Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

18th o: Location and Improvement of Indians.—Nashville Bar. [H. of R. & Sen.

[ocr errors]

RECAPITULATION. states and reaarronies. | Whole num- | Whole quantit boi...] oil.’ ItemiAitks. Achies. Maine, - - - 956 92,260 Massachusetts, - - 750 Rhode Island, - - 420 3,000 Connecticut, - - 400 4,300 New York, - e. - 5,143 246,675 Virginia, - - - 47 27,000 South Carolina, - - 450 144,000 Ohio, - - - 2,350 409,501 The o o: embraces those * the coun- - - - - - try West of Lake Michigan, as well as those in the Michigan Territory, 28,316 7,057,920 peninsula of Michigan; the information being such Las not to admit of a separate enumeration. nd. - - Some of the Indians claiming lands in these states o - 11,579 $ 10,104,000 || 2 re. partly in both ; the particular number in nois, - - - & 5,314,560. - - - ***** either cannot therefore be stated. Georgia, . - - s 9,537,920 [he Indians claiming lands in these states, do not Alabama, - - 53.625 7,272,576 all reside in any one of then, except the ChickaTennessee, - - - 3. 1,055,680 s saws; and it cannot therefore be stated what is the Mississippi, - - - J U. 15,705,000 particular number residing in each state. f lorida Territory, - - 5,000 4,032,640 Louisiana, - - - 1,313 !----- s The Osages and Piankeshaws are scattered in MisMissouri, - - - 18 917 2,782,726 |..} souri and Arkansas, and most of the former beyond Arkansas Territory, - ; - 13,612,560 Y the limits of either; it cannot therefore be stated U.what is the particular number of Indians in either. 129,266 77,402,318

[merged small][ocr errors]

MEMORIAL

of the Members of the Bar of Nashville, in the State of Tennessee.—Jan. 4, 1825.

** Honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of .1merica, in Congress assembled.

The members of the Bar of Nashville, in the state of onnessee, beg leave, respectfully, to submit to your honorable body, a brief statement, showing the evils exorienced by the Western States, in consequence of the *ctive organization of the Federal Judiciary system. In the nine western States, there is only one Circuit *ge; and, of course, only one member of the SuPoeme Court of the United States. Seven of those states ** at this time, entirely excluded from all the benefits to be derived from the presence and learning of a Judge of the Supreme Court. If this be a privation, followed }*rious injuries to the states in that situation, it is time ** a remedy should be applied by the National Legiso or its application be clearly shown to be impracCable. When the extensive grant of judicial power was made y the Constitution, to the Federal Government, it beone the duty of that Government to provide for the *ercise of those powers in a mode equal in its opera* and by courts fully competent, by their ability, learning, and knowledge of the laws which they were to administer. At present, there exists a great inequality

in the exercise of this power—in states where there is comparatively, little or no business, a Judge of the Supreme Court is associated in the administration of justice with the District Judge. The questions presented are decided by a court which, almost, ensures correctness and satisfaction; or, if the question is difficult, and worthy of a more solemn examination, by a division of opinion in the court it may be brought before the Supreme Tribunal, when the amount in controversy, or the situation of the litigants, would not otherwise allow this to be done. In other states, where the dockets are crowded with business, where property, to an immense amount, is in dispute, and where questions of the greatest moment, to the parties and the community, are to be decided, the courts are, sonetimes, as we have been informed, composed only of a District Judge, of inferior talents, whose judgment, no matter how palpably erroneous, if the amount is under two thousand dollars, is irreversible, beyond examination, and carries with it disaster and utter ruin to the suitor; and if the amount is such as allows of a writ of error, it is too often impossible for the injured party, either from poverty or want of friends, to purchase the expensive and distant remedy. But, if it should be a criminal prosecution, by an error" in which the character, or liberty, or property, or life of the citizen is to be affected, then he must bow in submission to the erroneous judgment of a single Judge. And if, instead of imbecility, the District Judge is endowed with great talents and learning, yet, there can be no division of opinion, which is of such infinite imporo

18th CoNGREss, 2d SEssion.

