part, in informing the Briti h Commissioners, that we were not instructed on the subjects of dian pacification or boundary, and of fisheries; nor did it seem probable, although

point as one which they were particularly desirous of discussing; but that as it had oc cupied so prominent a place in the disputes between the two countries, it necessarily attracted notice, and was considered as a sub-neither of these points had been stated with ject which would come under discussion. 2. The Indian Allies of Great Britain to be included in the paciiration, and a definite boundary to be settled for their territory.

"The British Commissioners stated, that an arrangement upon this point was a sine qua non; that they were not authorised to conclude a treaty of peace which did not embrace the Indians as Allies of his Britannic Majesty and that the establishment of a definite boundary of the Indian territory was necessary to secure a permanent peace, not only with the Indians, but also between the United States and Great Britain.

sufficient precision in that first verbal conference, that they could be admitted in any shape. We did not wish, however, to prejudge the result, or by any hasty proceeding abruptly to break off the negociation. It was not impossible that, on the subject of the Indians, the British Government had received erroneous impressions from the traders in Canada, which our representations might remove; and it appeared, at all events, important to ascertain distinctly the precise iutentions of Great Britain on both points. We therefore thought it advisable to invite the British Commissioners to a general conversi. tion on all the points: stating to them, at the same time, our want of instructions on 10 of them, and holding out no expectation of the probability of our agreeing to any article respecting them. At our meeting on the ensuing day we informed the British Commissioners, that upon the first and third points proposed by them we were provided with instructions, and we presented as further subjects considered by our Government as suitCom-able for discussion.

"3. A revision of the boundry line between the United States and the adjacent British Colonies.

"Ist. A definition of blockade ; and as far as might be mutually agreed, of other neutral and belligerent rights.

"2d. Claims of indemnity in certain cases of capture and seizure.

"With respect to this point, they expressly disclaimed any intention on the part of their Government to acquire an increase of territory, aud represented the proposed revision as intended merely for the purpose of preventing uncertainty and dispute. "After having stated these three points, as subjects of discussion, the British missioners added, that before they desired any answer from us. they felt it incumbent upon them to declare, that the British Goverament did not deny the right of the Americans to the fisheries generally, or in the "We then stated that the two subjects, 1st (pen seas; but that the privileges, formerly of Indian pacification, and boundary; and, granted by treaty to the United States, of 2d, of fisheries,were not embraced by our infishing within the limits of the British juris-structions.-We observed, that as these points diction, and of landing and drying fish on had not been heretofore the grounds of any the shores of the British territories, would controversy between the Government of not be renewed without an equivalent. The Great Britain and that of the United States, extent of what was considered by them as and had not been alluded to by Lord Casilewaters peculiarly British, was not stated. reagh, in his letter proposing the negociation, From the manner in which they brought this it could not be expected that they should subject into view, they seemed to wish us to have been anticipated, and made the subject understand that they were not anxious that of instructions by our Government: that it it should be discussed, and that they only in- was natural to be supposed that our instructended to give us notice that these privilegestions were confined to those subjects upon had ceased to exist, and would not be again | granted without an equivalent, nor unless we thought proper to provide expressly in the treaty of peace for their renewal.

which differences between the two countries were known to exist; and that the proposition to define, in a treaty between the United States and Great Britain, the boundary of "The British Commissioners having stated, the Indian possessions within our territories that these were all the subjects which they was new and without example. No such intended to bring forward or to suggest, re provisions had been inserted in the Treaty of quested to be informed, whether we were in- Peace in 1788, nor in any other treaty be structed to enter into negociation on these tween the two countries--no such provision several points? and whether there was any had, to our knowledge, ever been inserted in amongst these which we thought it unneces any treaty made by Great Britain or any other sary to bring into the negociation? and they European power in relation to the same de desired us to state, on our part, such other scription of people, existing under like cir· subjects as we might intend to propose for cumstances. We would say, however, that discussion in the course of the negociation. it would not be doubted, that peace with the The meeting was then adjourned to the next Indians would certainly follow a peace with day, in order to afford as the opportunity of Great Britain that we had information that consultation amongst ourselves, before we Commissioners had already been appointed gave au auswer... In the course of the even- to treat with them; that a treaty to that ef ing of the same day, we received your let-fect might, perhaps, have been already conters of the 25th and 27th of June. | claded—and that the United States having "There could be no hesitation, on our no interest, nor any motive, to continue à

separate war against the todians, there could never be a moment when our Government would not make peace with them.

