only ground upon which such information had ever been refused was that a disclosure might disturb or impéde the impending negotiations; as the information required was already before the world, no such plea could in this case be offered."

"From a perusal of the papers, it appeared that the conduct of those who managed the negotiations had "been very culpable, yet it was impossible to bring a charge against them until the documents were produced. The British ministers at home had behaved with the greatest inattention to the American envoy, and had shown a neglect amounting to diplomatic incivility, while our ministers in the United States have acted in a manner scarcely less repulsive. The conduct of Mr. Jackson and Mr. Foster, while in America, had not been conciliatory; while the correspondence of Marquis Wellesley with Mr: Pinkney, which commenced in January, 1809, and terminated in February, 1810, had been such as to raise the indignation of the American government. The behaviour of Mr. Pinkney, on the other hand, had been deserving of great praise. When he entered on the duties of his mission, a strong feeling existed in America in consequence of what had occurred in the conrse of Mr Jackson's embassy; and the Americans were naturally anxious as to the character of the person who was to be named by Great Britain to renew the negotiation. On the 2nd of January, 1809, Mr. Pinkney again wrote to the Marquis Wellesley on the subject, but no answer was given to this letter till the 14th of March. On the 15th, Mr. Pinkney again wrote to Lord Wellesley respecting the English system of blockade, a subject most interesting to America; but to this letter he did not receive an answer for more than a fortnight. On the 30th of April, Mr. Pinkney wrote to Lord Wellesley on the subject of the Berlin and Milan decrees, but to this letter he never received any answer at all; and a complaint which he made against the infa mous practice of forging ships' papers in London, and

making an open traffic of them, was treated with the same neglect. That many other instances had occurred in which the communications of the American minister had been treated in a manner not less contemptuous, and in particular to his letter of the 15th September to Lord Wellesley, on the subject of the blockade of Elsineur by Sir James Saumarez, and stating some circumstances relating to the seizure of four American seamen in the Viola, he received an imperfect answer only on the 6th of December, which noticed the letter so far as it related to the blockade, but said nothing at all on the subject of the impressment. That the latter subject was one of the greatest delicacy; and although the seamen had afterwards been released by virtue of a judgement of Sir William Scott, yet the secretary of state had considered the original complaint as unworthy of his notice. Such had been the conciliatory spirit of the noble secretary, who permitted the sentence of a court of justice to answer the communication of a foreign minister, whom he himself would not take the trouble of satisfying on so interesting a point. Although Mr. Pinkney had, on numerous occasions, addressed the British minister on the subject of the Berlin and Milan decrees, he had never received any satisfactory answer, and he accordingly demanded his audience of leave."

"Little appeared to have been afterwards done towards effecting the important objects which both governments professed to have at heart. Mr. Foster had been sent out with no new instructions; he went to offer what had been previously rejected, and to restate what had often before been stated in vain, so that his mission was only productive of disappointment. That it is of the utmost importance to conciliate America; this object might at one time have been thought unattainable, but from some measure recently adopted by Congress, for admitting British manufactures into the ports of the United States, there was reason to believe that it was still the wish of the Americans to avoid a rupture. The prosperity of

America contributed largely to the welfare of this coun try; and that America had committed no fault, except that, as she was placed in an extraordinary situation as the only neutral in the world, she had endeavored to avail herself of the advantages her situation afforded. The intelligence which had so recently been received from America, made it more important than ever, tho roughly to consider this subject; that the bill spoken of as likely to pass through Congress, would give umbrage to France; and it was the duty of the British govern ment to endeavor, by conciliation, to avail itself of any difference of this kind, which might arise."

Several members strongly opposed the motion of Mr. Whitbread for the production of the copies of the correspondence between the two governments, and he and his friends were highly censured for the allegations they had brought against the government of Great Britain, regarding their conduct towards America, and on their strict adherence to the Orders in Council. "The British government," said they, "instead of having acted unjustly towards America, had the strongest case against that power, that one nation ever had against another; no benefit could result from a premature agitation, in the House of Commons, of the differences between the two countries; but, on the contrary, the greatest inconvenience and mischief might thus be produced. Government had uniformly expressed but one sentiment in regard to the dispute with America, and was sincerely desirous that a war with that country might be avoided, if that could be done without injury to the maritime rights of Great Britain, which never could be yielded to the pretensions of France. The prosperity of America was not so essential to the webfare of Great Britain as many persons affected to imagine all the predilections of America closely united her to France; and partly from the influence of these feelings, partly from more sordid motives, she insisted that England should allow her to take up the whole carrying

43

trade, nay, even the whole coasting trade of her enemies. It was for America to decide the question of peace or war; she had adopted a new system, and made new and unheard of pretentions, to which she knew well that Great Britain never would, nay, consistent with her honor, never could concede. By moving for. papers, it must be intended to create a discussion on them when granted; yet any parliamentary discussion which could take place on the subject, must necessarily increase the irritation on both sides.. The spirit of conciliation always professed in the diplomatic correspondence, between the two countries, had been most sincere on our side; but the British government would never abandon these maritime rights, which the country had so long maintained, and which were necessary to her greatness. The Marquis Wellesly had acted wisely in declining to go into details as to the principles of the blockade which we were called upon to abandon. The first letter of Mr. Pinkney, alluded to in the debate, had been written for the purpose merely of asking Lord Wellesley some questions on this point; but the British government was determined not to confound with the discussion on the Orders in Council, this question of blockade; and therefore it was absurd to suppose that England should stand ready to declare to France how much of her rights she would surrender, in order to purchase for the Americans a revocation of the tyrannical and obnoxious ediets of Buonaparte. As to the letter of Mr. Pinkney, on the subject of the recall of Mr. Jackson, which was said, with so much emphasis, not to have been answered by Lord Wellesley, the American minister himself had, in his correspondence with his own government, stated that he had had communications with Lord Wellesley on the subject, and repeated opportunities of personal intercourse; and that he had been informed by his lordship, and had no doubt of the fact, that a minister would be sent out to America without delay. If the letter had not been formally answered, therefore, the omission was fully

explained, and the information desired by Mr. Pinkney had been communicated to him in another manner. The ostensible reason of Mr. Pinkney, for demanding his passport, was that no minister had been sent to America; yet he had been previously informed, that the delay in sending out a minister had been occasioned wholly from the situation in which the government found itself for the two months preceding, in consequence of His Majesty's illness. The Orders in Council did not originate with the present government, the system having been acted upon by those who now complained so loudly of it; no one, in the proper exercise of his reasoning faculties, could dispute the justice of these Orders in Council, who was not, at the same time, prepared to deny our right of retaliating upon the enemy its own excesses; & those who attributed the commercial distresses of the country to the Orders in Council, must have forgotten that the continental system was of itself sufficient to account for the distress which had occurred."

"The late repeal by France of her decrees, was a mere pretence, since the principles of the system were still preserved with vigour; for in a letter lately written by Tureau the French minister to the American government, he declared: That it is to be clearly understood, that France would not consent to alter that, system of exclusion adopted by all Europe against the commerce of Great Britain, the wisdom and policy of which system was already clearly developed in its effects against the common enemy; that neutrality was entirely disregarded in every state over which France had any influence. Such was the language of France through her own minister, which openly declared that she had said to each state in succession, I must take away your liberty and independence in order to injure England: and could it be doubted, that Great Britain was thus entitled to call on neutral nations to assert and maintain their rights? The correspondence between this country and America was not finally closed; and while a