DECEMBER, 1809.

Conduct of the British Minister.

solely from his own visionary mental conceits, without a fact or pretext for its support.

SENATE.

more than in the disavowal of Mr. Erskine's arrangement-in avoiding to avow the real motives for it-and in the uncandid attempt to convert the bad fajth of the British Government into a reproach upon our own; and this was to be done by an ingenious mental device, prettily conceived by Mr. Canning, and adroitly executed by Mr. Jackson, who, if not equal to Mr. Canning in the mysterious art of punning, I think can be very little way behind his prototype in the art of equivoques. Sir, the disavowal, in my judgment, was not for the want of competent powers. Too great a share of the real cause of the disavowal, unfortunately, is attributable to ourselves, and now is the moment to relieve ourselves from the imputation.

Let me now, sir, call your attention to the letter of Mr. Smith to Mr. Jackson, in reply to these highly offensive insinuations, dated 19th of October, 1809, pages 46 and 47, of the printed documents:

Mr. President, I am told that Mr. Canning is a professed punster. But, sir, I would not condescend to make the observation here, had he not, after heaping upon us, during the whole of his administration, every injury and insult in his power, at the close of it placed us in a ludicrous situation by imposing on us an obligation, in a grave and serious concern to the nation, of expounding his equivoques, and unriddling his riddles. I really feel some condescension in being compelled, in my place, to hunt out for his and Mr. Jackson's meaning, through a transition of sentences, a collocation of words, and a shifting of verbiage. And indulge me, sir, with remarking, that I conceive the situation of a nation never can be more disastrous, calamitous, and lamentable, than when its great and serious affairs are placed in the hands of a parcel of punsters. For, sir, men of minds of that description are too much employed in the pleasing amusement of looking "The stress you have laid on what you have been out for corruscations of wit and sentiment, to have pleased to state as the substitution of the terms finally any leisure for the more dull and unpleasurable agreed on, for the terms first proposed, has excited no business of observing and marking the great oc- small degree of surprise. Certain it is, that your precurrences in human affairs, and of devising means decessor did present for my consideration the three of giving them a direction favorable to their own conditions, which now appear in the printed docuviews, or to their country's interests. No, sir. mont-that he was disposed to urge them more than this is too dull and plodding a pursuit for men of the nature of two of them (both palpably inadmissible, such light, flitting, brilliant imaginations, and if, and one more than merely inadmissible) could permit, ever they unfortunately undertake it, they soon and that on finding his first proposals unsuccessful, the find the woful misapplication of talents. If, sir, more reasonable terms comprised in the arrangement any illustration were wanting of the correctness what, sir, is there in this to countenance the conclurespecting the Orders in Council were adopted. And of these observations, it could nowhere be found sion you have drawn in favor of the right of His Britbetter than in an attentive review of the histori-annic Majesty to disavow the proceeding? Is anything cal events which occurred during the late British administration-the administration of the energetic, the brilliant, the sarcastic, the facetious, the joking Mr. Canning. He has carried his joking propensities far indeed. It may be truly said, he jests at scars indeed-at scars of the blackest disgrace and ruin inflicted upon his bleeding country-upon a great nation, which probably would have received, and certainly merited, a better fate, if it had fortunately placed its destinies in better hands. Sir, it appears to me, that all the military enterprises during his whole administration, from the abominable attack on Copenhagen, down to the last expedition against the islands of Zealand, were nothing more than belligerent puns and conundrums. It has been constantly announced that some grand, secret expedition was on hand, and each succeeding one grander than the preceding, until the last expedition to Walcheren, which was the grandest of all; and, when the secret really came out, it appeared either that the object was abominable or contemptible, and the means of executing even the contemptible object, upon experiment, were generally found incompetent. Yes, sir, probably these enterprises have cost the British nation the lives of fifty thousand brave officers and soldiers, and I will not undertake to count the millions of dollars. Sir, the same little-minded course of policy has also been uniformly manifested during the same time against the United States; and in no respect

more common in public negotiations than to begin with a higher demand, and, that failing, to descend to a lower? To have, if not two sets of instructions, two, or more than two, grades of propositions in the same set of instructions; to begin with what is the most desirable, and to end with what is found to be admissible, in case the more desirable should not be attainable. This must be obvious to every understanding, and it is confirmed by universal experience.

