms which they trusted we would approve. Also, a Letter from our minister plenipotentiary at Paris, covering one to him from the minister of marine of that government, assuring him that the Imperial Decree lately passed was not to affect our commerce, which would still be governed by the rules of the Treaty established between the two countries. T. JEFFERSON.

(Second Inclosure referred to in No. 1.) —To James Madison, Secretary of State, Washington, dated London, Dec. 27th, 1806.

Sir; We have ,the pleasure to acquaint you that we have this day agreed with the British commissioners, to conclude a Treaty on all the points which have formed the object of our negociation, and on terms which we trust our government will approve. It will require only a few days to reduce it to form. When that is done, we shall transmit it to you by a special messenger. We hasten to communicate to you this interesting intelligence, for the information and guidance of our government in such measures as may have reference to the subject. We have the honour, &C. JAMES MONROE. WM. PINCKNEY.

(Third Inclosure referred to in No. 1.)—To Mr. Madison, Washington, dated Paris, 24th Dec. 1806.

Sir; I have the honour of transmitting the copy inclosed of a Letter from his majesty's minister of marine and colonies, in Answer to mine of the 10th inst. on the subject of the Imperial Arrêté of the 21st of Nov. 1806. An additional explanation, which it may be well to communicate, is, that neutral vessels coming from England or her colonies, into the ports of France, &c. since the date of the aforesaid Arrêté, will not be received, and that if any person or persons, charged with the ship or other vessel and cargo, shall be detected in evading this regulation by means of false declarations, they shall forfeit the said ship or other vessel and cargo. I am, Sir, &C. JOHN ARMSTRONG.

(Fourth Inclosure referred to in No. 1.) —Imperial Decree of the 21st Nov. 1806.

Art. I.—The British Islands are declared in a state of Blockade.—II. All commerce and correspondence with the British islands are prohibited. In consequence, letters or packets addressed either to England, to an Englishman, or in the English language, shall not pass through the Post Office, and shall be seized.—III. Every subject of England, of whatever rank and condition soever, who shall be found in the countries occupied by our troops, or by those of our allies, shall be made a prisoner of war.—IV. All magazines, merchandize, or property whatsoever, belonging to a subject of England, shall be declared a lawful prize.—V. The trade in English merchandize is forbidden. All merchandize belonging to England, or coming from its manufactories and colonies, is declared lawful prize.—VI. One half of the proceeds of the confiscation of the merchandize and property, declared good prize by the preceding Articles, shall be applied to indemnify the merchants for the losses which they have suffered by the capture of merchant vessels by English cruizers.—VII. No vessel coming directly from England or from the English colonies, or having been there since the publication of the present decree, shall be received into any port.—VIII Every vessel contravening the above clause, by means of a false declaration, shall be seized, and the vessel and cargo confiscated, as if they were English property.—IX. Our Tribunal of Prizes at Paris is charged with the definite adjudication of all the controversies, which may arise within our empire, or in the countries occupied by the French army, relative to the execution of the present decree. Our Tribunal of Prizes at Milan, shall he charged with the definite adjudication of the said controversies which may arise within the extent of our kingdom of Italy.—X. The present Decree shall be communicated by our minister of exterior relations, to the kings of Spain, of Naples, of Holland, and of Etruria, and to our Allies, whose subjects, like ours, are the victims of the injustice and the barbarism of the English maritime laws. Our ministers of exterior relations, of war, of marine, of finances, of police, and our post masters general, are charged, each in what concerns him, with the execution of the present Decree.

(Fifth Inclosure referred to in No. 1.).—Gen. Armstrong to the Minister of Marine and Colonies, dated Paris, Dec. 10, 1806.

The undersigned, minister plenipotentiary of the U. States of America, has the honour of demanding from his exc. the minister of marine and colonies, the official Explanation which may have been given to the Imperial Decree of the 21st Nov. 1806, so far as that decree involves the rights of neutral nations.—The undersigned would more particularly wish to be Informed whether by 'British Islands' mentioned ill Art. I. are to be understood all Islands in the possession of his Brit. majesty, and Islands merely, or whether the rule will be so construed, as to extend the Blockade to the continental possessions also, of his said majesty? Whether it be meant that the Arrêté shall operate from its date, and that seizures made under it before notice shall have been given, shall be considered legal? Whether American vessels, navigating the high or narrow seas shall be liable to seizure, on evidence only, that they are going to, or returning from, a port or ports of his Brit. majesty? And whether Art. II. and V. shall operate only as domestic Regulations, or whether their injunctions shall extend to citizens of foreign and independent nations? His exc. the minister of marine is sufficiently aware of the interest of the United States in the interpretation which shall be given to these Articles, and will readily and justly appreciate the motives of the undersigned, in requesting that his excellency's Answer may be given as, promptly as possible. JOHN ARMSTRONG.

(Sixth Inclosure referred to in. No. 1.)—Dated Paris, 24th Dec. 1806.

Mr. Minister Plenipotentiary; I hasten to answer the Note you did me the honour to address to me on the 20th of this month. I consider the Imperial Decree of the 21st Nov. last, as, thus far, conveying no Modification of the Regulations at present observed in France with regard to neutral navigators, nor consequently of the convention of the 30th Sept. 1800, with the United States of America. But although, by this Answer, the four Questions upon which your exc. has desired to know my opinion, have been implicitly resolved, I think I can add, 1st, That the Declaration expressed by the 1st Art. of the Decree of the 21st Nov. net at all changing the present French laws concerning maritime captures, there is no reason for enquiring what interpretation or restriction or extension may be given to this Article. 2d, That Seizures, contrary to the present Regulations concerning Cruizing, shall not be allowed to the capturers. 3d, That an American vessel cannot be taken at sea for the mere reason that she is going to a port of England, or is returning from one, because, conformably with the 7th Art. of the said Decree, we are limited in France not to admit vessels coming from England or the English Colonies. 4th, That the provisions of Articles 2d and 5th of the said Decree, naturally apply to foreign citizens domiciliated in France or in the countries occupied by the troops of his majesty the emperor and king, inasmuch as they have the character of a general law; but that it will be proper that your exc. should communicate with the minister of exterior relations as to what concerns the correspondence of the citizens of the United States with England. I pray, &c. (Signed) DECRES.—It will not escape gen. Armstrong that my Answers cannot have the developement which they would receive from the minister of exterior relations, and that it is naturally to him that he ought to address himself for these explanations, which I am very happy to give him, because he wishes them, but upon which I have much less positive information than the Prince of Beneventum.

(Signed) DECRES.

No. II—Message from the President to the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States. Dec. 18, 1807.

The communications now made, shewing the great and increasing dangers with which our vessels, our seamen, and merchandize are threatened, on the high seas and elsewhere, from the belligerents of Europe, and it being of the greatest importance to keep in safety these essential resources, I deem it my duty to recommend the subject to the consideration of Congress; who will doubtless perceive all the advantages which may be expected from an inhibition of the departure of our vessels from the ports of the United States. Their wisdom will also see the necessity of making every preparation for whatever events may grow out of the present crisis. I ask a return of the letters of Messrs. Armstrong and Chempagny, which it would be improper to make public.

TH. JEFFERSON.

No. III.—Extract of a Letter from the Grand Judge, Minister. of Justice at Paris, to the Attorney General for the Council of Prizes there, dated Paris, Sept. 18th, 1807.

I have submitted to his majesty the emperor and king the doubts raised by his exc. the minister of marine and colonies, on the extent of certain dispositions of the imperial decree of the 21st Nov. 1806, which has declared the British isles in a state of blockade. The following are his majesty's intentions on the points in question: May vessels of war by virtue of the imperial decree of 21st Nov. last, seize on board neutral vessels, either English property, or even all merchandize proceeding from the English manufactories or territory?—Answer. His majesty has intimated that, as he did not think proper to express any exception in this Decree, there is no ground for making any in its execution in relation to any whomsoever, (à l'egard de qui que ce pent être.) His majesty has postponed a decision on the question, whether armed French vessels ought to capture neutral vessels bound to or from England, even when they have no English merchandize on board. (Signed) REONIER.

(SECOND SET, PRESENTED FEB. 22.)

No. I.—DISPATCH from lord visc. Howick to the hon. David Erskine, dated Downing Street, 8th Jan. 1807.

Sir; Your dispatch No. I. announcing your arrival at Annapolis on board the Avon sloop of war, was received here on the 6th of Dec. and, together with Mr. Merry's dispatches, which were received at the same time, has been laid before the king. It is with great satisfaction that I inform you that the Treaty of Amity, Navigation, and Commerce, between this country and the U. States, was signed on 31st ult. by lords Holland and Auckland on the part of his maj. and by M. M. Monroe and Pinkney on the part of their government.—Mr. Purviance, secretary to the American legation here, who leaves London to-day, is the bearer of the Treaty for ratification. I have the honour herewith to transmit a copy of this Treaty for your information, together. with a copy of a Note, delivered previous to the signature by the lords Holland and Auckland, relative to the complaints of the Canada merchants, on the subject of the estimation of the duties on the inland trade, in certain parts of the U. States. These complaints, which were communicated by Mr. Merry in the early part of last year, but from various circumstances postponed for consideration, certainly must not be lost sight of by his majesty's government, and every means will be taken to obtain redress for the removal of the inconvenience complained of.—I transmit to you also the copy of another Note presented by their lordships to the American commissioners previously to the signature of the Treaty, on the subject of the extraordinary Declarations and Orders of the French government issued at Berlin on the 16th Nov. last. This Note I must recommend to your particular attention; you will state to the American government, that his majesty relies with con- fidence on their good sense and firmness in resisting pretensions, which, if suffered to take effect, must prove so destructive to the commerce of all neutral nations.—His majesty has learnt, that the measures announced in the Decree have already in some instances been carried into execution by the privateers of the enemy, and there could be no doubt that his maj. would have an indisputable right to exercise a just retaliation. Neutral nations cannot indeed expect that the king should suffer the commerce of his enemies to be carried on through them, whilst they submit to the prohibition which France has decreed against the commerce of his majesty's subjects.—But though this right of retaliation would unquestionably accrue to his maj. yet his maj. is unwilling, except in the last extremity, to have recourse to measures which must prove so distressing to all nations not engaged in the war against France.—His maj. with that forbearance and moderation which have at all times distinguished his conduct, has determined for the present to confine himself to the exercise of the power given him by his decided naval superiority, in such manner only as is authorized by the acknowledged privileges of the law of nations, and has issued an order for preventing all commerce from port to port of his enemies, comprehending in this order, not only the ports of France, but those of such nations as, either in alliance with France or subject to her dominion, have by measures of active offence, or by the exclusion of British ships, taken a part in the present war.—His maj. feels an entire confidence, that the moderation and justice of this conduct will be duly appreciated by the United States; and you will express to that government, in the strongest terms, the regret. his maj. has experienced in being thus compelled in his own defence, to act in a manner which must prove in some degree embarrassing to the commerce of neutral nations; and his majesty's sincere desire to avoid any stronger measures, to which, however, if the injustice and aggression of his enemies should not be resisted by those nations whose rights and interests are invaded by so flagrant a violation of all public law, it may be ultimately necessary for the king to have recourse. I am, &c. HOWICK.

