130 



if he had referred, at the same time, to the clespatch of the 25th 

 December, 1814, (/I) he would there have seen that, in fact, ama- 



(d) Extractfrom a despatch from the American Plenipotentiaries to the Secrela&amp;lt; 

 ry of Stale, dated at Ghent, ttth of December, 



At fhc first conference, on the Slh of August, f he British plenipotentiaries had 

 notified us, t/tat Ike British government did not intend, henceforth, to allow to the 

 people of the United States, without an equivalent, the liberties to Jish, and to 

 dry and cure Jish within the exclusive British jurisdiction, stipulated in their 

 favour by the tatter part of the third article of the treaty of peace of 1783. And 

 in the note of the l9//t of * h/-gusf, the British plenipotentiaries had demanded a 

 new stipulation to secure to British subjects the right of navigating the Missis 

 sippi, a demand, which, unless warranted by another article of the same treaty 

 of 1 783, we could not perceive that Great Britain had any colourable pretext for 

 Waking. Our instructions had forbidden us to suffer our right to the fisheries 

 to be brought into discussion, and had not authorized us to make any distinction 

 in the several provisions of the third article of the treaty of 1 783, or between that 

 article and any other of the same treaty. We had no equivalent to offer for a 

 new recognition of our right to any part of the fisheries, and we had no power 

 to grant any equivalent, which might be asked for it by the British government. 

 Wt contended that the whole treaty of 1783 must be considered as one entire and 

 permanent compact, not liable, like ordinary treaties, to be abrogated by a sub 

 sequent war between the parties to it, as an instrument recognising the rights and 

 liberties enjoyed by the people of the United States as an independent nation, and 

 containing the terms and conditions on which the two parts of one empire had 

 mutually agreed, thenceforth, to constitute two distinct and separate nations. In 

 consenting, by that treaty, that a part of the North American continent should 

 remain subject to the British jurisdiction, the people of the United States had 

 reserved to themselves the liberty, which they had ever before enjoyed, ofjishw 1 ^ 

 on that part of the coast, and of drying and curing Jish upon the shores and 

 this reservation had been agreed to by the other contracting party. We saw nut 

 why this liberty, then no new grant, but a mere recognition of a prior right, 

 should be forfeited by war, any more than any other of the rights of our national 

 independence or why we should need a new stipulation for Us enjoyment more 

 than we needed a new article to declare that the king of Great Biitain treated 

 with us as free, sovereign, and independent States. We staled this principle, in 

 general terms, to the British plenipotentiaries, in the note which we sent to them, 

 with our project of the treaty and we alleged it as the ground upon which no 

 new stipulation was deemed by our government necessary to secure to the people 

 of the United Slates all the rights and liberties, stipulated in their favour by the 

 treaty of 1783. JVb reply to that part of our note was given by the British 

 plenipotentiaries ; but, in returning our project of a treaty, they added a clause 

 to one of the articles stipulating for a right for British subjects to navigate the 

 Mississippi,* without adverting to the ground of prior, and immemorial usage, 

 if the principle were just, that the treaty of 1783, from its peculiar character, 

 remained in force in all its parts, notwithstanding the war, no new stipulation 

 ic as necessary to secure to t/ie subjects of Great Britain the right of navigating 

 the Mississippi as far as that right was secured by the treaty of 1783 ; as on the 

 other hand, no new stipulation was necessary to secure to the people of the United 

 States the liberty to Jish and to dry and cure Jish, within the exclusive jurisdic 

 tion of Great Britain. If they asked (lie navigation of the Mississippi, as a 

 new claim, tliey could not expect we sJiould grant it without an equivalent ; if 

 they asked it because it had been granted in 1783, they must recognise the claim 

 vf the people of the United States to the liberty to Jish and to dry and cure Jish 

 tn question. 



To place both points beyond all future controversy, A MAJORITY OP us de 

 tormined to offer to admit an article confirming both rights. 



* This passage is here incorrectly quoted by erroneous punctuation ; exhibiting a sense dif- 

 fernt from that of the original for which see p. c&amp;gt;5; but it is here, as published in the Bostaa 

 Statesman of 27 Jure. A 