"What were the real and entire instructions given to your predecessor is a question essentially between him and his Government. That he had, or, at least, that he believed he had sufficient authority to conclude the arrangement, his formal assurances during our His subsequent letter of the 15th of June, renewing

discussions were such as to leave no room for doubt.

his assurances to me that the terms of the agreement, so happily concluded by the recent negotiation, will be strictly fulfilled on the part of His Majesty,' is an evident indication of what his persuasion then was as to his instructions. And with a view to show what his impressions have been even since his disavowal, I must take the liberty of referring you to the annexed extracts (see C) from his official letters of the 31st of July and of the 14th of August.

"The declaration that the despatch from Mr. Canning to Mr. Erskine of the 23d of January, is the only despatch by which the conditions were prescribed to Mr. Erskine for the conclusion of an arrangement on the matter to which it relates,' is now for the first time made to this Government; and I need hardly add that if that despatch had been communicated at the time of

SENATE.

Conduct of the British Minister.

the arrangement, or if it had been known that the propositions contained in it, and which were at first presented by Mr. Erskine, were the only ones on which he was authorized to make an arrangement, the arrangement would not have been made."

The language of this quotation is at once so perspicuous, candid, and intelligent, that it requires no explanation or illustration from me. I will, therefore, pass on to Mr. Jackson's reply, dated 23d October, 1809, pages 59, 60, in the following words:

DECEMBER, 1809.

unworthily, as well of Mr. Erskine, as of our Government; but very far from yielding to the influence of all this evidence, in the very face of it, with the most extraordinary effrontery, he contradicts the whole, and renews his offensive insinuation with all the aggravation of this impudent contradiction. But, sir, this is not all, he here reiterates this insinuation by referring to what he calls the "obvious deduction" he took the liberty of making in his letter of the 11th of October, which I have before animadverted on to the Senate; this reiteration demonstrates the propriety of my animadversions on that letter; the whole of which are equally applicable to the let

tion, and noticed in the resolution before you; with this additional aggravating circumstance, that at the time of writing this last letter, Mr. Jackson knew that he wrote the first under false or mistaken impressions. Nor, sir, can it escape observation that he here again renewed his insinuations, deduced from his ridiculous and contemptible interpretation of what he calls the act

of substitution.

"I have, therefore, no hesitation in informing you, that His Majesty was pleased to disvow the agreement concluded between you and Mr. Erskine, because it was concluded in violation of that gentleman's instruc-ter of the 23d of October, now under considerations, and altogether without authority to subscribe to the terms of it. These instructions, I now understand by your letter, as well as from the obvious deduction which I took the liberty of making in mine of the eleventh instant, were at the time in substance made known to you; no stronger illustration, therefore, can be given of the deviation from them which occurred, than by a reference to the terms of your agreement. "Nothing can be more notorious than the frequency with which, in the course of a complicated negotiation, Ministers are furnished with a gradation of condition, on which they may be successively authorized to conclude. So common is the case which you put hypothetically, that, in acceding to the justice of your statement, I feel myself impelled to make only one observation upon it, which is, that it does not strike me as bearing upon the consideration of the unauthorized agreement concluded here, inasmuch as, in point of fact, Mr. Erskine had no such graduated instruction. You are already acquainted with that which was given, and I have had the honor of informing you that it was the only one by which the conditions on which he was to conclude were prescribed. So far from the terms, which he was actually induced to accept, having been contemplated in that instruction, he himself states that they were substituted by you in lieu of those originally proposed."

Let me now, sir, proceed to Mr. Smith's letter to Mr. Jackson, of 1st of November, replying to It will these reiterated and aggravated insults. be found in pages 66, 67, of the printed documents, in the following words:

"But it would be improper to conclude the few observations, to which I purposely limit myself, without adverting to your repetition of a language implying a knowledge on the part of this Government that the instructions of your predecessor did not authorize the arrangement formed by him. After the explicit and peremptory asseveration that this Government had no such knowledge, and that with such a knowledge no such arrangement would have been entered into, the view which you have again presented of the subject, makes it my duty to apprize you, that such insinuations are inadmissible in the intercourse of a foreign Minister with a Government that understands what it owes to itself."

fidence and complacency towards his own Government, when he beholds the openness, the frankness, the candor, and the intelligence with which it gets at the truth, compared with the miserable and contemptible conceits and subterfuges with which the British Minister attempts to disguise and obscure it.