No. II.—Note from Lords Holland and Auckland to Messieurs Monroe and Pinkney, Dated London Dec. 31, 1806.

The undersigned, Henry Rd. Vassal lord Holland, and Wm. lord Auckland, plenipotentiaries of his Britannic maj. have the honour to inform J. Monroe and Wm. Pinkney, commissioners extraordinary and plenipotentiaries of the United States of and America, that they are now ready to proceed to the signature of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, on the Articles of which they have mutually agreed. But at the same time they have it in command from his maj. to call the attention of the commissioners of the U. States to some extraordinary proceedings which have lately taken place on the continent of Europe, and to communicate to them officially the sentiments of his maj.'s government thereupon.—The proceedings alluded to are certain Declarations and Orders of the French government, issued at Berlin on the 21st of Nov. last. In these Orders the French government seeks to justify or palliate its own unjust pretensions, by imputing to G. Britain, principles which she never professed and practices which never existed.—His majesty is accused of a systematic and general disregard of the law of nations, recognized by civilized states, and more particularly of an unwarrantable extension of the right of blockade; whereas his maj. may confidently appeal to the world on his uniform respect for neutral rights, and his general and scrupulous adherence to the law of nations, without condescending to contrast his conduct in these particulars with that of his enemy; and with regard to the only specific charge, it is notorious that he has never declared any ports to be in a state of blockade without allotting to that object a force sufficient to make the entrance into them manifestly dangerous.—By such allegations, unfounded as they are, the enemy attempts to justify his pretensions of confiscating as lawful prize all produce of English industry or manufacture, though it be the property of neutrals; excluding from his harbours every neutral vessel which has touched at any port of his majesty's dominions, though employed in an innocent commerce; and of declaring G. Britain to be in a state of blockade though his own ports and arsenals are actually blockaded, and he is unable to station any naval force whatever before any ports of the United Kingdom.—Such principles are in themselves extravagant and repugnant to the law of nations; and the pretension founded on them, though professedly directed solely against G. Bri- tain, tend to alter the practice of war among civilized nations, and utterly to subvert the right and independence of neutral powers.—The undersigned cannot, therefore, believe, that the enemy will ever seriously attempt to enforce such a system. If he should, they are confident, that the good sense of the American government will perceive the fatal consequences of such pretensions to neutral commerce, and that its spirit and regard to national honour will prevent its acquiescence in such palpable violations of its rights and injurious encroachments of its interests.—If, however, the enemy should carry these threats into execution, and if neutral nations should, contrary to all expectation, acquiesce in such usurpations, his maj. might probably be compelled, however reluctantly, to retaliate in his just defence, and to adopt in regard to the commerce of neutral nations with his enemies, the same measures which those nations shall have permitted to be enforced against their commerce with his subjects. The commissioners of the United States will therefore feel, that at a moment when his maj. and all neutral nations are threatened with such an extension of the belligerent pretensions of his enemies, he cannot enter into the stipulations of the present Treaty without an explanation from the United States of their intentions, or a reservation on the part of his maj. in the case above-mentioned, if it should ever occur.—The undersigned, considering that the distance of the American government renders any immediate explanation on this subject impossible, and animated by a desire of forwarding the beneficial work in which they are engaged, are authorized by his majesty to conclude the Treaty without delay. They proceed to the signature under the full persuasion that, before the Treaty shall be returned from America, with the ratification of the United States, the enemy will either have formally abandoned or tacitly relinquished his unjust pretensions, or that the government of the United States, by its conduct or assurances, will have given security to his maj. that it will not submit to such innovations in the established system of maritime law: and the undersigned have presented this Note from an anxious wish that it should be clearly understood on both sides, that, without such abandonment of his pretensions on the part of the enemy, or assurances of such conduct on the part of the United States, his maj. will not consider himself bound by the present signature of his commissioners to ratify the Treaty, or precluded from adopting such measures as may seem necessary for counteracting the designs of the enemy.—The undersigned cannot conclude, without expressing their satisfaction at the prospect of accomplishing an object so important to the interests and friendly connection of both nations, and their just sense of the conciliatory disposition manifested by the commissioners of the United States, during the whole course of the negociation.

VASSAL HOLLAND. AUCKLAND.

No. III.—Extract of a Dispatch from the hon. David Erskine to lord vise. Howick, dated Washington, March 30th, 1807.

In compliance with your lordship's Instructions, I communicated to this government his majesty's views relative to the French Decree of the 21st Nov. 1806, as detailed in your dispatch to me of the 8th January last; and received the Answer which I have now the honour to inclose.

(Inclosure referred to in No. 1.III)—To the hon. David Erskine, &c. Dated Department of State, 20th March 1807.

Sir; I have laid before the president your Letter of the 12th inst. communicating the views of his Britannic maj. in relation to the French Decree of Nov. 21st, 1806, and to the principle of retaliation, through the commerce of neutrals who may submit to the operation of that Decree; as also the measure actually taken, of prohibiting all neutral commerce from port to port of his enemies, not only the ports of France, but those of such other nations, as, either in alliance with France, or subject to her dominion, have by measures of active offence, or by the exclusion of British ships, taken a part in the present war.—The president cannot be insensible, sir, to the friendship and confidence towards the United States which are signified by his Britannic maj. in this communication.—In making this acknowledgment, however, the president considers it not less incumbent on him to reserve for a state of things which it is hoped will never occur, the right of discussing the legality of any particular measures, to which resort may be had, on a ground of retaliation; at this time, it would suffice to observe that it remains to be more fully ascertained in what sense the decree in question will be explained, and to what extent it will be carried into execution, and consequently whether in any case the United States can be involved in questions concerning measures of retaliation, supposed to accrue to one belligerent from such a proceeding, by another.—But it is worthy the justice and liberty of the British government to recollect, that, within the period of those great events which continue to agitate Europe, instances have occurred, in which the commerce of neutral nations, more especially of the United States, has experienced the severest distresses from its own orders and measures, manifestly unauthorized by the law of nations. The respect which the United States owe to their neutral rights and the interests they have in maintaining them, will always be sufficient pledges, that no culpable acquiescence on their part will render them accessary to the proceedings of one belligerent nation, through the rights of neutrals, against the commerce of its adversary.—With regard to the particular order issued against the trade of neutrals from one port to another of the enemies of Great Britain, no fair objection can lie against it, provided it be founded on and enforced by actual blockades, as authorized by the law of nations. If, on the other hand, the order has reference not to such a blockade, but to a supposed illegality of the neutral trade from one to another of the described ports, the remark is obvious, that, on that supposition, the order is superfluous, the trade being as interdicted by the law of nations, liable at all times, without any such order, to the capture of British cruizers and the condemnation of British courts; and if not interdicted as such by the law of nations, it cannot otherwise be made illegal, than by a legal blockade of the ports comprehended in the order. This inference is applicable even to the case of a neutral trade between the ports of France herself, since it is not a principle of the acknowledged law of nations, that neutrals may not trade from one to another port of the same belligerent nation; and it would be an innovation on that now not before attempted, to extend the principle to a neutral trade between ports of different countries, confessedly open in times of peace as well as of war.—If the British order refers for its basis, to the principle of retaliation against the French decree, it falls under the observations already made on that subject, and which need not be repeated. I have, &c.

JAMES MADISON.

No. IV.—Dispatch from the hon. David Erskine to lord vise. Howick, dated Washington, 31st March, 1807.

My Lord; After 1 had closed the preceding number of my dispatches which accompany this, I received another letter from Mr. Madison, in answer to the communications, which, in obedience to your lordship's orders, I made to this government, of his majesty's views relative to the French decree of blockade of the 21st of November last, and his majesty's prohibitory orders against the neutral trade from port to port of his enemies. As I conceived it would be most prudent to wait for your lordship's instructions, I did not send any reply to the letter, but have now the honour to inclose it to your lordship. I have, &c. D. M. ERSKINE.

(Inclosure referred to in. No. IV.)—To the hon. David Erskine, dated Department of State, 29th March 1807.

Sir; Further reflection on the tenor and tendency of the order of his Britannic majesty, communicated by your letter of the 16th instant, which was answered by mine of the 20th, induces me to resume that important subject.—From the difficulty of supposing that the order can have for its basis either a legal blockade, impossible to be extended to all the ports described in the order, or a supposed illegality of the trade between those ports, an illegality which has never been applied by the British government or its admiralty courts, to use accustomed trade even between ports of a belligerent nation, and is utterly at variance with the conduct of both, in reference to a trade between a belligerent nation and its allies; a necessity seems to result of ascribing the order to the policy of countervailing through the commerce of neutrals, the French decree of the 21st of Nov. last.—In this view of the order, it demands, on the part of the United States, the most serious attention both to its principle and to its operation.—With respect to its principle, it will not be contested, that a retaliation by one nation on its enemy; which is to operate through the interest of a nation not its enemy, essentially requires, not only that the injury inflicted should be limited by the measure of injury sustained, but that every retaliating step in such a case should be preceded by an unreasonable failure of the neutral party, in some mode or other to put an end to the inequality wrongfully produced. Were it certain, therefore, that the French decree is to be enforced in the sense in which it is taken, and that, in violation of the, treaty between France and the United States, the commerce of the latter will not be exempted; the British order being peremptory in its import and immediate in its execution, might justly be regarded by the United States as a proceeding equally premature and unfriendly. But in the uncertainty as to the real meaning of that decree, and whilst a presumption offered itself, that the decree, if avowed and executed in an unlawful extent, might not embrace the commerce of the United States; they are bound by justice to their interests, as well as by respect for their rights, to consider the British order as a ground for serious complaint and remonstrance. Should it prove that the decree had not the meaning ascribed to it, and particularly, should the respect of France for her treaties with the United States, except their trade from the operation of the decree, the order of the British government will stand exposed to still severer comments. It will take the character of an original aggression, will furnish to the French government a like ground with that assumed by itself, for retaliating measures, and will derive a very unfavourable feature from the consideration that it was a palpable infraction of a treaty first signed on the part of the British government, and expected, at the date of the order, to be speedily ratified on the part of the United States.—The necessity of presenting the subject in its true light, is strengthened by the operation which the British order will have on a vast proportion of the entire commerce of the United States, not to dwell on the carrying branch of the commerce between the ports and countries of Europe, and which the immunity given by our flag, in consequence of treaties with the enemies of G. Britain, to British property, and not enjoyed by the property of her enemies, has hitherto been advantageous to G. Britain; and without inquiring into the effect of an application of the interdict to the other quarters of the globe, all of which are evidently within the comprehensive terms of the order, it cannot be overlooked, that the character and course of nearly the whole of the American commerce with the ports of Europe, other than of Great Britain, will fall under the destructive operation of the order; it is well known that the cargoes exported from the United States frequently require that they may be disposed of partly at one market and partly at another. The return cargoes are still more frequently collected at different ports, and not unfrequently at ports different from those receiving the outward cargoes.—In this circuitous voyage, generally consisting of several links, the interest of the undertakers materially requires also, either a trade or a freightage between the ports visited in the circuit. To restrain the vessels of the United States, therefore, from this legitimate and accustomary mode of trading with the continent of Europe, as is contemplated by the order, and to compel them on one hand, to dispose of the whole of their cargoes at a port which may want but a part; and on the other hand, to seek the whole of their returns at the same port, which may furnish but a part, or perhaps no part of the articles wanted, Would be a proceeding as ruinous to our commerce as contrary to our essential rights.—These observations, which are made in conformity with the sentiments of the president, cannot fail, sir, to have all the weight with an enlightened and friendly government to which they are entitled, and the president persuades himself, that the good effect of truths which they disclose, will be seen in such measures as will remove all grounds for dissatisfaction, and demonstrate on that side, the same sincere disposition to cultivate harmony and beneficial intercourse, as is felt and evinced by the United States and their government. I have, &c. JAMES MADISON.