ance in criminal causes, and in those where no writ of error is allowed; and, in the decisions of all questions, there is not so great a probability of correctness as if he was assisted by another Judge of equal or superior ability. If this state of things does not constitute a great inequality, and even injustice, in the mode of exercising and distributing the judicial powers of the Union, it is hardly possible to suppose any case which would constitute this degree of inequality and injustice. Great and ruinous as are the evils which arise from this source, they are not so alarming in principle, or so injurious in practice, as those which spring from the incompetency of the present Supreme Court to execute the Judicial powers confided to the General Government, in the mode which the spirit of the Constitution prescribes, and which the safety and welfare of the citizens of the several states of the Union demand. This grant of judicial power was to be exercised over two great, but entirely distinct, departments—the one regarding the administration of the Constitution and laws of the United States; the other, which is, at least, of equal importance, regarded the administration of the laws of the several states. When this transfer of power was made, it was not intended, by the states, that any change should, thereby, be effected in their laws; but, it was expected that those laws, whether common or statute, should be administered in their spirit and purity; and, upon receiving this power, it became the imperative duty of Congress to organize the Courts of the United States in such a manner, and upon such principles, as would ensure a just, and enlightened, and substantial discharge of a trust, so extensive and important. That such is the duty of the United States none will deny. What is then necessary to its performance, and what defects in this organization will constitute such a dereliction of this duty, as to form a just and rational ground of complaint * The object to be attained is the impartial administration of justice, according to the state laws. To effect this, it is not only necessary that the Judiciary Tribunal be honest and enlightened, but, that it have, also, an intimate and accurate acquaintance with the common law of the state; by which we mean the common law of England, or, the Civil law, as modified by the habits of the people, and the situation of the country; the statute laws of the states, with their history, causes, construction, and application, and the judicial decisious of the state courts; all of which constitute the laws which the courts of the Union are to observe as their rule of decision; and, upon the understanding and observation of which, depend the rights and welfare of the citizens, and the security of their property. Are the Courts of the United States so constituted, as to ensure, to a reasonable extent, the proper and safe exercise of this great trust and power The negative answer to this question, is most obviously and most deplorably true. What Judge on the bench of the Supreme Court has an accurate knowledge of the laws of Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Illinois, or Tennessee Not one—it is quite impossible that any one of them should have, situated as at present they are. We know, we every day feel and we do most deeply regret, their entire ignorance of the laws of Tennessee; and thiswe say,not in derogation of that very able and enlightened Court, for which we feel the highest respect, but, to show the imperfections of the present system, and attribute them to their proper cause. It is impossible that each of the Judges can acquire such a minute acquaintance with the laws of every one of the twentyfour distinct, sovereign states, all differing in their codes, so as to be competent to determine, with ability and satisfaction, the causes dependent on those codes. To acquire an adequate knowledge of the state laws, the Judge must devote much of his time to their study ; he must be, acquainted with the country and its citizens;

[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors]

he must know the situation of their land titles; he must hear their legal principles and their peculiar systems of jurisprudence examined and discussed by the resident lawyers, by men to whom those principles and systems are familiar, who can correct any erroneous opinions which may exist in regard to any part of them. His mind must be ion the fountain head. This can only be done by the Judge holding the courtsin the several states, and applying his mind, exclusively, to at quiring a knowledge of the laws of the two or three states, in the courts of which he may preside. A man of vigo rous mind, thus situated, and thus employed, will carry into the Supreme Tribunal of the Nation a competent knowledge of the laws which are to govern their exami nation and decisions; and if the appeal is to correct an error committed by himself, he bears with him the light which will enable his associates to detect such error, and rectify what was, probably, a mistake occasioned by the hurry of trial, which will sometimes occur to the ablest men. The peculiarity of the local laws of some of the Wes. ern states, particularly of Kentucky and Tennessee, in relation to their land titles, renders it necessary that there should be two, or more, Judges in the Supreme Court of the United States, from the Western country. These systems of law are not the same in Kentuckyo in Tennessee, though between them there is some to semblance; but, in many parts of these systems, no analogy exists to the doctrines of the common law; and a Judge may be an excellent lawyer, endowed with the most exalted talents, and yet not competent to deco or even comprehend, many questions arising in land: controversies from these states. Able counsel may be employed to argue these causes, who are, themselves perfectly conversant with their local laws, yet, it is in practicable, in an argument of counsel, to lay down the first rudiments and principles, and to inform, suffciently, the minds of Judges who are strangers to ** tem of laws, which is, in reality, complicated, and which to them, would appear technical and inconsistent. No one will deny, that uniformity of decision in the Supreo Federal and State Tribunals, upon questions involvino titles to land, is of the greatest importance; and h" great would be the confusion and distress that would to sue from a difference of opinion and decision between those tribunals, upon questions of that nature. Your memorialists respectfully represent, that, al though by the act of 1807, the Circuit Court system" extended to Tennessee, yet, in fact and in practice, much of the time, during the interval, from that per to the present, the Circuit Courts have not been.” tended by a Judge of the Supreme Court of the Unio States. The seventh circuit, consisting of Kentuo Ohio, and Tennessee, is too large for the duties of it!” be devolved on one man; and it was absolutely impo ble for the Judge, assigned to this circuit, to fulfil letter of the law, designating his duties. The lo". quired the court to be held once a year in the dist” of West Tennessee, and the Judge of the Suproo Court, since 1807, has attended but ten couts for?" district, little more than one half the number; and, f the situation of the District Judge, in relationship toth parties, his interest in the event of the questions pending, and other causes, great delay and increas: expense have been the consequence; and no power ha existed to have many questions of importance and 4. culty revised in the Supreme Court, where the ano" in controversy was under two thousand dollars. An ad ditional cause of complaint, in Tennessee, now exists that, at the last session of Congress, the time of o the Circuit Court of the United States for the distrio Ohio, was made the same as that of its session in Nao ville. o