The first observation which occurs, in reading this extract, is, that Mr. Jackson here attempts to get at his object by what, I suppose, he con- This language is also too perspicuous and corsiders an ingenious conceit, shifting his ver-rect in itself, to require any explanation from me. biage-the words, "conditions prescribed in the But I cannot help remarking, sir, that surely despatch" are here dropped; and the word "in-every American patriot must feel a smile of constructions" substituted. Thus endeavoring to show, that Mr. Erskine's instructions themselves, were in fact known to Mr. Smith, at the time of the arrangement. And how, sir, do you suppose he attempts to get at this fact? Why, sir, he tells you, from Mr. Smith's letter, just read; which is so far from justifying that conclusion, that it positively denies it; and even goes further, it furnishes, and refers to extracts of two letters from Mr. Erskine to Mr. Smith, the one dated the 31st July, the other the 14th August, 1809-it refers also to one of the 15th, all of which go explicitly to show that the instructions in question were not known to Mr. Smith, and that Mr. Erskine at every pe- "You will find that in my correspondence with you, riod of time thought his instructions competent I have carefully avoided drawing conclusions that did to the arrangement. Sir, these papers ought to not necessarily follow from the premises advanced by have relieved Mr. Jackson's mind from every ves- me, and last of all should I think of uttering an insintige of a doubt, respecting this fact, if it were pos-uation, where I was unable to substantiate a fact. To sible that he could even before have thought so facts, such as I have become acquainted with them, I

After this admonition, made with dignified decision and moderation, let me turn your attention to Mr. Jackson's reply. It will be found in his letter to Mr. Smith of the 4th of November, page 72, of the printed documents, in the following words:

DECEMBER, 1809.

Conduct of the British Minister.

have scrupulously adhered, and in so doing I must continue, whenever the good faith of his Majesty's Government is called in question, to vindicate its honor and dignity, in the manner that appears to me best calculated for that purpose."

SENATE.

what prospect of benefit could there be to the United States, in proceeding with a negotiation conducted with such a spirit of hostility and superciliousness on the part of the British negotiator? Is there a gentleman whose highest senIt cannot have escaped your observation, sir, sibilities are not excited by this insolent conduct that the Executive Government, with a modera- of the British Minister? and whose judgment tion and forbearance almost peculiar to itself, is not convinced of the propriety of the conduct would not impose upon Mr. Jackson the pain of his own Government? And, sir, after all either of explanation or retraction. Notwith- these outrageous and premeditated insults, what standing his reiterated affronts, it made no de- is the measure proposed by the Executive in remand of either. It appeared only to desire to lation to this contumacious Minister? Why, throw out of the way these offensive insinuations. sir, the mildest in the whole vocabulary of exAnd how, sir, has it been requited for this moder-pedients. Simply to refuse to receive any furation and forbearance? Why, sir, instead of ther communications from him, and to request dropping a subject in which Mr. Jackson was his recall by his own Government; and in the so clearly in the wrong, he again renews it with mean time, to receive communications through still further aggravations. He tells Mr. Smith any other channel. Thus merely shielding itself that he had carefully avoided, in all his preceding from further insults, and manifesting a solicitude correspondence, drawing conclusions, that did not for friendly intercourse with Great Britain, which necessarily follow from premises advanced by must shield it from every imputation of insinhim; or uttering an insinuation, where he was cerity in its professions of friendly views in reunable to substantiate a fact. That he had scru-lation to that Government. Yes, sir, negotiation pulously adhered to such facts as he had become is still open, although in my judgment without acquainted with, and that he should continue to the smallest probability of success or advantage. do so, whenever the good faith of his Majesty's Upon the whole review of this part of the subject Government was called in question, to vindicate then, sir, is there a gentleman, who is not preits honor and dignity, in the manner he thought|pared to say, that in refusing to receive any furbest calculated for that purpose. ther communications from Mr. Jackson, the ExNow, sir, permit me to ask you, if the Execu-ecutive Government has manifested a just regard tive Government had gone on to receive any fur- to its own dignity and honor, as well as to the ther communications from Mr. Jackson after character and interests of the American people? these declarations, in what situation would the and can there be a gentleman of this Senate who American Secretary of State have been placed? is not prepared to pledge himself to stand by and when Mr. Jackson, in substance, here tells him, support the Executive Government in this rewith a superciliousness bordering on mental in- spect to the last extremity? Permit me now, fatuation, I have insulted you, I here repeat the sir, to call your attention to a still more aggrainsult, and now give you notice that I will con- vated conduct on the part of Mr. Jackson. I altinue to repeat it, whenever I may think proper, lude to his letter headed "Circular," dated 13th of during the whole course of our future nego- November, and published and circulated through tiations. For, sir, at the time of writing this let-the country. In all its essential parts it seems to ter, you will be pleased to remark, that there remained no doubt of the true meaning of the of fensive insinuations; because Mr. Smith had put an interpretation upon them in his letter of the 1st of November, which was plain and explicit, and which could not be misunderstood. Mr. That Mr. Jackson has seen with much regret, that Smith then tells Mr. Jackson, that his, Mr. Jack-facts, which it has been his duty to state in his official son's language, implied a knowledge on the part of correspondence, have been deemed by the American the American Government, that the instructions of his predecessor did not authorize the arrangement formed by him. That after the explicit and peremptory asseveration that this Government had no such knowledge, and that with such knowledge, no such arrangement would have been entered into, &c. such insinuations are inadmissible, &c. This interpretation of the meaning of Mr. Jackson's insinuations is not denied, and therefore admitted by Mr. Jackson; and with that admission he goes on superciliously to repeat them, and to declare that he will continue to do so in all future discussions, whenever he pleases.

