PERTAINING To NEGOTIATION OF TRKATY OF 1818. 267 



rights had been annulled. There was, therefore, no article concerning 

 them in the treaty, and the question as to the right was not discussed. 

 I now stated the ground upon which the Government of the United 

 States considered the right as subsisting and unimpaired. The treaty 

 of 1783 was, in its essential nature, not liable to be annulled by a sub- 

 sequent war. It acknowledged the United States as a sovereign and 

 independent Power. It would be an absurdity, inconsistent with the 

 acknowledgment itself, to suppose it liable to be forfeited by a war. 

 The whole treaty of Ghent did constantly refer to it as existing and 

 in full force, nor was an intimation given that any further confirma- 

 tion of it was supposed to be necessary. It would be for the British 

 Government ultimately to determine how far this reasoning was to be 

 admitted as correct. There were, also, considerations of policy and 

 expediency, to which I hoped they would give suitable attention, be- 

 fore they should come to a final decision upon this point. I thought 

 it my duty to suggest them, that they might not be overlooked. The 

 subject was viewed by my countrymen as highly important, and I 

 was anxious to omit no effort which might possibly have an influence 

 in promoting friendly sentiments between the two nations", or in 

 guarding against the excitement of others. These fisheries afforded 

 the means of subsistence to multitudes of people who were destitute 

 of any other; they also afforded the means of remittance to Great 

 Britain in payment for articles of her manufactures exported to 

 America. It was well understood to be the policy of Great Britain 

 that no unnecessary stimulus should be given to the manufactures in 

 the United States, which would diminish the importation of those 

 from Great Britain. But, by depriving the fishermen of the United 

 States of this source of subsistence, the result must be to throw them 

 back upon the country, and drive them to the resort of manufacturing 

 for themselves; while, on the other hand, it would cut off the means 

 of making remittances in payment for the manufactures of Great 

 Britain. 



I though! it besl to urge every consideration which might in- 

 fluence a party having other views in that respect, to avoid coming to 

 a collision upon it. I would even urge considerations of humanity. I 

 would say that fisheries, the nature of which was to multiply the 

 means of subsistence to mankind, were usually considered by civilized 

 nations as under a sort of special sanction. It was a common practice 

 to have them uninterrupted even in time of war. He knew, for 

 instance, that the Dutch had been, for centuries, in the practice of 

 fishing upon the coa ts of this island, and that they were not inter- 

 rupted in this occupation even in ordinary times <>i' war. It was to 



be inferred from this, that, to interdict a fishery, which has been en 



joyed for age . far from being a usual ad in the peaceable relations 

 between nations, was an indication of animosity, transcending even 

 the ordinary course of hostility in war. He said thai no such dis- 

 position was entertained by the Briti l> Government; thai to show the 

 liberality which they had determined to exercise in this case, he 

 would assure me thai the instructions which he had given <o the 

 officers on that station had been, not even to interrupt the A.merican 

 fishermen who might have proceeded to those coasts, within the 

 British juri diction, for the presenl year; to allow them p> complete 

 their fares, hut to give them notice thai this privilege could no longer 