[ocr errors]

bably from mistake; it will not, we hope, be o: to a wish, on the part of the members of Congress fro

[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]

Memorial of the Washville Bar.—Convention with Russia. [Sen.& H. of R.

18th CoNGREss, R 2d Session. 5

Tennessee, to dispense, altogether, with the Circuit Court. This was far from their intention. If the present state of things remains, either Ohio or this state will be deprived of the benefit of the attendance of a Judge of the Supreme Court. But, arranged as the Courts were before the last Congress, the Judge of the Sev. enth Circuit never had it in his power to remain at Nashville during a whole session. He has always been necessarily called off before the end of the term, to hold court at some other place; which circumstance, alone, has been productive of great inconvenience and delay. The Circuit Court, for this district, commonly sits from six to eight weeks; and it is believed, that no possible arrangement of the sessions of the court, under the present system, can prevent an interference, so as not, necessarily, to deprive one or more circuits of the benefits ofa Judge of the Supreme Court. To show to your honorable body the situation of the business in the Circuit Court for the district of West Tennessee, the following statement is submitted with regard to the number of suits depending therein: On the trial docket of said court, in i819, there were one hundred and seventy suits ; in 1820, there were one hundred and fifty-two; in 1821, there were two hundred and two; in 1822, there were one hundred and fortyeight; in 1823, one hundred and eighty-five ; and in 1824, one hundred and sixty-one. The most of these suits were of importance, either as to amount or in printiple, Many of them involve difficult questions in law requity, upon the decision of which, depend large and Faluable tracts of land, and, sometimes, the whole states of individuals. The above number of suits is not he annual product of each year—they have been accunulating from time to time—have been sometimes coninued for the want of a competent court, at others beause they were not reached, until some of them are lder than the professional career of almost every man at his bar. The delay of justice is almost equivalent to ls denial; and when the extent of this district, and the fistance from which witnesses are summoned, are taken to view, it will be seen that the expense of protracted tigation must be ruinous. No method occurs to us, hat will have a tendency to prevent the highly injuriusand fatal consequences which we have endeavored point out, but a change or reformation in the judiciasystem, or in the number of Judges; and to attain is end, we have made this appeal to the National egislature. Upon the most mature consideration that we have ten able to give to the subject, we think the most aceptable plan would be, to form new additional circuits the Western country, and to appoint three Circuit idges, who shall likewise be Associate Justices of the upreme Court of the United States. Your memorialists cannot perceive the force of the obotion which has been urged against this plan, that ten ill be too great a number of Judges for the Supreme ourt of the United States. In England, no practical inonvenience is found from having twelve, or, in truth, cluding the Lord Chancellor, thirteen Judges for the ocision of cases in a court of last resort; and we conently refer to the results of experience in that coun* No good reason can be given why ten Judges can*transact business with equal ease, celerity, and abilias seven; and should it so happen that, upon ques* of great importance, an equal division of opinions ould exist, in all probability, it would be better for the *munity that such question should remain undecided, "that the cause be decided by an affirmation of the *ment of the court below. It may also be said, that **ourt, as at present constituted, cannot transact the *ness on the docket of the Supreme Court, and that oasing the number of Judges will not obviate, but *her add to, this difficulty. why is not the business