Is there one single gentleman in the United States, with an American heart in his bosom, who could wish to see his Government and his country placed in so degrading a situation? And

be the same with the note of the same date delivered to Mr. Smith by Mr. Oakley at the request of Mr. Jackson, in the following wordsand will be found in the printed documents pages 74, 75—

Government to afford a sufficient motive for breaking off an important negotiation, and for putting an end to all communication whatever with the Minister charged by his Sovereign with that negotiation, so interesting to both nations, and on one point of which an answer has not even been returned to an official and written overture.

"One of the facts alluded to has been admitted by the Secretary of State himself, in his letter of the 19th substance of Mr. Erskine's original instructions were October, viz: that the three conditions forming the submitted to him by that gentleman. The other, viz: that that instruction is the only one in which the conditions were prescribed to Mr. Erskine for the conclusion of an arrangement on the matter to which it related, is known to Mr. Jackson by the instructions which he has himself received.

"In stating these facts and in adhering to them, as his duty imperiously enjoined him to do, Mr. Jackson

Conduct of the British Minister.

I wish it also understood, sir, that I consider "And that by the capture of Martinique, in addition the insult to consist in the appeal itself, in the to that of almost all the colonies of the enemies of publication and circulation of the paper, without Great Britain, together with the blockade of Guadaany reference to the question of the truth or false-loupe, the extent to which the liberty of commerce with hood of the facts stated as the grounds of the appeal; but, sir, as an aggravation in the case, the facts stated are manifestly false or fallacious, and in some respects, I believe both false and fallacious As an incontestible evidence of this, sir, Iciple to maintain." beg your attention to the first paragraph of this impudent appeal, which has been already read, in the following words:

But again, sir, let us see in what manner this negotiation was to be conducted, and what were the powers of Mr. Jackson in relation to it. To do this, sir, with the most perfect fairness and What, sir, is the evident design of Mr. Jackson impartiality, let me present the subject in Mr. in thus presenting this complaint to the people Jackson's own words. His first annunciation will against their own Govarnment? Why, sir, to be found in page 63, of the printed documents: impress them with a belief that he really was "Beyond this point of explanation which was supengaged in an important negotiation, bighly inter-posed to have been attained, but which is now given esting both to the United States and Great Brit- by the present letter in the form understood to be most

Conduct of the British Minister.

clusion of an arrangement on the matter to which it I am apprized that Mr. Jackson places this sub-related, is known to Mr. Jackson by the instructions ject upon a ground somewhat different in his which he has himself received." next letter; or, at least, it would appear so if that letter were taken by itself; but, in fact, I apprehend there is no material difference in the two statements. Let me, however, call your attention to his own words, which will be found in page 71, of the printed documents. In addressing Mr. Smith, Mr. Jackson says:

"I am surprised at the transition by which it appears to you that this part of the subject is connected with the authority empowering me to negotiate with "In my letter of the 19th ultimo, I stated to you you. It will not, I dare say, have escaped your recol- that the declaration in your letter of the 11th, that the lection that I informed you, at a very early period of despatch from Mr. Canning to Mr. Erskine, of the 23d our communications, that, in addition to the usual of January, was the only despatch by which the concredential letter, His Majesty had been pleased to in-ditions were prescribed to Mr. Erskine for the concluvest me with a full power, under the great seal of his Kingdom, for the express purpose of concluding a treaty or convention.”