PERTAINING TO NEGOTIATION OF TREATY OF GHENT. 257 



The papers, of which copies are likewise now forwarded, will ex- 

 hibit to you so fully the progress of the negotiation since the departure 

 of the Chauncey, that few additional remarks from us will be neces- 

 sary. It may be proper for us, however, to state that, in the interval 

 between the time when our first projet of a treaty was sent to the 

 British plenipotentiaries and that when they communicated to us the 

 answer to it, the despatches which we had sent by Mr. Dallas, and the 

 instructions to us. which had been published in the United States, 

 were republished in England. In declining to insist on the articles 

 respecting impressment and indemnities, we made a formal declara- 

 tion that the rights of both parties on the subject of seamen and the 

 claims to indemnities for losses and damages sustained prior to the 

 commencement of the war should not be affected or impaired by the 

 omission in the treaty of a specific provision on these two subjects. 



From the time when the projet of the treaty presented by us was 

 returned with the proposed alterations, it was apparent that, unless 

 new pretensions on the part of Great Britain should be advanced, the 

 only important differences remaining to be discussed were those relat- 

 ing to the mutual restoration of territory taken during the war, to 

 the navigation of the Mississippi by British subjects, and to the right 

 of the people of the United States to the fisheries within the British 

 jurisdiction. Instead of a general restitution of captured territory, 

 which we had proposed, the British Government at first wished to 

 confine it to the territory taken by either party belonging to the 

 other. On our objecting that this would make each party the judge 

 whether territory taken did or did not belong to the other, and thereby 

 occasion new disputes, they acknowledged it to be their object that 

 each party should, until a decision had taken place with respect to 

 the title, retain possession of all the territory claimed by both parties, 

 which might have been taken by such party during the war. They 

 proposed, however, to limit the exception from mtital restitution to 

 tie- islands in the hay of Passamaquoddy. As it had been on both 

 sides admitted (hat the title to these islands was disputed, and as a 

 method of settling amicably those disputes was provided for in the 

 treaty, we had not expected that the British Government would adhere 

 to the demand of retaining the temporary possession of those islands. 

 We insisted, therefore, on their being included in the general restora 

 lion, until we had reason to believe that our further perseverance 

 would have hazarded (he conclusion of (he peace, itself. We finally 

 consented, as an alternative preferable to the continuance of the 

 war, lo tin- exception, upon condition that it should not he under- 

 stood a impairing in any manner the right of the United States to 

 these islands. We also urged for a stipulation requiring an ultimate 

 decision upon the title within a limited time; I mi to tin- we also found 

 opposed an insuperable objection, ami we were finally induced to 

 accept in it-, tead a declaration of the British plenipotentiaries, that 

 no unnecessary delay of the decision should he interposed on the pari 

 of ( iie;it Britain. 



At the iir i conference, on the 8th of August, the British plenipo- 

 tentiaries had notified to ii- that the British Governmenl did not 



intend henceforth to allow to (he people of the United States, without 



an equivalent, the liberties to fish and to dry and cure fish within the 

 exclusive British juri diction, stipulated in their favor l>.\ the latter 