more liberal and humane towards the Indigins than that pursued by the United states; that our object had been, by all practicable nieans, to introduce civilization amongst them; that their possessions were secured to them by well-defined boundaries; that their persons, lands, and other property, were now more effectually protected against violence or frauds from any quarter, than they had been under any former Government; that even our citizens were not allowed to purchase their lands; that when they gave up their, title to any portion of their country to the United States, it was by voluntary treaty with our Government, who gave them a fatisfactory equivalent; and that through thes means the United States had succeeded in preserving, since the Treaty of Grenville, of 1795, an uninterrupted peace of 16 years with all the Indian tribes-a period of tran quillity much longer than they were known to have enjoyed heretofore.

"We then expressed our wish to receive from the British Commissioners a statement of the views and objects of Great Britain | upon all the points, and our willingness to discuss them all, in order that, even if no arrangement should be agreed on, upon the points not included in our instructions, the Government of the United States might be possessed of the entire and precise intentions of that of Great Britain respecting these points, and that the British Government might be fully informed of the objections on the part of the United States to any such arrangement. In auswer to our remark, that these points had not been alluded to by Lord Castlereagh, in his letter proposing the nego ciation, it was said that it could not be expected that in a letter, merely intended to invite a negociation, he should enumerate the topics of discussion, or state the preten "It was then expressly stated on our part, sions of his Government, since these would that the propositions resp cting the Indians depend upon ulterior events, and might was not distinctly understood. We asked, arise out of a subsequent state of things. In whether the pacification, and the settlement reply to our observation, that the proposed of a boundary for them were both made a stipulation of an Indian boundary was with- sine qua non? Which was answered in the out example in the practice of European na- affirmative. The question was then asked tions, it was asserted, that the Indians must the British Commissioners, whether the proin some sort be considered as an independent posed Indian boundary was intended to prepeople, since treaties were made with them,clude the United States from the right of both by Great Britain and by the United States, upon which we pointed out the obvious and important difference between the treaties we might make with the Indians, living in our territory, and such a treaty as was proposed to be made, respecting them, with a foreign power, who had solem ly acknowledged the territory on which they resided to be part of the United States.

purchasing by treaty from the Indians, without the consent of Great Britain, lands lying, beyond that boundary? And as a restriction upon the Indians from selling, by amicable treaties, lands to the United States, as had, been hitherto practised?-To this questioa, it was first answered by one of the Commis sioners, that the indiaus would not be res tricted from selling their lands, but that the "We were then asked by the British Com- United States would be restricted from purmissioners whether, in case they should enter chasing them; and on reflection, another of farther upon the discussion of the several the Commissioners stated. that it was in points which had been stated, we could expect tended that the Indian territories should be that it would terminate by some provisional a barrier between the British dominions and arrangement on the points on which we had no those of the United States; that both Great instructions, particularly on that respecting Britain and the United States should be rethe Indians, which arrangement would be sub-stricted from purchasing their lands; but ject to the ratification of our Government? We answered, that before the subjects were distinctly understood, and the objects in view more precisely disclosed, we could not decide whether it would be possible to form any satisfactory article on the subject; nor pledge ourselves as to the exercise of a discretion under our powers, even with respect to a provisional agreement. We added, that as we should deeply deplore a rupture of the negociation on any point, it was our anxious desire to employ all possible means to avert an event so serious in its consequences; and that we had not been without hopes that a discussion might correct the effect of any erroneous information which the British Government might have received on the subject, which they had proposed as a preliminary basis. We took this opportunity to remark, that no nation observed a policy