"transacted? Because the Judges are compelled to

[ocr errors]

attend their circuits, in the different states, which are held, we believe, twice a year in every state and district in the Union, except in Tennessee. In that state, owing to its division into two districts, wholly unconnected with each other, so far as relates to the Federal Court, as much as if they were in different states, there is but one Circuit Court held in a year, for the transaction of business. In the Circuit Courts of the United States, held in almost every state of the Union, perhaps in all but three or four, the business on the dockets can be, and is, completed in four or five days. Were the Circuit Courts held in each state or district but once a year, this would enable the Judges of the Supreme Court to hold their sessions for a much longer period of time, and complete the business before them. The inconvenience of having but one Circuit Court in a year, would be much less than that arising from the great delay, which now exists, in the disposition of the causes in the Supreme Court. The practical effect of the present system, both as to the Supreme and Circuit Courts, is, that the causes of the least importance, and where the amount in controversy is small, are now immediately disposed of, and, others are delayed, from year to year, without argument or decision. We respectfully submit these our sentiments and views, hoping that they will be received by you in that spirit which ought to characterise an American Congress; and we trust that your enlightened body will remove the numerous inconveniences and great evils which Tennessee, in common with the other Western states, now suffers, from the organization of the present judicial system of the United States. G. W. CAMPBELL, Chairman. FEL1x Gnu NDY, Secretary. MESSAGE From the President of the United States, transmitting a copy of the Convention between the United States and the Emperor of Russia. January 21, 1825. To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States: I communicate, here with, to both Houses of Congress, copies of the Convention between the United States and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, concluded at St. Petersburg on the 5th (17th) of April last; which has been duly ratified on both sides, and the ratifications of which were exchanged on the 11th instant. JAMES MONROE. Washington, 18th January, 1825.

By the President of the United states of America.

A PROCLA MATION.

Whereas a Convention between the United States of America and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, was concluded and signed at St. Petersburg, on the 5th (17th) day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four; which Convention, as translated from the French language, is, word for word, as follows: In the name of the most Holy and Indivisible Trinity

The President of the United States of America and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, wishing to cement the bonds of amity which unite them, and to secure between them the invariable maintenance of a perfect concord, , by means of the present Convention, have named, as their Plenipotentiaries, to this effect, to wit: The President of the United States of America, Hsnar Minnleton, a citizen of said States, and their Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary near his Imperial Majesty; and His Ma:

jesty the Emperor of all the Russias, his beioved and

faithful chanies Robent Count of Nesselhops, actual

[ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Privy Counsellor, Member of the Council of State, Secretary of State directing the administration of Foreign Affairs, actual Chamberlain, Knight of the order of St. Alexander Nevsky, Grand Cross of the order of St. Wladimir of the first class, Knight of that of the White Eagle of Poland, Grand Cross of the order of St.Stephen of Hungary, Knight of the orders of the Holy Ghost and of St. Michael, and Grand Cross of the Legion of Honor of France, Knight Grand Cross of the orders of the Black and of the Red Eagle of Prussia, of the Annunciation of Sardinia, of Charles III. of Spain, of St. Ferdinand and of Merit of Naples, of the Elephant of Denmark, of the Polar Star of Sweden, of the Crown of Wirtemberg, of the Guelphs of Hanover, of the Belgic Lion, of Fidelity of Baden, and of St. Constantine of Parma; and Preune de Polerica, actual Counsellor of State, Knight of the order of St. Anne of the first class, and Grand Cross of the order of St. Wladimir of the second ; who, after having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon, and signed, the following stipulations: ...Article 1st.—It is agreed, that, in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean, or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the high contracting powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following articles: ...Article 2d.—With the view of preventing the rights of navigation and of fishing, exercised upon the great ocean by the citizens and subjects of the high contracting powers, from becoming the pretext for an illicit trade, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not resort to any point where there is a Russian establishment, without the permission of the governor or commander; and that, reciprocally, the subjects of Russia shall not resort, without permission, to any establishment of the United States upon the Northwest Coast. ...Article 3d.—It is moreover agreed, that, hereafter, there shall not be formed by the citizens of the United States, or under the authority of the said States, any establishment on the Northwest Coast of America, nor in any of the Islands adjacent, to the north of fifty-four degrees and forty minutes of north latitude; and that, in the same manner, there shall be none formed by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south of the same parallel. ...Article 4th.-It is, nevertheless, understood, that, during a term of ten years, counting from the signature of the present Convention, the ships of both powers, or which belong to their citizens or subjects, respectively, may reciprocally frequent, without any hindrance whatever, the interior seas, gulfs, harbors, and creeks, upon the coast mentioned in the preceding article, for the purpose of fishing and trading with the natives of the country. ...Article 5th,-All spirituous liquors, fire-arms, other arms, powder, and munitions of war of every kind, are always excepted from this same commerce permitted by the preceding article; and the two powers engage, reciprocally, neither to sell, or suffer them to be sold to the natives, by their respective citizens and subjects, nor by any person who may be under their authority. It is likewise stipulated that this restriction shall never afford a pretext, nor be advanced, in any case, to authorize either search or detention of the vessels, seizure of the merchandise, or, in fine, any measure of constraint whatever, towards the merchants or the crews who may carry on this commerce ; the high contracting Powers reciprocally reserving to themselves to determine upon the pe. nalties to be incurred, and to inflict the punishments in case of the contravention of this article, by their respective citizens or subjects,