THIRD SET OF PAPERS, PRESENTED FEB. 22.

No. I.—NOTE from Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney to Mr. Secretary Canning, dated London, 24th July 1807.

The undersigned, commissioners extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the U. States of America, have the honour to inform Mr. Canning, that they are instructed by the president of the United States to propose to his majesty's government a renewal of negotiation relative to the objects of the mission of the undersigned, with a view to a more satisfactory result than is found in the Instrument signed on the 31st of Dec. last, by his majesty's plenipotentiaries, and those of the United States.—The undersigned are persuaded that his majesty's government will see in this measure, an unquestionable proof of the sincere desire of the president to place the friendly relations of the two countries beyond the reach of those misunderstandings which either the absence or the inadequacy of precise arrangements on subjects of the greatest delicacy and importance might from time to time occasion. —It is under the influence of this solicitude, that the president has charged the undersigned to express to his majesty's government, his unfeigned regret that the Instrument above-mentioned does riot appear to him to be such as he can approve, and at the same time to declare his entire confidence that the just and liberal sentiments which animate his majesty's government, corresponding with those which belong to the government of the United States, cannot fail to lead, without delay or difficulty, to such an issue of the negotiation which is now proposed, as shall be suited in all respects, to the rights and interests of both nations, and therefore calculated to insure a long continuance of the friendship which so happily subsists between them.—The undersigned have already had the honour to present to Mr. Canning a Paper, which, taken in connection with a Project on the subject of Impressment, and another on the subject of certain Claims to Compensation by American citizens, presented by the undersigned at the same time, will be found to exhibit a compleat view of the Alterations which the Instrument above-mentioned is deemed by the president to require. They forbear to trouble Mr. Canning with a recapitulation of the details which these Papers contain; but there are some Explanations upon the topics of Impressment and Compensation which they do not furnish, and which it is therefore incumbent upon the undersigned to avail themselves of this occasion to give.—It was one of the primary objects of the mission of the undersigned to adjust with his majesty's government a formal and explicit arrangement relative to a practice by British ships of war, which has excited in a very great degree the sensibility of the American people, and claimed the anxious attention of their government. The practice alluded to, is that of visiting on the main ocean the merchant vessels of the United States, navigable under the American flag, for the purpose of subjecting their crews to a hasty and humiliating inquisition, and impressing as British seamen such of the mariners, as upon that inquisition the visiting officer declares to be so. The effect of this practice is, that the flag of an independent power is dishonoured, and one of the most essential rights of its sovereignty violated; that American citizens, either mistaken for British subjects, or assumed to be such without in- quiry, are forced from the quiet pursuits of a lawful commerce into the severe and dangerous service of a foreign military navy, to expose their lives in fighting against those with whom their country is at peace; and that the merchant vessels of the United States are frequently thus stripped of so large a portion of their hands; before their voyages have been performed, as to bring into the mast imminent peril, and sometimes to produce the actual loss of the vessels, their cargoes, and their remaining crews. It cannot be thought surprising that a practice like this should act with peculiar force upon the feelings of those whom it oppresses, and that the sensation should- extend itself to their countrymen and their government.—The government of the United States has accordingly made this pretension the subject of frequent discussion with G. Britain, and when an extraordinary mission to his majesty's government was last year determined on, it was one of the Instructions to the undersigned, to whom the duties of that mission were confided, to make no treaty which should not provide for that object. In the first stages of the negotiation, which followed that mission, the undersigned were led to indulge a confident expectation that such a provision should be obtained. At length however the rejection by his majesty's government of a project of an article on this point, which, without touching the question of right, offered on the part of the United States an effectual equivalent for the mere forbearance of the practice, having extinguished all hope of an immediate adjustment of this subject by treaty, the undersigned felt that they were called upon by candour as well as by their duty to their government, to inform the British commissioners, that the project relative to Impressment having failed, they had no power to conclude a Treaty upon the other points which had been discussed between them, so as to bind the government of the United States. The undersigned did accordingly give them this information in the most explicit terms, and the negotiation was in consequence for a short time suspended. It was soon afterwards, however, suggested by his majesty's commissioners, that, if this topic should be expressly reserved for future conventional arrangements, and a pledge given to the United States for resuming the consideration of it at a convenient season with that view, and if, in the mean time, such an informal understanding should be substituted, as in its practical effect would remove the vexation complained of, it might perhaps be yet possible to conduct the negotiation to a result which would not be unacceptable to the respective governments; and in pursuance of this suggestion the British commissioners presented to the undersigned on the 8th of Nov. last, the official Note, of which a copy is herewith enclosed. The undersigned transmitted to their government, for its consideration, a copy of this Note, together with a statement of the circumstances connected with it, and, without giving it their sanction, agreed in the mean time to concur with the British commissioners, as they were invited to do, in an effort to adjust the stipulations of a Treaty upon the remaining objects of their mission, and to leave the effect of what should be adjusted to their government.—It appears that the president of the United States considers this collateral proceeding upon a concern of such paramount importance, as unsuitable to the nature of it, as well in the mode as in its terms. In this opinion the president does but continue to respect the considerations which heretofore induced him to believe that an arrangement upon this point ought to stipulate with precision against the practice in question, and that the manner of it would properly be that which should be chosen for the arrangement of the other points of discussion; and in the Instructions which, in conformity with that opinion, he has now given to the undersigned, he does but manifest his reliance upon the spirit of justice and amity, which he is assured his majesty's government will bring to the renewed consideration of a subject so interesting to the rights and feelings of a friendly nation, for such an adjustment of this, as well as of every other question belonging to the relations of the two countries, as shall confirm their dispositions to mutual kindness, and promote the happiness and prosperity of both.—The subject of Compensation will perhaps be sufficiently explained by the inclosed copies of two Notes from the undersigned to lord Holland and lord Auckland and to lord Howick.—It will appear from the last of these Notes, that this subject, for which the projected Treaty did not provide, was not to be affected by it; but on the contrary, that the rights of the United States and the Claims of their citizens were understood to be reserved for future adjustment, as compleatly as if no-treaty had been made; and it will occur to Mr. Canning, that the project of an Article on this point, which they had the honour to leave with him at their late interview, is in the spirit of that understanding, and is besides so entirely free from objection, that no motive is likely to exist against the adoption of it.—There is another subject, to which the undersigned have the orders of the president to invite the attention of his majesty's government, as affecting materially, and giving a new and unexpected character to the proposed Treaty. They allude to the written Declaration relative to the French Decree of the 21st of Nov. last, by which his majesty's plenipotentiaries accompanied their signature of the Treaty; a Declaration, which, in its actual form, creates unnecessary embarrassments in the way of an acceptance of the treaty by the United States.—The undersigned persuade themselves, that as this proceeding, to which no sanction was given on their part, imposed on the United States no new obligation, and could only be intended to declare that, in signing or ratifying the Treaty, it was understood by G. Britain that nothing contained in it would be a bar to any measure which, if no such treaty had been signed, would be lawful as a measure of retaliation against her enemy, and as the occasion which produced it does not now appear to exist as then supposed, it will not be thought that any thing is sacrificed by withdrawing it as unnecessary.—The undersigned, &c.

JAMES MONROE, WILLIAM PINKNEY.

First Inclosure referred to in No 1.) Copy of the TREATY Or AMITY, COMMERCE, AND NAVIGATION, between his majesty and the United States of America, concluded and signed on the 31st Dec. 1806, by the right hon. Henry Rd. Vassal lord Holland, one of his majesty's privy council and lord keeper of his majesty's privy seal, and Wm. lord Auckland one of his majesty's privy council, and president of the committee of council for all matters of trade and foreign plantations, plenipotentiaries on the part of his Britannick majesty; and James Monroe and Wm. Pinkney, commissioners extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary on the part of the United States.

His Britannic majesty, and the United States of America, being equally desirous to promote and perpetuate the good understanding and friendship which happily subsist between the subjects of the united kingdom and the citizens of the United States, and for that purpose to regulate the commerce and navigation between their respective countries, territories, and people, on the basis of reciprocity and mutual convenience, have respectively named their plenipotentiaries, and have given to them full powers to make and conclude a Treaty of Amity, Navigation, and Commerce; that is to say, his Britannick majesty has named for his plenipotentiaries Henry Rd. Vassal lord Holland, one of his majesty's privy council and lord keeper of his majesty's privy seal; and Wm. lord Auckland, one of his majesty's privy council, and president of the committee of council for all matters of trade and foreign plantations: And the President of the United States, by and with the advice of the Senate thereof, bath appointed for their plenipotentiaries James Monroe and Wm. Pinkney, commissioners extraordinary and plenipotentiaries; who, after having exchanged their respective full powers, have agreed on the following Articles:

Art. 1. There shall be a firm, inviolable and universal peace, and a true and sincere friendship between his Britannick majesty and the United States of America, and between their respective countries, territories, cities, towns, and people, of every degree, without exception of persons or places.