that the Indians might sell them to a third party. The proposition respecting Indian boundary, thus explained and connected with the right of sovereignty ascribed to the. Indians over the country, amounted to nothing less than a deinand of the absolute cession of the rights both of sovereignty and of spil. We cannot abstain from remarking to you, that the subject (of Indian boundary) was indistinctly stated, when first proposed, and that the explanations were at first obscure, and always given with reluctance.And it was declared from the first moment to be a sine qua non, roudering any dis cussion unprofitable, until it was admitted as a basis. Knowing that we had no power to cede to the Indians any part of our territory, we thought it unnecessary to ask, what probably would not have been, answered till the principle was ad

the line of demarkation of the Indian coun

try was proposed to be established.ee United States, and exposed to invasion, it was necessary, for its security, that Great British Commissioners after having repeated Britain should require that the United States that their instructions on the subject of the should hereafter keep no armed naval force Indians were peremptory, stated, that unless on the Western Lakes, from Lake Ontario to we could give some assurance, that our Lake Superior, both inclusive; that they powers would allow us to make at least a should not erect any fortified or military provisional arrangement on the subject, post or establishment on the shores of those any further discussion would be fruitless, Lakes; and that they should not maintain and that they must consult their own Go- those which were already existing. This vernment on this state of things. They pro- must, they said, be considered as a moderate posed accordingly a suspension of the con-demand, since Great Britain, if she had not ferences, until they should have received an answer, it being understood that each party might call a meeting whenever they had any proposition to submit. They dispatched a special messenger the same evening, and we are now waiting for the result.

disclaimed the intention of any increase of territory, might, with propriety, have asked a cession of the adjacent American shores. The commercial navigation and intercourse would be left on the same footing as heretofore. It was expressly stated (in answer to a question we asked), that Great Britain was to retain the right of having an armed naval force on those Lakes, and of bolding military posts and establishments on their shores.

"2. The boundary line west of Lake Superior, and thence to the Mississippi, to be revised; and the Treaty right of Great Britain to the navigation of the Mississippi to be continued. When asked, whether they did not mean the line from the Lake of the Woods to the Mississippi, the British Commissioners repeated that they meant the line from Lake Superior to that river.

"Before the proposed adjournment took place, it was agreed that there should be a protocol of the conferences; that a statement should for that purpose be drawn up by each party, and that we should meet the next day to compare the statements.-We accordingly met again on Wednesday the 10th instant, and ultimately agreed upon what should constitute the protocol of the conferences. A copy of this instrument we have the honour to transmit with this dispatch and we also enclose a copy of the statement originally drawn up on our part, for the purpose of making known to you the passages to which the British Commissioners objected. Their objection to some of the passages was, that they appeared to be argumentative, and that the object of the protocol was to contain a mere statement of facts. They, however, objected to the insertion of the answer which they had given to our question respecting the effect of the proposed Indian boundary; but they agreed to au alteration of their original proposition "We asked whether the statement made, on that subject, which renders it much more respecting the proposed revision of the explicit than as stated, either in the first boundary line between the United States and conference, or in the proposed draught of the dominions of Great Britain, embraced all the protocol. They also objected to the in the objects she meant to bring forward for sertion of the fact, that they had proposed discussion, and what were particularly her to adjourn the conferences until they could views with respect to Moose Island, and such obtain further instructions from their Go-other Islands in the Bay of Passamaquoddy, vernment. The return of their messenger may, perhaps, disclose the motive of their reluctance in that respect. We have the ho, nour to be, very respectfully, Sir, your humble and obedient servants,

J. A.

(Signed) JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, BAYARD, H. CLAY, JONA RUSSELL." In a letter from Messrs. Adam, Bayard, Clay, Russel, and Galatin, dated from Gheat, on the 19th August, 1814, the British Commissioners, in a conference on that day, explain the views of the British Government as follows:

"3. A direct communication from Halifax and the province of New Brunswick to Queber, to be secured to Great Britain. In answer to our question, in what manner this was to be effected, we are told, that it must be done by a cession to Great Britain of that portion of the district of Maine (in the state of Massachusetts) which intervenes between New Brunswick and Quebec, and prevents that direct communication.

as had been in our possession till the present war, but had been lately captured? We were answered, that those Islands, belonging of right to Great Britain (as much so, one of the Commissioners said, as Northamptonshire,) they would certainly be kept by her, and were not even supposed to be an object of discussion.

