242 



. That the principle alluded to in its application to our fishing li 

 berties, is my favourite principle, I admit, knowing as I do, that it 

 has been the means of saving them from total extinction. That it 

 is my own principle, I have perhaps not more the right to say than 

 that it was Mr. Clay s own principle : for it was at his proposal 

 that it was assumed by the American mission at Ghent, and the pa 

 ragraph by which it was assumed, was drawn up by him. For all 

 possible consequences in relation to the British right of navigating 

 the Mississippi, which may flow from the assumption of this prin 

 ciple, Mr. Clay so far as official acts and signatures can pledge, is 

 as responsible as I am. 



But the truth is, that the principle can no longer be. applied to 

 the British right of navigating the Mississippi, because they them* 

 selves have disclaimed it, and thereby renounced the right to the 

 claim. The right once disclaimed, cannot again be resumed. It 

 could not be resumed even after a tacit renunciation a disclaimer 

 is still more. It was precisely because acquiescence on our part 

 in the principle asserted by the British plenipotentiaries, in their 

 notification of 8th August, would have been a surrender and tacit 

 renunciation of the fishing liberties, that I deemed the counter no 

 tification on our part, or a new article indispensable. But in assert 

 ing a principle just and sound in itseif, in defence of our own liber 

 ties, we are in nowise bound to force it upon Great Britain, in support 

 of any right of hers ; and as she has chosen to consider her right 

 to navigate the Mississippi by virtue of the 8th article of the treaty 

 of 1783, as abrogated by the war, we are neither bound to obtrude 

 upon her that which she disclaims, nor to admit the claim, should 

 she hereafter be disposed to retract the principle. 



But this is not all ; the editorial article asks &quot; how can the Se 

 cretary consistently say that the British abandoned this right in the 

 convention of 1818, when not a word is said about it in that com 

 pact?&quot; It is precisely because not a word is said in the compact about 

 it, that the British have abandoned the right. By the second arti 

 cle of the convention a new boundary line is stipulated, along the 

 49th parallel of latitude, which of course cuts them off from the 

 line to which they were before entitled to the Mississippi. Dis 

 claiming the right secured to them by the 8th article of the treaty 

 of 1783, the only ground upon which they still claimed the right, 

 was by virtue of the line which brought them in contact with the 

 river. At the negotiations of 1807, and at Ghent, they declined 

 agreeing to the new line, unless wilh a reservation of the right to 

 navigate the river, and of access to it, through our territories. 

 They demanded the same thing at the negotiation of the convention 

 of 1818, and presented an article to that effect. But they finally 

 agreed to the new boundary line, without the reservation, and 

 thereby abandoned their last claim to the right of navigating the 

 river. 



The editorial article in the Argus, is sufficient to justify Mr. 

 Clay for his assent to, and concurrence with, all the measures 