Art. 2. It is agreed, that the several Articles of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, between his majesty and the United States, made at London on the 19th of Nov. 1794, which have not expired, nor as yet had their full operation and effect, shall be confirmed in their best form, and in their full tenour;. and that the contracting parties will also from time to time enter into friendly explanations on the subject of the said Articles, for the purpose of removing all such doubts as may arise or have arisen as to the true purport of the same, as well as for the purpose of rendering the said Articles more conformable to their mutual wishes and convenience.

Art. 3. His maj. agrees, that the Vessels belonging to the U. States of America [and sailing direct from the said States,(1)] shall Alterations proposed by the President of the United States. (1) Omit the words 'and sailing direct from the ports of the said States.'— be admitted and hospitably received in all the sea ports and harbours of the British dominions in the East Indies; and that the citizens of the said United States may freely carry on a trade [between the said territories and the said United States, (2)] in all articles of which the importation or exportation respectively to and from the said territories shall not be entirely prohibited: Provided only, that it shall not be lawful for them, in any time of war between the British government and any power or state whatever, to export from the said territories, without the special permission of the British government there, any military stores, or naval stores, or rice. The citizens of the United States shall pay for their vessels, when admitted into the said ports, no other or higher tonnage than shall be payable on British vessels, when admitted into the ports of the United States; and they shall pay no other or higher duties or charges, on the importation or the exportation of the cargoes of the said vessels, than shall be payable on the same articles when imported or exported in British vessels. But it is expressly agreed, that the vessels of the United States shall not carry any of the articles exported by them from the said British territories to any port or place, except to some port or place in America, where the same shall be unladen, (3) and such Regulations shall be adopted by both parties as shall from time to time be found necessary to enforce the due and faithful observance of this stipulation.—It is also understood, that the permission granted by this Article is not to extend to allow the vessels of the United States to carry on any part of the coasting trade of the said British territories,(4) but the vessels going out with their original cargoes or part thereof from one port of discharge to another, are not to be considered as carrying on the coasting trade. Neither is this Arti- (2) Omit the words 'between the said territories and the said United States,' and insert 'with the said territories.'—(3) After the words where the same shall be unladen,' insert 'or to some port or place or ports or places in China, or the Indian or other seas, beyond the Cape of Good Hope, from whence the said vessels shall proceed as aforesaid to some port or place in America, and there unlade their cargoes.' —(4) After the words 'British territories,' insert 'without the special permission of the British government.'— cle to he construed to allow the citizens of the said States to settle or reside within the said territories, or to go into the interior parts thereof, without the permission of the British government established there; and if any transgressions should be attempted against the Regulations of the British government in this respect, the observance of the same shall and may be enforced against the citizens of America in the same manner as against British subjects or others transgressing the same rule. And the citizens of the United States, whenever they arrive at any port or harbour in the said territories, or if they should be permitted in manner aforesaid, to go to any other place therein, shall always be subject to the laws, government, and jurisdiction, of whatever nature, established in such harbour, port, or place, according as the same may be. The citizens of the United States, may also touch for refreshment at the Island of Saint Helena, (5) but subject in all respects to such Regulations as the British government may from time to time establish there.

Art. 4. There shall be between all the dominions of his majesty in Europe and the territories of the United States, a reciprocal and perfect liberty of commerce and navigation. The people and inhabitants of the two countries respectively shall have liberty freely and exclusively, and without hindrance and molestation, to come with their ships arid cargoes to the lands, countries, cities, ports, places, and rivers within the dominions and territories aforesaid, to enter into the same, toresort there, and to remain and reside there without any limitation of time; also to hire and possess houses and warehouses for the purpose of their commerce; and generally, the merchants and traders on each side shall enjoy the most compleat protection and security for their commerce, but subject always as to what respects this Article, to the laws and statutes of the two countries respectively. (6) (5) After the words 'St. Helena,' insert 'or at such other places as may be in the possession of Great Britain in the African or Asiatic seas.'—(6) At the end of the Article add 'And it is further agreed, that if any other trade in and with the said British territories in the East Indies than is hereby authorized, or any other or greater rights or advantages in respect thereof shall be granted or permitted to the citizens or subjects of

Art. V. It is agreed, that no other or higher Duties shall be paid by the ships or merchandize of the one Marty in the ports of the other, than such as are, paid by the like vessels or merchandize of all other nations. Nor shall any other or higher duty be imposed in one country on the importation of any articles, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the other, than are or shall be payable on the importation of the like articles, being of the growth, produce, or manufacture of any other foreign country.(7)—Nor shall any prohibition be imposed on the exportation or importation of any articles to or from the territories of the two parties respectively, which shall not equally extend to all other nations. But the British government reserves to itself the right of imposing on American vessels entering into British ports in Europe a tonnage duty equal to that which shall at any time be payable by British vessels in the ports of America; and the government of the United States reserves to itself a right of imposing on British vessels entering into the ports of the United States, a tonnage duty equal to that which shall at any time be payable by American vessels in the British ports in Europe.—It is agreed, that in the trade of the two countries with each other," the same duties of exportation and importation on all goods and merchandize, and also the same drawbacks and bounties, shall be paid and allowed in either country, whether such importation or exportation shall be made in British or American vessels.

Art. 6. The high contracting parties. not having been able to arrange at present, by treaty, any Commercial Intercourse between the territories of the United States and his majesty's islands and ports in the West-Indies, agree that, until that subject shall be regulated in a satisfactory manner, each of the parties shall remain in the complete possession of its rights, in respect to such an intercourse.

Art. 7. It shall be free for the high con- any European nation, the same shall be common to the citizens of the U. States.'—(7) At the end of the first Paragraph insert 'nor shall any higher defies or charges be imposed in one country, on the exportation of any articles to the ports of the other, than such as are payable on the exportation of the like articles to every other foreign country.'— tracting parties respectively to appoint consuls for the protection of Trade, to reside in the dominion and territories aforesaid; and the said consuls shall enjoy those liberties and rights which belong to them by reason of their function; but before any consul shall act as such, he shall be in the usual forms approved and admitted by the party to whom he is sent: And it is hereby declared to be lawful and proper, that in case of illegal or improper conduct towards the laws or government, a consul may either be punished according to law, if the laws will reach the case, or be dismissed, or even sent back, the offended government assigning to the other the reasons for the same.—Either of the parties may except from the residence of consuls, such particular places as such party shall judge proper to be excepted (8).

Art. 8. It is agreed, that in all cases where Vessels shall be captured or detained [on just suspicion of having on board enemy's property, or of carrying to the enemy any of the articles which are contraband of war (9)] or for [other (10)] lawful cause, the said vessel shall be brought to the nearest or most convenient port; [and if any property of an enemy should be found on board such vessel (11)] that part only which [belongs to the enemy or (12)] is [otherwise (13)] confiscable, shall be made prize, and the vessel, unless by law subject to condemnation, shall be at liberty to proceed with the remainder of the cargo, without any impediment. And it is agreed, that all proper measures shall be taken to prevent delay in deciding the cases of ships and cargoes so brought in for adjudication, and in the payment or recovery of any indemnification adjudged or agreed to be paid to the masters or owners of such ships.—It is also agreed, that in all cases of unfounded detention, or other contravention of the Regulations stipulated by the present Treaty, the owners of the vessel and cargo so (8) Propose to strike out the last Paragraph.—(9) Omit the words 'on just suspicion of having on board enemy's property, or of carrying to the enemy any of the articles which are contraband of war.'—(10) Omit the word 'other,' and substitute (11) Omit the words 'if any property of an enemy should be found on board such vessel.'—(12) Omit the words 'belongs to the enemy, or.'—(13) Omit the word 'otherwise.'— detained shall be allowed damages proportioned to the loss occasioned thereby, together with the costs and charges of the trial.

Art. 9. In order to regulate what is in future to be esteemed contraband of war, it is agreed that under the said denomination shall be comprized all arms and implements serving for the purposes of war by land or by sea, such as cannon, musquets, mortars, petards, bombs, grenadoes, carcasses, carriages for cannon, musquet rests, bandoliers, gunpowder, match, saltpetre, ball, pikes, swords, head pieces, cuirasses, halberts, lances, javelins, horse-furniture, holsters, belts, and generally all other implements of war; as also timber for ship building, copper in sheets, sail cloth, hemp, and cordage, and in general (with the exception of unwrought iron and fir planks; and also with the exception of tar and pitch (14.), when not going to a port of naval equipment, in which case they shall be entitled to pre-emption) whatever may serve directly to the equipment of vessels; and all the above articles are hereby declared to be just objects of confiscation, whenever they are attempted to be carried to an enemy; but no vessel shall be detained on pretence of carrying contraband of war, unless some of the above-mentioned articles not excepted, are found on board of the said vessel at the time it is searched.

Art. 10. Whereas in consideration of the distance, and other circumstances incident to the situation of the high contracting parties, it may frequently happen that vessels may sail for a port or place belonging to an enemy, without knowing that the same is either besieged, blockaded, or invested, it is agreed, that every vessel so circumstanced, may be turned away from such port or place, but she shall not be detained, nor her cargo, if not contraband, be confiscated, unless after such notice she shall again attempt to enter; but she shall be permitted to go to any other port or place she may think proper; nor shall any vessel or goods of either party, that may have entered into such port or place before the same was besieged, blockaded, or invested by the other, and be found therein after the reduction or surrender of such place, be liable to confiscation, but shall be restored to the owners or proprietors (14) After the words 'tar and pitch,' add 'turpentine and rosin':— thereof (15).—Neither of the parties when at war, shall, during the continuance of the Treaty, take from on board the vessels of the other, the subjects of the opposite belligerent, unless they be in the actual employment of such belligerent.