"We need hardly say that the demands of Great Britain will receive from us an unanimous and decided negative. We do not "1st, Experience had proved that the deem it necessary to detain the Johu Adams joint possession of the Lakes, and a right for the purpose of transmitting to you the common to both nations, to keep up a naval official notes which may pass on the subject force on them, necessarily produced co- and close the negociation. And we have sions, and rendered peace insecure. As felt it our duty immediately to apprise you, Great Britain could not be supposed to ex-by this hasty but correct sketch of our last pect to make conquests in that quarter, and conference, there is not, at present, any hope as that province was essentially weaker than prace. (Signed as above.)

of

Printed and Published by J. MORTON, 94, Strand.

VOL. XXVI. No. 23.] LONDON, SATURDAY, DEC. 3, 1814. [Price 1s.

705]

LETTER II.

TO THE EARL OF LIVERPOOL,

ON THE AMERICAN WAR.

-[706

(where the war was most opposed) for the defence of the sea-coast. At Boston, even (the seat of the Cossack Priesthood) every preparation was made for defence; and the Bostonian Cossack newspapers announce, that they bid defiance to any force that may be brought against that city, or the

State of Massachusetts.

Sept. 26. At Baltimore grand funeral processions at the interment of certain volunteers, who, it is said, lost their lives "in defence of the city and of their coun"try's rights."

66

Botley, 27th Nov. 1814. MY LORD,-In my last, I gave you my reasons for believing, that we ought, in this contest, to place no reliance on the expected Separation of the States of the American Republic. The recent intelligence from that country tends strongly to confirm this opinion. But, before I come to speak more particularly upon this point, I think it may be useful to state the sub- Sept. 28. The citizens of New York stance of the most interesting parts of this continued their daily labours on the fortirecent intelligence, in the order in which fications for the defence of that important that intelligence presents itself. For, as place.- Same date, the following article to the partial and garbled extracts, pub-from Boston :- "THE STRANGER.-Of lished by the London newspapers, they are "this valuable prize, a letter from Salem only calculated, and, indeed, only intended," adds,-A passenger in the Stranger to cheat this nation. It must be observed, states, that she was one of four ships however, that none but papers on the "ladened with ordnance stores, which Federal, or Noblesse, side appear, since the "sailed from England, under convoy of a commencement of the war, to reach this frigate; that on the Banks of Newfoundcountry; which is not at all wonderful, if" land they were separated in a gale and we consider, that the channels are all now "two of them foundered, and the crews closed, except to the English Government, were taken off by the Stranger and the or the English merchants. Halifax is the "other ship, which two afterwards sepagreat channel; our ships of war and" rated that the Stranger has on board packets are the bearers. It is to be ex-" sixty-six 24-pounders, with carriages, pected, therefore, that we shall never, ex- "and apparatus complete, expressly intendcept by mere accident, see a newspaper "ed for Sir James Yeo's new ship building hostile to our views. Your Lordship will" at Kingston; and a great quantity of bear in mind, that the expedition to the City of Washington destroyed, very completely, the printing presses and types of" Messrs. Gales and Seaton, who were charged with hostility to our cause. How far this was consistent with the usages of war amongst civilized nations I know not; but, if our officers were so attentive to the press in this instance, it is not to be supposed, that they would be negligent in other instances; it is not to be supposed, that they would be the bearers, or suffer any body else to be the bearer, of Republican newspapers. The summary of intelli-a as follows: gence Sept. 21. Troops were pouring in from the back parts of the Eastern States

is

:

blankets, soldiers clothing, shot, shells, Congreve rockets, blue lights, muskets, and a variety of other articles, for the use of the army in Canada. The "Stranger commenced unlading yesterday, "and no doubt by this time every article "of her important cargo is safely deposited "in a place of security.--The loss of the

66

Stranger, and the two ships foundered, "will be a very serious one to the enemy, "and which cannot very well be remedied "till the spring."