...Article 6th.-When this Convention shall have been duly ratified by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Senate, on the one part, and on the other by His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washing ton in the space often months from the date below, or sooner, if possible. In faith whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed this Convention, and there. to affixed the seals of their arms. Done at St. Petersburg, the 17th (5th) April, of the #. of Grace one thousand eight hundred and twenty. out. HENRY MIDDLETON, LE Contre C. DE NESSELROUE. PIERRE DE POLETICA.

And whereas the said Convention has been duly no fied on both parts, and the respective ratifications of the same were exchanged at Washington, on the eleventh day of the present month, by John Quincy Anans, so cretary of State of the United States, and the Baron & Tuyll, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipoleo tiary of his Imperial Majesty, on the part of their to spective Governments : Now, therefort, be it known, that I, JAMEs Moviet President of the United States, have caused the sai Convention to be made public, to the end that thesao and every clause and article thereof, may be obsert: and fulfilled with good faith by the United States to the citizens thereof. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hando caused the seal of the United States to be affito Done at the City of Washington, this to day of January, in the year of our Lord one to [L. s.] sand eight hundred and twenty-five, and go Independence of the United States the fool ninth. | JAMEs MONROf By the President: John Quixcy AnAms, Secretary of State.

LET ITER From the Secretary of State, transmitting info ation in relation to the Commercial Relatio (as they at present exist,) between the Uni States and the kingdom of the Netherlan ebruary 11, 1825. DEPARTMENT or STATE, Washington, 10th February, 18% The Secretary of State, in obedience to a resolut of the House of Representatives, of the 21st of Janu last, directing him to communicate to that House information he may have in this Department, “show whether the duties levied on the tonnage of the ves. of the United States, entering the ports of the king of the Netherlands, and on the merchandise with wo they may be loaded, exceed those paid by the wo belonging to the said kingdom,” has the honortosuo to the House of Representatives copies of the coo pondence in this Department, having relation to subject.

Respectfully submitted, John QUINCY ADAMS Extracts of a letter (No. 102) from Mr. Everett, ". ./ldams, dated Brussels, 17th. March 18. “I have the honor to enclose copies of to " which I have lately had occasion to address to B* Nagell, and of his answer to them.” o “The reply to my application in regard to the d cnce in the duties imposed upon goods imp"

[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]

18th Congress, { Commercial Relations between the U.States and the Netherlands. LH. of R.

2d Session.

national and foreign vessels, is merely an acknowledgment of the receipt of the note. As the principal object of the new financial system is to encourage the commerce and navigation of this country, it is perhaps hardly to be expected that the exception which I have suggested in favor of the United States, will be admitted. If it is not, a partial repeal of the law of the 20th of April, 1818, will probably be thought necessary. But, is this measure cannot be taken till the meeting of the next Congress, there will be ample time in the interval preceive the definitive answer of this Government.” “A separate discriminating duty in favor of national sessels has also been imposed, since the commencement f this year, upon the importation of coffee from Bataia, which is to be in force until the end of 1824.”

.Mr. Everett to the Baron de JMagell. Baussels, JMarch 7, 1823.