Art. 11. Whereas differences have arisen concerning the trading with the colonies of his majesty's enemies, and the instructions given by his majesty to his cruizers in regard thereto; it is agreed, that, [during the present hostilities (16),] all articles of the growth, produce, and manufacture of Europe (17), not being contraband of war, may be freely carried from the United States to the port of any colony not blockaded, belonging to his majesty's enemies.—Provided such goods shall previously have been entered and landed in the United States, and shall have paid the ordinary duties on such articles so imported for home consumption, and on re-exportation shall after the drawback remain subject to a duty equivalent to not less than one per cent. ad volorem, and that the said goods and the vessel conveying the same, shall from the time of their clearance from the American port, be bonâ fide the property of citizens and inhabitants of the United States: And in like manner, that all articles not being contraband of war, and being the growth and produce of the enemy's colonies, may be brought to the United States, and after having been there landed, may be freely caried from thence to any port of Europe (18) not blockaded, provided such goods shall previously have been entered and landed in the said United States, and shall have paid (19) the ordinary duties on colonial articles so imported for home consumption, and on re-exportation shall, after the draw-back, remain subject to a duty equivalent, to not less than 2 per cent. ad valorem; and provided that the said goods and the vessel conveying the same, (15) At the end of the first Paragraph introduce, a definition of the Blockade: 'In order to determine what characterizes a blockade, that denomination is only given to a port where there is, by the disposition of the power which blockades it with ships stationary, or sufficiently near, an evident danger in entering.'—(16) Omit 'during the present hostilities.'—(17) After the word 'Europe,' insert 'or elsewhere.'—(18) After the word 'Europe,' insert 'or elsewhere.'—(19) After the word 'paid,' insert 'or secured to be paid.'— be bonâ fide the property of citizens and inhabitants of the United States (20).—Provided always, that this Article, or any thing therein contained, shall not operate to the prejudice of any right belonging to either party; but that, after the expiration of the time limited for the Article, the rights on both sides shall revive and be in full force.

Art. 12. And whereas it is expedient to make special provisions respecting the Maritime Jurisdiction of the high contracting parties on the coasts of their respective possessions in North America, on account of peculiar circumstances belonging to those coasts, it is agreed that in all cases where one of the said high contracting parties shall be engaged in war, and the other shall be at peace, the belligerent power shall not stop, [except for the Purpose hereafter mentioned.(21),] the vessels of the neutral power, or the unarmed vessels of other nations within 5 miles from the shore belonging to the said neutral power on the American seas (22).—Provided that the said stipulation shall not take effect in favour of the ships of any nation or nations which shall not have agreed to respect the limit aforesaid as the line of Martime Jurisdiction of the said neutral state: And it is further stipulated, that if either of the high contracting parties shall be at war with any nation or nations which shall have agreed to respect the said special limit or line of Maritime Jurisdiction herein agreed upon, such contracting party shall have the right to stop or search any vessel beyond the limit of a cannon shot or 3 marine miles from the said coasts of the neutral power, for the purpose of ascertaining the nation to which such vessel shall belong. And with respect to the ships and property of the nation or nations not having agreed to respect the aforesaid line of jurisdiction, the belligerent power shall exercise the same rights as if this Article did not exist; (20) At the end of the Paragraph introduce the following 'It is understood, that no inference is to be drawn from this Article to affect any question, now or hereafter to be judicially depending, touching the legality or illegality of a direct trade from Europe, or elsewhere, by citizens of the United States, with enemies colonies beyond the Cape of Good Hope.'—(21) Omit the words 'except for the purpose hereafter mentioned.'—(22) Omit the last Paragraph.— and the several provisions stipulated by this Article shall have full force and effect only during the continuance of the present Treaty.

Art. 13. With respect to the Searching of Merchant Ships, the commanders of ships of war and privateers shall conduct themselves [as favourably as the course of the war then existing may possibly permit towards the most friendly power that may remain neuter (23,)] observing as much as possible the acknowledged principles and rules of the law of nations. And for the better security of the respective subjects and citizens of the contracting parties, and to prevent their suffering injuries by the men of war or privateers of either party, all commanders of ships of war and privateers, and all others the said subjects and citizens, shall forbear doing any damage to those of the other party, or committing any outrage against them; and if they act to the contrary, they shall be punished, and shall also be hound in their persons and estates to make satisfaction and reparation for all damages, and the interest thereof, of whatever nature the said damages may be.—For this cause, all commanders of (23) Propose to introduce, as the first Paragraph of the Article, the following, If the ships of either of the parties shall be met with, sailing either along the coasts or on the high seas, by any private armed vessel of the other party, such armed vessel shall, for avoiding all disorder in visiting and examining the same, remain out of cannon shot, unless the state of the sea or place of meeting render a nearer approach necessary; and shall in no case compel or require such vessel to send her boat or her papers or any person from on board to the belligerent vessel, but the belligerent vessel may send her own boat and may enter her to the number of 2 or 3 men only, who may, in an orderly manner, make the necessary enquiries concerning the vessel and her cargo: And it is agreed, that effectual provision shall be made for punishing violations of any part of this stipulation.'—Omit the words 'as favourably as the course of the war then existing may possibly permit towards the most friendly power that may remain neuter,' and insert according to the acknowledged principles and rules of the laws of nations, and as favourably, moreover, as the course of the war then existing may possibly permit towards the most friendly power that may remain neuter.'—s privateers, before they receive their commissions, shall hereafter be compelled to give, before a competent judge, sufficient security, by at least two respectable sureties, who have no interest in the said privateer, each of whom, together with the said commander, shall be jointly and severally bound in the sum of 2000l. sterling; or, if such ship be provided with above 150 seamen, or soldiers, in the sum of 4000l. sterling, to satisfy all damages and injuries, which the said privateers, or officers, or men, or any of them, may do or commit during their cruize, contrary to the tenour of this Treaty, or to the Laws and Instructions for regulating their conduct; and further, that in all cases of aggressions, the said commissions shall be revoked and annulled.—It is also agreed, that whenever a Judge of a court of Admiralty of either of the parties shall pronounce sentence against any vessel or goods or property belonging to the subjects or citizens of the other party, a formal and duly authenticated copy of all the proceedings in the cause, and of the said sentence, shall, if required, be delivered to the commander of the said vessel, without the smallest delay, he paying all legal fees and demands for the same.

Art. 14. It is further agreed, that both the said contracting parties shall not only refuse to receive any pirates into any of their ports, havens, or towns, or permit any of their inhabitants to receive, protect, harbour, conceal or assist them in any manner, but will bring to condign punishment all such inhabitants as shall be guilty of such acts or offences.—And all their ships, with the goods or merchandizes taken by them, and brought into the ports of either of the said parties, shall be seized as far as they can be discovered, and shall be restored to the owners, or the factors or agents duly deputed, and authorized in writing by them, (proper evidence being shewn in the court of admiralty, for proving the property) even in case such effects should have passed into other hands by sale, if it be proved that the buyers knew, or had good reason to believe, or suspect that they had been piratically taken.

Art. 15. It is likewise agreed, that the subjects and citizens of the two nations, shall not do any acts of hostility or violence against each other, nor accept commissions or instructions so to act from any foreign prince or state, enemies to the other party, nor shall the enemies of one of the parties be permitted to invite or endeavour to enlist in the military service any of the subjects or citizens of the other party; and the laws against all such offences and aggressions shall be punctually executed: and if any subject or citizen of the said parties respectively shall accept any foreign commission, or letters of marque, for arming any vessel to act as a privateer against the other party, it is hereby declared to be lawful for the said party to treat and punish the said subject or citizen, having such commission or letter of marque, as a pirate.

Art. 16. It is expressly stipulated that neither of the said contracting parties will order or authorize any acts of reprizal against the other on complaints of injuries and damages, until the said party shall first have presented to the other a statement thereof, verified by competent proof and evidence, and demanded justice and satisfaction, and the same shall either have been refused or unreasonably delayed.

Art. 17. [The ships of war of each of the contracting parties shall at all times be hospitably received in the ports of the other, their officers and crews paying due respect to the laws and government of the country (24).] The officers shall be treated with that respect which is due to the commissions which they bear; and if any insult should be offered to them by any of the inhabitants, all offenders in this respect shall be punished as disturbers of the peace and amity between the two countries. And both contracting parties agree, that in case any vessel of the one should, by stress of weather, danger from enemies, or other misfortunes, be reduced to the necessity of seeking shelter in any of the ports of the other, into which such vessel could not in ordinary cases claim to be admitted, she shall, on manifesting that necessity to the satisfaction of the government of the place, be hospitably received, and permitted to refit, and to purchase at the market price such necessaries as she may stand in need of, conformably to such Orders and Regulations as the government of the place, having respect to the circumstances of each case, shall prescribe.—She shall not be allowed to break bulk or unload her cargo, unless the same shall (24) Substitute the following: 'The ships of war arid privateers of the two nations, as well as their prizes, shall be treated in their respective ports as those of the nation most favoured.'— be bonâ fide necessary to her being refitted; nor shall she be obliged to pay any duties whatever, except on such articles as she may be permitted to sell for the purpose aforesaid.

Art. 18. It shall not be lawful for any foreign privateers (not being subjects or citizens of either of the said parties) who have commissions from any power or state in enmity with either nation, to arm their ships in the ports of either of the said parties, nor to sell what they have taken, nor in any other manner to exchange the same; nor shall they be allowed to purchase more provisions than shall be necessary for their going to the nearest port of that prince or state from whom they obtained their commissions.

Art. 19. It shall be lawful for the ships of war and privateers, belonging to the said parties respectively, to carry whithersoever they please the ships and goods taken from their enemies, without being obliged to pay any fees to the officers of the admiralty, or to any judges whatever; nor shall the said prizes, when they arrive at and enter the ports of the said parties, be detained or seized; nor shall the searchers, or other officers of those places, visit such prizes (except for the purpose of preventing the carrying of any part of the cargo thereof on shore, in any manner contrary to the established laws of revenue, navigation, or commerce); nor shall such officers take cognizance of the validity of such prizes; but they shall be at liberty to hoist sail, and depart as speedily as may be, and carry their said prizes to the place mentioned in their commissions or patents, which the commanders of the said ships of war or privateers shall be obliged to show.—No shelter or refuge shall be given in their ports to such as have made a prize upon the subjects or citizens of either of the said parties, but if forced by stress of weather or the dangers of the sea to enter them, particular care shall be taken to hasten their departure, and to cause them to retire as soon as possible. Nothing in this Treaty contained shall however be construed to operate contrary to the former and existing public treaties with other sovereigns or states: but the two parties agree, that while they continue in amity, neither of them will in future make any treaty that shall be inconsistent with this or the preceding articles.—Neither of the said parties shall permit the ships or goods belonging to the subjects or citizens of the other to be taken within cannon-shot of the coast, nor within the jurisdiction described in Art. 12. so long as the provisions in the said Article shall be in force, by ships or war or others having commissions from any prince, republic, or state whatever. But in case it should so happen,-the party whose territorial rights shall thus have been violated shall use his utmost endeavours to obtain from the offending party full and ample satisfaction for the vessel or vessels so taken, whether the same be vessels of war or merchant vessels (25).