Sept. 29.-The Governor of Vermont Federalist), issues a proclamation, in which is the following pass ge Where

66

as it appears, that the war, in which our country is unfortunately engaged, has asZ

66

"sumed an entirely different character, "since its first commencement, and has "become almost exclusively defensive, and "is prosecuted by the enemy with a spirit, unexampled during pending negociations "for peace, which leaves no prospect of "safety but in a manly and united deter"mination to meet invasion at every point, "and expel the invader.-And, whereas, "notwithstanding the signal and glorious "naval victory lately achieved by our gal"lant Commodore M'Donough and his "brave officers and seamen, over a superior "British naval force, on Lake Champlain; "and a like discomfiture of the enemy's "whole land force, concentrated at Platts

66

66

66

"3. The President of the United States.

"4. The Congress of the United States-May "they possess the wisdom to discern, and the energy to pursue, the true and permanent in"terests of their country.

66

5. Our Commissioners at Ghent-May they "return freighted with the blessings of peace. "6. The memory of Washington.

7. The heroes and statesmen of the Revolu "tion-May our gratitude for their services be "as immortal as their fame.

8. Our Navy-Both hemispheres have been "illuminated with its ascending glory. "9. The Governor of the State of New York.

10. Party-spirit-May it be banished from our Land-We have now but two parties, our

country, and its invading enemies.

"11. Our brave army on the Niagara frontier

-It has covered itself with glory - It has the "rich merit of having redeemed our national "character.

burgh, by General Macomb's small but "valiant band of regular troops, aided and powerfully supported by our patriotic, "virtuous, and brave volunteers, who flew "to meet the invader with an alertness and spirit, unexampled in this or any other 12. Commodore McDonough-The ever me country, it is made known to me, that the "morable and glorious victory of the 11th Sep"British army is still on the frontier of our "tember, achieved by his squadron over a s "sister State, collecting and concentrating"perior British force in men and guns, has im "a powerful force, indicating further opera"tions of aggression.-And, whereas, the "conflict has become a common, and not

66

a party concern, the time has now ar"rived when all degrading party distinc"tions and animosities, however we may "have differed respecting the policy of de"claring, or the mode of prosecuting the. war, ought to be laid aside; that 66 heart may be stimulated, and every arm nerved, for the protection of our common country, our liberty, our altars, and our 86 firesides; in defence of which we may, "with a humble confidence, look to Hea

66

66

ven for assistance and protection."

every

Same Date. Account of a dinner at Albany. These are the signs of the feelings of the people of America. They are more worthy of attention than 50,000 empty harangues on either side:-" On Monday "the 19th inst. a Public Dinner was given by the citizens of this city to Majors General Scott and Gaines, and their "respective suites. The company was very numerous, and consisted of the most "respectable citizens of this place, without "distinction of party. The Hon. John "Taylor, Lt. Gov. Presided--and the "Hon. P. S. Van Rensselaer, the Mayor, "was Vice President.--The following "Toasts were drank on the occasion:"1. Our soil in its defence every good and ants, 4 energies.

66

brave m

mortalised him and his brave men –The State "of New York owes him peculiar gratitude, he "has saved our northern frontier from pillage "and devastation.

“13. Major-General Brown-His military "skill and valour entitles him to the plaudits of "his country.

"14. Major-General Porter--The gallant "leader of the New York State Volunteers.

"15. Those heroes who have fallen in battle “in defending our rights-they have sealed with "their blood their devotion to their country"their memories are enshrined in our heart. "16. The memory of George Clinton. "17. The memory of Alexander Hamilton. "The following volunteer toasts were given: "By Major-General Scott--The City of "Albany, in munificence and public spirit, "worthy to be the metropolis of the first State in "the Union.