Six: The new Tariff, which has recently gone into peration, contains several articles affecting the commercial relations between this country and the United itates. I think it my duty to invite your Excellency’s tention to these articles, and to point out the manner n which they will operate upon the American trade. Your Excellency will recollect that the Government f the United States, by the law of the 20th of April, 818, extended to the ships of the Netherlands, ariving in the ports of the Republic, nearly the same rivileges that are enjoyed by our own. They pay the ame tonnage duty, and also the same duties on their argoes, as far as these consist of articles, being of the rowth or manufacture of the Netherlands, or of such eighboring countries as usually ship their products rom the Dutch ports. These privileges were granted the commerce of the Netherlands in consequence of he adoption, in this kingdom, of the law of October 3, 815, which abolished the discriminating tonnage duty, nd of the understanding that there was no other discrimlating duties in force. If any change were to take place * the laws of this kingdom, in either of these respects, le natural consequence would be a corresponding hange in those of the United States. I regret to find that the new financial system appears contemplate some important alterations of this detription. Several articles of the tariff establish a differnce of duties in favor of goods imported in Dutch vestls: and the law of 26th August, 1822, creates, in the rm of a drawback, a general discrimination to the me effect; the 10th article being as follows: One tenth the duties paid upon the importation, or exportation, of "goods, shall be returned when the same are imported, or ported in Dutch vessels, ercepting those articles, of hich the i mportation and earportation in Dutch vessels, are orwise specifically favored by the tariff. It has always been the wish of the Government of the mited States, to lend its aid in placing the commerce f the world upon the most liberal footing. With this ow, it was proposed to all the powers of Europe, soon her the close of the late wars, to abolish, mutually, all *riminating duties on tonnage; and the proposition ong been, in substance, accepted by the Government the Netherlands, the arrangement took effect between he two countries. As it was also understood that no ther discriminating duties existed, a similar regulation * established in favor of goods imported in Dutch *ls, into the Uuited States. It is obvious, however, *these privileges cannot be continued upon any other *ciple than that of reciprocity. It would not suit, other with the honor or interest of the United States, * the merchants of the Netherlands should enjoy, in "Ports, the same advantages with native citizens, '* our merchants were subjected in this country to *orable discriminations. "if this Government is *d to abandon the equalizing system, which led

to the enaction of our law of April 20, 1818, the immediate and necessary consequence will be, the repeal of that law, as far as it applies to the vessels of the Netherlands. I must, therefore, take the liberty of requesting your Excellency to inform me, whether it is the intention of the Government of this country, that the new principles, introduced by the late tariff, shall be applied to the American trade. The Government of the United States has no wish to interpose, in any way, with the policy of the Netherlands; and has never sought, or accepted, exclusive or onerous commercial advantages in the ports of any nation. The liberal system which has lately prevailed, in the intercourse between the two countries, was regarded as mutually beneficial, and as conformable to the general spirit of the administration of both. I assure your Excellency, that my Government would regret to find itself compelled to depart from this system; and I venture to hope that you will furnish me with such explanations as may shew that a measure of that kind will not be necessary. I have the honor to be, with high respect, Sir, Your Excellency’s obedient servant, A. H. EVERETT. Extract of a letter (JNo. 105) from Mr. Everett to Mr. ./ldams, dated i

BRussels, June 1, 1823.

“I transmit, here with, copies of an answer from Baron de Nagell, to my note of the 7th of March, respecting the discriminating duty established by the new provincial system, and of my reply.”

Baron de JWagell to .Mr. Everett. [TRANslation.]

The undersigned, Minister of Foreign Affairs, being eager to lay before the King the note which Mr. Everett, charge d’ Affaires of the United States of America, sent him, of the 7th of this month, has the honor of informing him, that the observations which it contains on the new system of imposts of the kingdom of the Netherlands, as far as it applies to the commerce of the United States, shall be immediately taken into grave consideration.

The undersigned flatters himself with being shortly enabled to give to Mr. Everett the desired explanations on this subject, and embraces this occasion to renew to him the assurance of his distinguished consi

deration. A. W. C. de NAGELL, Brussels, 10th. March, 1823.

Baron de JMagell to Mr. Everett.
[TRANslation.]

The new system of duties introduced into the Kingdom of the Netherlands, having naturally appeared to the Government of the United States of America to produce a change in the commercial relations between the two countries, Mr. Everett had thought it his duty to demand, by the note which he had done him the honor of addressing to the undersigned Minister of Foreign Affairs on the 7th of March last, explanations proper to tran: quilize in this regard the Government of the United States, or to direct its future conduct. -

the King has just authorized the undersigned to give here the explanations desired. *

The 10th article of the law which precedes the new tariff of duties of entry and clearance, is the argument upon which Mr. Everett founds his representations. The article grants a drawback of ten per cent. of the duties on merchandise imported or exported by the vessels of the Netherlands; now, as, by an act of Congress of the United States, of 20th April, 1818, all difference of treatment between the ships of the Netherlands and

« ForrigeFortsett »