Art. 20. If at any time a rupture should take place (which God forbid) between his majesty and the United States, the merchants and others of each of the two nations residing in the dominions of the other, shall have the privilege of remaining and continuing their trade, so long as they do it peaceably, and commit no offence against the laws; and in case their conduct should render them suspected, and the respective governments should think proper to order them to remove, the term of 12 months from the publication of the order shall be allowed them for the purpose to remove them with their families, effects, and property; but this favour shall not be extended to those who shall act contrary to the established laws: and for greater certainty, it is declared, that such rupture shall not be deemed to exist while negotiations for accommodating differences shall be depending, nor until the respective ambassadors or ministers, if such there shall be, shall be recalled or sent home on account of such differences, and not on account of personal misconduct, according to the nature and degree of which both parties retain their rights, either to request the recall or immediately to send home the ambassador or minister of the other, and that without prejudice to their mutual friendship and good-understanding.

Art. 21. It is further agreed, that his majesty and the United States, on mutual Regulations by them respectively, or by their respective ministers or officers authorised to make the same, will deliver up to justice all persons who, being charged with murder or forgery, committed within the jurisdiction of either, shall seek an asylum within any of the countries of the other; provided that this shall only be done on such evidence of criminality, (25) The two last Paragraphs to be struck out.— as, according to the laws of the place where the fugitive or person so charged shall be found, would justify his apprehension and commitment for trial, if the offence had there been committed. The expense of such apprehension and delivery shall be borne and defrayed by those who make the requisition, and receive the fugitive.

Art. 22. In the event of a shipwreck happening in a place belonging to one or other of the high contracting parties, not only every assistance shall be given to the unfortunate persons, and no violence done to them, but also the effects which they shall have thrown out of the Ship into the sea shall not be concealed or detained nor damaged under any pretext whatever; on the contrary the above mentioned effects and merchandize shall be preserved and restored to them, upon a suitable recompence being given to those who shall have assisted in saving their persons, vessels, and effects.

Art. 23. And it being the intention of the high contracting parties that the people of their respective dominions shall continue to be on the footing of the most favoured nation, it is agreed that, in case either party shall hereafter grant any additional advantages, in navigation or trade, to any other nation, the subjects or citizens of the other party shall fully participate herein (26).

Art. 24. The high contracting parties engage to communicate to each other, without delay, all such laws as have been or shall be hereafter enacted by their respective legislatures, as also all measures which shall have been taken for the Abolition or Limitation of the African Slave Trade; and they further agree to use their best endeavours to procure the cooperation of other powers for the final and complete Abolition of a Trade so repugnant to the principles of justice and humanity.

Art. 25. And it is further agreed, that nothing herein contained, shall contravene or affect the due execution of any treaty (26) To stand thus: 'It is agreed, that in case either party shall hereafter grant any additional advantages in navigation or trade to any other nation, the subjects or citizens of the other party shall fully participate therein freely, where it is freely granted to such other nation, or on yielding the same compensation when the grant is conditional.'— or treaties now actually subsisting between either of the high contracting parties and any other power or powers.

Art. 26. This Treaty, when the same shall have been ratified by his majesty, and by the president of the United States, with the advice of their, senate, and their respective ratifications mutually exchanged, shall be binding and obligatory on his majesty and on the said states for ten years (27), from the date of the exchange of the said ratification, and shall be reciprocally executed and observed with punctuality, and the most sincere regard to good faith. (27) Period to be five years.—

Articles proposed —No person whatever shall, upon the high seas, and without the jurisdiction of either party, be demanded or taken out of any ship or vessel belonging to citizens or subjects of one of the other parties, by the public or private armed ships belonging to or in the service of the other, unless such person be at the time in the military service of an enemy of such other party.—Art. 2. Complaints having been made by divers merchants and other citizens of the United States, that during the war in which his majesty is engaged, they have sustained loss and damage by reason of the irregular and illegal captures and condemnations of their vessels and other property, under colour or authority of commissions from his majesty, contrary to the tenour of a communication from lord Hawkesbury to Mr. King, of the 11th of April 1801, of which a copy is annexed to this treaty, or contrary to the tenour of a Letter from Mr. Merry to Mr. Maddison, of the 12th of April 1801, of which a copy is also hereto annexed, or otherwise contrary to the known and established rules of the law of nations; and the said merchants and others having farther complained, that full and complete redress for the said losses and damages has not been, and cannot be, for various causes, had and obtained in the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, his majesty agrees that he will, without delay, cause the most effectual measures to be taken in concert with the United States, for an impartial examination of the said complaints, and that he will cause full and complete reparation to be made thereupon to the parties entitled, as justice and equity, and the nature of the respective cases, shall appear to require.

(Second Inclosure referred to in No. 1.)—To the right hon. lord Holland and lord Auckland: dated London, Aug. 20th, 1806.

The undersigned, commissioners extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the United States of America, think it necessary to give to lords Holland and Auckland, the commissioners extraordinary and plenipotentiary of his majesty, a brief explanation in writing of the claims which they have already had the honour to mention to their lordships in a recent conference, of sundry American citizens, for suitable Compensation for loss and damages sustained in the course of the present war, by reason of irregular or illegal captures or condemnations of their vessels and other property, and at the same time to call the attention of their lordships to the situation of certain Prize Causes arising out of some of these captures now depending in the tribunals of this country.—The undersigned are happy in having it in their power to state, that, according to the information they have been able to obtain, such of these Claims as relate to captures, which, from causes peculiar to themselves, have excited in America a more than ordinary degree of sensibility, are not so considerable in number as at first was supposed.—The complaints of this description, to which the undersigned would particularly invite the attention of their lordships, have been produced by seizures as prize, made in direct violation of rules of maritime practice previously declared by his majesty's government to the government of the United States, and in no degree revoked or affected by any arrangement between them, or even by any notification, they were about to be abandoned.—Of these seizures, the most important, and in every view the most interesting, were made in the year 1805, and in tile early part of the year 1806, of the ships and merchandize of American citizens, upon the pretension, that the voyages on which they were engaged were direct or continuous between the colonies of his majesty's enemies and some port in Europe.—Although it is certain that the government of the United States had never admitted that illegality can be imputed to such a trade, even when confessedly continuous or direct, and had concluded that the question had been otherwise formally settled in its favour, the undersigned believe it to be unnecessary to bring that point into view, with any reference to the cases now un- der consideration. It is sufficient to state, that at the date of these seizures the merchants of the United States did explicitly understand, and justified in a confident belief, founded not only upon antecedent practice, but upon a formal communication, in the year 1807, to the American minister in London from his majesty's principal secretary of state for the department of foreign affairs, that the circumstances by which these voyages were accompanied, had been and were distinctly admitted by the British government and by British courts of prize, to break their continuity, and render them unquestionably lawful.—The following detail will shew more precisely the nature and effect of the communication to which the undersigned allude.—The public and private armed ships of this country having seized American vessels bound from the United States to the Spanish West Indies, on the pretext that their cargoes consisted of articles of the growth of Spain when at war with Great Britain, and the vice admiralty court of Nassau having condemned the cargo of one of these vessels upon that pretext, Mr. King in a note to lord Hawkesbury of the 13th March 1801, remonstrated against these acts as palpable abuses.—The subject of this remonstrance was immediately referred to the king's advocate, whose report of the 16th March 1801, after declaring that the sentence of the vice admiralty court Was erroneous, concludes with the following exposition of the law as understood in G. Britain, relative to the commerce of neutrals with belligerents and their colonies: "It is now distinctly understood, and has been repeatedly so decided by the high court of appeal, that the produce of the colonies of the enemy may be imported by a neutral into his own country, and may be re-exported from thence even to the mother country of such colony; and in like manner the produce and manufactures of the mother country may in this circuitous mode legally find their way to the colonies. The direct trade, however, between the mother country and its colonies have not, I apprehend, been recognized as legal, either by his majesty's government or by his tribunals.—What is a direct trade or what amounts to an intermediate importation into the neutral country may sometimes be a question of some difficulty. A general definition of either, applicable to all cases, cannot well be laid down. The question must depend upon the particular circumstances of each case Perhaps the mere touching in the neutral country to take fresh clearances may properly be considered as a fraudulent evasion, and is in effect the direct trade; but the high court of admiralty has expressly decided, (and I see no reason to expect that the court of appeal will vary the rule), that landing the goods and paying the duties in the neutral country breaks the continuity of the voyage, and is such an importation as legalises the trade, although the goods be-reshipped in the same vessel, and on account of the same neutral proprietors, and to be forwarded for sale to the mother country or the colony." An Extract from this Report, containing the foregoing passage, was transmitted by the duke of Portland, in a letter of the 30th of March 1801, to the lords commissioners of the admiralty. His grace's letter concludes thus:" In order, therefore, to put a stop to the inconveniencies arising from these erroneous sentences of the vice admiralty courts, I have the honour to signify to your lordships the king's pleasure, that a communication of the doctrine laid down in the said report shall be immediately made by your lordships to the several judges presiding in them, setting forth what is held to be the law upon the subject by the superior tribunals, for their guidance and direction."—On the 11th of April 1801, lord Hawkesbury communicated to Mr. King, for the information of the government of the United States, a copy of the above letter of the duke of Portland, which is stated by his lordship to have been written by his majesty's command, in consequence of Mr. King's representation of the preceding month, together with a copy of the extract from the report of the king's advocate, referred to in his grace's letter, and already above quoted. Upon the receipt of this communication Mr. King transmitted it to his government in a letter (of which a copy is annexed) containing the following observations: "I take the liberty of suggesting the expediency of publishing these copies in our newspapers, as the most expeditious means of communicating the same to the cruizing ships and privateers in the American seas. Having intimated this suggestion to lord Hawkesbury before he prepared and sent me his answer, there can be no exceptions here against such a publication." The publication was directed and took place accordingly.—The undersigned are persuaded that lord Holland and lord Auckland will at once perceive that the Report of the king's advocates thus unequivocally adopted by his majesty's government, and communicated as an act to be respected and confided in, through the American minister, to the government of the United States, and finally to their citizens, and to Europe through the medium of a publication expected and authorized, cannot in any fair construction be viewed as any thing short of a formal declaration on the part of Great Britain; that the landing of the cargo and the payment of the duties in the neutral country would be considered as legalizing the circuitous trade, even between a belligerent and its own colonies.—The practice during the late and the two first years of the present war was in perfect conformity with this document, and by that conformity en-creased its authority, and furnished an additional justification, if any had been required, for a dependance upon the doctrine which it announced.—In the summer of 1805, however, when a large amount of American property was afloat, undeniably entitled to the protection of the above rule, and committed to the high seas, under an implicit reliance upon a strict adherence to it; the rule was suddenly abandoned, and British cruizers fell upon this trade, thus sanctioned by the express admission, as well as by the acquiescence of their government; and these captures are understood to have received the highest judicial sanction.—The undersigned have no desire to dwell upon this subject. They are convinced that the liberal and equitable sentiments which distinguish his majesty's government render unnecessary the farther explanation of which it is susceptible. Referring to two notes from the undersigned, Mr. Monroe, to lord Mulgrave, of the 23d of Sept. 1805, and to Mr. Fox, of the 25th of Feb. 1806, the undersigned have only to declare their sincere conviction that his majesty's government will not fail to see in the facts which they have had the honour to state, an irresistible call upon it to repair the injurious effects of these seizures. As to the few cases of this class now depending before the lords commissioners of appeal, or in other prize courts of his majesty, the undersigned feel assured that measures will be taken to cause them to be favourably disposed of, and that suitable reparation will moreover be secured to the parties injured, for the, loss and damage they have sustained. The undersigned have the honour to transmit herewith a list of all the cases of this class, in which are distinguished such as are still judicially depending.—The next class of these cases (of which lists and estimates will hereafter be furnished) comprehends captures during the existing war, contrary to the tenor, of a letter of the 5th of Jan. 1804, from sir Evan Nepean to Mr. Hammond, on the subject of the Blockade of Martinique and Guadaloupe, of which a copy was enclosed in a letter of the 12th of April 1804, from Mr. Merry to Mr. Maddison, of both of which letters copies are herewith transmitted.—The citizens of the United States complain that they have suffered severely by captures, in violation of the rules laid down with so much fairness and precision in this communication, and that, where condemnations have not followed, compensation equivalent to the actual loss have not been and cannot be procured in the ordinary course by any exertions on their part. The pretext for some of these captures has been the breach of an alleged blockade of Martinique or Guadaloupe; for others, the breach of an imaginary blockade of Curracoa; and for others, the breach of an equally imaginary blockade of other ports and places. In all of these cases either the actual investment of the particular port was wanting, or the vessel seized for an imputed criminal destination to it, had not been warned as required. The just extent of these claims the undersigned are not able to state, but they presume it cannot be considerable.—The only remaining claims which are reducible to any precise class, are those which relate to captures within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Of these, as well as of some others of a miscellaneous nature, which the undersigned have not at present the means of prescribing distinctly to lord Holland and lord Auckland, lists shall hereafter be prepared and laid before their lordships accompanied by suitable explanations. The undersigned, &c. JAMES MONOROE, WILLIAM PINCKNEY.

