Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

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

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 encreased its authority, and furnished an additional justification, if any had been re-procured in the ordinary course by any quired, 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

|

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 Curraçoa; 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 MONROE, 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.

[ocr errors]

and Auckland to Mr. Secretary Can

ning, dated July 28th, 1807. Sir; We have received the honour of your Letter with its several Inclosures, 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 negociations, 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 go

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 circum-vernments. · And in pursuance of this stances 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 VOL. X.

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 cautions 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 2Q

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 Can

ning, 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 from 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.

« PreviousContinue »