(Letter referred to in second Inclosure of No. 1.)—To the Secretary of State of the United States. Dated Washington, April 12th, 1804.

Sir; Mr. Thornton

not having failed to transmit to his majesty's government an account of the Representation which you were pleased to address to him under date of 27 Oct. last year, respecting the blockade of the islands of Martinique and Guadaloupe, it is with great satisfaction, sir, that I have just received his majesty's commands signified to me by his principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, under date of the 6th Jan. last, to communicate to you the instructions which have in consequence of your representation been sent to commodore Hood and to the judges of the vice admiralty courts in the West Indies.—I have accordingly the honour to transmit to you, sir, the inclosed copy of a letter from sir Evan Nepean, secretary to the board of admiralty, to Mr. Hammond, his majesty's under secretary of state for foreign affairs, specifying the nature of the instructions which have been given.—His majesty's government doubt not that the promptitude which has been manifested in redressing the grievance complained of by the government of the United States, will be considered by the latter as an additional evidence of his majesty's constant and sincere desire to remove any ground of misunderstanding that could have a tendency to interrupt the harmony which so happily subsists between his government and that of the United States. I have &c. ANT. MERRY

(Letter referred to in second Inclosure of No. 1. and in the preceding Letter.) To George Hammond esq. Dated Admiralty Office, 5th Jan. 1804.

Sir; Having communicated to the lords of the admiralty lord Hawkesbury's letter of the 23d ultimo, inclosing the copy of a dispatch which his lordship had received from Mr. Thornton his majesty's chargé d'affaires in America, on the subject of the blockade of the islands of Martinique and Guadaloupe, together with the report of the advocate general thereupon; I have their lordships commands to acquaint you, for his lordship's information, that they have sent orders to commodore Hood not to consider any blockade of those islands as existing, unless in respect of particular ports which may be actually invested, and then not to capture vessels bound to such ports unless they shall previously have been warned not to enter them, and that they have also sent the necessary directions on the subject to the judges of the vice admiralty courts in the West Indies and America. I am &c.

EVAN NEPEAN.

(Third Inclosurse referred to in No. 1.) To James Monroe esq. and Wm. Pinckney esq. Dated Holland house, Nov. 8th, 1806.

His majesty's commissioners and plenipotentiaries have the honour to represent to the commissioners and plenipotentiaries of the United States.—That the project of an article on the subject of impressing seamen, together with the reasonings by which the commissioners of the United States have urged the expediency of an engagement on that subject, has been considered with the same friendly and conciliatory disposition, which has marked every step of the negotiation:—That his majesty's government has not felt itself prepared to disclaim or derogate from a right which has been uniformly and generally maintained, and in the exercise of which the security of the British navy may be essentially involved; more especially in a conjuncture when his majesty is engaged in wars which enforce the necessity of the most vigilant attention to the preservation and supply of the naval force of his kingdom:—That his majesty's government, actuated by an earnest desire to remove every cause of dissatisfaction, has directed his majesty's commissioners to give to Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinckney the most positive assurances that instructions have been given and shall be repeated and enforced for the observance of the greatest caution in the impressing of British seamen; and that the strictest care shall be taken to preserve citizens of the United States from any molestation or injury; and that immediate and prompt redress shall be afforded upon any representation of injury sustained by them:—That the commissioners of the United States well know that no recent cases of complaint have occurred, and that no probable inconvenience can result from the postponement of an article subjected to so many difficulties. Still that his majesty's commissioners are instructed to entertain the discussion of any plan that can be devised to secure the interests of both states without any injury to rights to which they are respectively attached:—That in the Mean time the desire of promoting a right conclusion of the proposed treaty, and of drawing closer the ties of connection between the two countries, induces his majesty's commissioners to express their readiness to proceed to the completion of the other articles, in the confident hope, that the result cannot fail to cultivate and confirm the good understanding happily subsisting between the high contracting parties; and still further to augment the mutual prosperity of his majesty's subjects, and of the citizens of the United States. VASSALL HOLLAND. AUCKLAND.

(Fourth Inclosure referred to in No. 1.)—To L. Visc. Howick. March 14, 1807.

My lord; In conformity with the intimation which your lordship was so good as to make to us at a late interview, relative to certain claims and prize causes, which had been brought into discussion in the course of the late negotiation, between his majesty's commissioners and those of the United States; we have the honour to transmit to your lordship, the copy of a note to lord Holland and lord Auckland, in which those claims and prize causes are fully explained. It is proper to add, that at the time of the signature of the Treaty, it was distinctly understood between the commissioners on both sides, that this subject was not to be affected by it, but was to remain completely open for future adjustment.—We have it upon the statement contained in that note, and the documents to which it refers, in perfect confidence that it will be viewed by your lordship with the interest which belongs to it, and that every thing which is suitable to the high and honourable character of his majesty's government, and the just claims of the United States will be done, with relation to it, as promptly as circumstances will permit. We have &c.

JAMES MONROE. WM. PINKNEY.

No. 2.—Letter from Mr. Secretary Canning to Lords Holland and Auckland. Dated Foreign Office, July 25th, 1807.

My lords; I have the honour to inclose to your lordships, the copies of a note which I have received from Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinkney, and of the several documents that accompanied it; I submit these papers to the consideration of your lordships, for the purpose of calling your attention to that passage of the note which refers to a suggestion on the part of his majesty's commissioners, on the impressment of seamen from on board of American ships. It is extremely desirable that his majesty's government should have the fullest information on this important point; and I have to request, that your lordships will be pleased to state to me, whether the representation contained in this part of the note of the American commissioners be accurate; and whether your lordships signified any such acquiescence as is there described in the implied "informal understanding, respecting the forbearance to be observed by the British cruizers, in regard to the practice of impressment of seamen on board of American vessels."

I have, &c. GEORGE CANNING.

No. III.—Letter from lords Holland and Auckland to Mr. Secretary Canning, dated July 28th, 1807.

Sir; We have received the honour of your Letter with its several lnclosures; and are desirous to give the fullest information in our power respecting any part of our late negotiation with the commissioners of the United States. We have accordingly applied our attention to that passage of the Note delivered to you by Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinkney, which states that "soon after the suspension of the negotiations, it was suggested by his majesty's commissioners) that if the topic relative to Impressment should be expressly reserved for future conventional arrangement, and a pledge given to the United States for resuming the consideration of it at a convenient season, with that view; and that, if, in the mean time, such an informal understanding should be substituted, as in its practical effect would remove the vexation complained of, it might perhaps be yet possible to conduct the negotiation to a result which would not be unacceptable to the respective governments. And in pursuance of this suggestion, the British commissioners presented their official note of the 8th day of Nov. last."—It appears to us, that the several parts of this statement taken with the context, have all the accuracy and honourable and right meaning which we experienced in the whole negotiation.—When the American commissioners speak of "such an informal understanding to be substituted, as would in its practical effect remove the vexation complained of," they do not mean, and certainly his majesty's commissioners never meant, that there should be a forbearance or suspension or discontinuance of the practice and exercise of the Impressment of British seamen. On the contrary, they proceed to say that "pursuant to the Suggestion of the British commissioners, the official note of the 8th of Nov. was presented." To that Note we beg leave to refer.—We considered that Note, and still consider it as pledging his majesty's government to give instructions to British cruizers, "to be very cautious in the exercise of the right of impressing British seamen, to take the strictest care to preserve the citizens of the United States from molestation or injury, and to redress any grievances which might be sustained by them."—When the negotiation proceeded after our delivery of that Note, we thought, and still think, that the treaty which we signed (omitting the point of Impressment, and several other points afterwards included in the proposed additional articles) was in itself compleat and unconditional, and subject to no reservation on either part, except that which was expressed in our second Note of the 30th of Dec. on the signature of the treaty.—If circumstances had not taken place, which made it our duty to suspend the signing of the additional articles, and which eventually discontinued the negotiation in our hands, we should have considered ourselves as bound to advert bonâ fide to the further pledge contained in our official note of the 8th Nov. We mean that paragraph which states, "that no recent cases of complaint have occurred (respecting the exercise of the right of Impressment), and that no probable inconvenience can result from the postponement of an article, subject to so many difficulties; still, that his majesty's commissioners are instructed to entertain the discussion of any plan that can be devised to secure the interests of both states, without any injury to rights to which they are respectively attached." The obvious sense of this paragraph, and the forms and substance of the compleated treaty, and the proposed additional articles appear to us to leave no doubt relative to the mutual understanding and views of those who were employed in a negotiation of such importance to their respective countries.

We have &c. VASSAL HOLLAND AUCKLAND.

No. IV.—Letter from Mr. Secretary Canning to Lords Holland and Auckland, dated August 6th, 1807.

My lords; In acknowledging the receipt of the letter which your lordships have done me the honour to address to me, in answer to mine of the 25th ult. I am sorry to have occasion to trouble your lordships with any further enquiry; but I am sure that your lordships will feel that the point most immediately in question, respecting the Impressment of British seamen from American ships, is one of such essential importance at the present moment, as to make it necessary for me to ascertain, with as much accuracy as possible, what has really passed between your lordships and the American commissioners upon this subject.—I understood the American commissioners to say, that in addition to whatever passed in writing between you, they received from your lordships an informal assurance of something that "should in its practical effect remove the grievance complained of." By "the grievance complained of," I understood the commissioners to mean the practice of impressment itself, not any abuses of that practice.—Your lordships deny, that any forbearance was promised, "In the sense of any suspension or discontinuance of the practice," and your lordships refer to your Note of the 8th of Nov. as containing the correct statement of what you communicated to the American commissioners.—The Note of the 8th of Nov. certainly promises forbearance in the practice, but not a discontinuance of the practice, of Impressment.—I am therefore under the necessity of requesting your lordships to have the goodness to state to me, whether the Note of the 8th of Nov. does, according to your lordships recollection and belief, contain the whole of what was promised or held out by your lordships to the American commissioners upon this point?—Whether whatever else passed (if any thing else did pass) in conversation, was in strict conformity to that Note; implying no further concession or forbearance on the part of Great Britain, and authorizing no further expectation on the part of the United States?—If this be so, it does appear to me that the American commissioners have misconceived the effect of your lordships communication to them; and must have represented it to their government as implying a much larger concession than was in fact in your lordships contemplation. I have, &c.

GEORGE CANNING.

No. V.—Letter from Lords Holland and Auckland to Mr. Secretary Canning, dated Aug. 10th, 1807.

Sir; In answer to your letter of the 6th instant, we have the honour to repeat our former assurances that it is our desire as it is our duty, to give you every possible information respecting the negotiation with the American Commissioners, which his majesty was lately pleased to entrust to us.—As the points in which our answer to your letter of the 25th ult. has not appeared to you sufficiently clear and satisfactory, we must again refer you to our official Note of the 8th of Nov. last, as Containing a full and authentic statement of what was settled between us and the American commissioners, with regard to the Impressment of British seamen from on board of American ships. That Note was delivered after many fruitless conferences, held for the purpose of devising some expedient that might reconcile the interests and pretensions of both nations on this important point. But finding after much careful consideration of the different plans proposed to us, that the difficulties which stood in the way of any final and permanent adjustment were at that time insurmountable, we were compelled to rest satisfied with the temporary and imperfect arrangement, which our Note of the 8th of Nov. promised to afford. We certainly did not then understand, nor do we now understand, that by that Note we pledged our government to abstain in future from the practice of impressing British seamen front American merchant vessels. We certainly, however, did mean to pledge the British government to make its cruizers observe the utmost caution, moderation, and forbearance in the exercise of that practice; but we never either expressed or implied, that they were to desist from taking British seamen from American merchant ships. We farther engaged that our government would be at all times ready to take into its serious consideration any proposal made to it by the American government, for the recovery of deserters from the British navy, who take refuge in the American territory or on board of American ships, without having recourse to the means which are at present resorted to for that purpose.—Whatever passed in conversation was, we conceive, in strict conformity to that Note, and implied no farther concession nor forbearance on the part of G. Britain than extreme caution and moderation in the exercise of the right, which alone, without any discontinuance, much less renunciation of the practice, we expressed our confident hope would be sufficient to prevent such inconveniences and outrages as the American commissioners represented and contended had frequently arisen from it. We have, &c.

VASSALL HOLLAND. AUCKLAND.

No. VI.—Letter from Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney to Mr. Secretary Canning, dated Oct. 18th, 1807.

Sir; In our interview of yesterday, you requested that we would explain the ground of the opinion which is expressed in our letter of July 24—that the occasion which induced the British commissioners to present to us the Note of the 31st Dec. preceding had ceased to exist. We hasten to comply with that request, as we shall do, to give an explanation of any other passage in that letter which you may desire. We were of opinion at the time when the British commissioners presented to us that paper, that the decree of the government of France, to which it related, ought not to be considered applicable to the United States, because such a construction was plainly repugnant to the treaty subsisting between the United States and France; and likewise, because the decree might be understood to relate only to France and the dominions subject to her arms. We alluded however, in our letter of July the 24th, to circumstances which had occurred since the date of the decree, as fixing unequivocally an interpretation of it, which we at first supposed to be reasonable.—Great anxiety having been excited by a different construction, which many believe the decree to be susceptible of, the minister of the United States at Paris requested of the minister of marine, who was charged with its execution, an explanation of the sense, in which it was understood by his government, who assured him, that it was not intended that it should in any degree interfere with the provisions of the treaty of 1800 between the United States and France.—We relied also upon the fact, not only that no countenance had been given by any practice or judicial decision in France to a different construction, but that the practice was in precise conformity with the view above suggested; and that in a cause in which the question had been brought into discussion, the court had sanctioned the conclusion that the treaty between the two nations was to be exactly fulfilled, and that the decree was to be so construed as not to infringe it.—We think it proper to confine ourselves to the explanation which you have desired, of the passage alluded to in our former letter, and not to enter in this communication in any other respect on the subject of the paper with which it is connected. We have, &c.

JAMES MONROE. WILLIAM PINCKNEY.

No. VII.—Letter from Mr. Secretary Canning to Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, dated Oct. 22d, 1807.

Gentlemen; The considerations which have hitherto suspended our communication on the subject of the treaty returned from America, having ceased by the termination of the discussion between Mr. Monroe and myself, respecting the encounter between the Leopard and the Chesapeake, I have now the honour to transmit to you the answer which I have been commanded by his majesty to return to your note of the 24th July. I have, &c.

GEORGE CANNING.

No. VIII.—Note from Mr. Secretary Canning to Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, dated Oct. 22d, 1807.

The undersigned, his majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, in returning an answer to the official note with which Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney have accompanied their communication of the copy of the treaty which has been sent back unratified from America, is commanded, in the first place, to inform the American commissioners, that his majesty cannot profess himself to be satisfied that the American government has taken any such effectual steps, with respect to the decree of France, by which the whole of his majesty's dominions are declared to be in a state of blockade, as to do away the ground of that reservation which was contained in the note delivered by his maj.'s commissioners at the time of the signature of the treaty; but that, reserving to himself the right of taking, in consequence of that decree, and of the omission of any effectual interposition, on the part of neutral nations, to obtain its revocation, such measures of retaliation as his majesty might judge expedient, it was nevertheless the desire and determination of his majesty, if that treaty had been sanctioned by the ratification of the president of the United States, to have ratified it, on his majesty's part, and to have given the fullest effect to all its stipulations.—Some of the considerations upon which the refusal the president of the United States to ratify the treaty is founded are such as can be matter of discussion only between the American government and its commissioners; since it is not for his majesty to inquire, whether in the conduct of this negotiation the commissioners of the U. States have failed to conform themselves in any respect to the instructions of their government.—In order to determine the course which his majesty has to pursue in the present stage of the transaction, it is sufficient that the treaty was considered, by those who signed it, as a complete and perfect instrument.—No engagements were entered into, on the part of his majesty, as connected with the treaty, except such as appear upon the face of it. Whatever encouragement may have been given by his majesty's commissioners to the hope expressed by the commissioners of the United States, that discussions might thereafter be entertained with respect to impressment of British seamen for merchant vessels, must be understood to have had in view the renewal of such discussions, not as forming any part of the treaty then signed, (as the American commissioners appear to have been instructed to assume) but separately, and at some subsequent period more favourable to their successful termination.—But the alterations proposed by the president of the United States in the body of the treaty thus formerly concluded, appear to require more particular observation.—The undersigned is commanded distinctly to protest against a practice altogether unusual in the political transactions of States; by which the American government assumes to itself the privilege of revising and altering agreements concluded, and signed, on its behalf, by its agents duly authorized for that purpose; of retaining so much of those agreements as may be favourable to its own views, and of rejecting such stipulations, or such parts of stipulations, as are conceived to be not sufficiently beneficial to America.—If the American government has a right to exercise such a revision, an equal right cannot be denied to others. And it is obvious, that the adoption of such a practice by both parties to a treaty, would tend to render negotiation indefinite, and settlement. hopeless; or rather to supersede altogether the practice of negotiation through authorized commissioners, and to make every article of a compact between state and state the subject of repeated reference, and of endless discussion.—The alteration of particular articles in a treaty, after the whole has been carefully adjusted and arranged, must necessarily open the whole to renewed deliberation. The demands of one party are not to be considered as absolute, and the concessions of the other as unconditional. What may have been given, on the one hand, in consideration of advantage to be derived, in return, from accompanying stipulations, might have been refused, if those stipulations had been less favourable; and must necessarily be withdrawn, if they are changed.—It cannot be admitted, that any government should hold those with whom it treats to all that has been granted by them in its favour, relaxing at the same time, on its part, the reciprocal conditions for which its own faith has been engaged; or that, after having obtained by negotiation a knowledge of the utmost extent of concession to which the other contracting party is prepared to consent in the conclusion of a treaty, it should require yet further concession, without equivalent, as the price of its ratification.—The undersigned is therefore commanded to apprize the American commissioners, that although his majesty will be all times ready to listen to any suggestions for arranging, in an amicable and advantageous manner, the respective interests of the two countries, the proposal of the president of the United States for proceeding to negotiate anew, upon the basis of a treaty already solemnly concluded and signed, is a proposal wholly inadmissible. And his majesty has therefore no option, under the present circumstances of this transaction, but to acquiesce in the refusal of the president of the- United States to ratify the treaty signed on the 31st of Dec. 1806. The undersigned, &c.

GEORGE CANNING.