146 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



of nations, but only by the law of the land. There is obviously no 

 such law. 



The argument which has been so long and so ably maintained by 

 Mr. Reeves, that the rights of antenati Americans, as British subjects, 

 even within the kingdom of Great Britain, have never been divested 

 from them, because there has been no Act of Parliament to declare it, 

 applies in its fullest force to this case ; and, connected with the article 

 in the treaty of 1783, by which this particular right was recognised, 

 confirmed, and placed out of the reach of an Act of Parliament, cor- 

 roborates the argument in our favour. How far it may be proper 

 and advisable to use these suggestions in your negotiation, must be 

 left to your sound discretion ; but they are thrown out with the hope 

 that you will pursue the investigation of the important questions of 

 British law involved in this interest, and that every possible advan- 

 tage may be taken of them, preparatory for the trial before the Lords 

 of Appeals, if the case should ultimately come to their decision. The 

 British Government ma}' be well assured that not a particle of these 

 rights will be finally yielded by the United States without a struggle, 

 which will cost Great Britain more than the worth of the prize. 



These are the subjects to which the President is willing that your 

 negotiation should be confined. With regard to the others of a 

 general nature, and relating to the respective rights of the two 

 nations in times of maritime war, you are authorised to treat of 

 them, and to conclude concerning them, conformably to the instruc- 

 tions already in possession of Mr. Rush ; or, if the difficulty of agree- 

 ing upon the principles should continue as great as it has been 

 hitherto, you may omit them altogether. 



You will not fail to transmit, by duplicates, the result of your 

 conferences at as early a period as may be found practicable. 



No. 32. 1818, Ay gust ^4' Extract from Instructions from Viscount 

 Castlereagh (at London] to Messrs. Robinson and Goulbum. 



FOREIGN OFFICE, August 24. 1818. 



The accompanying papers will bring the present state of the fishery 

 question under your view. I refer you to the proceedings at Ghent 

 for those arguments upon which the British plenipotentiaries main- 

 tained, as I conceive unanswerably, that the second branch of the 

 Illrd Article of the treaty of 1783 had expired with the war. The 

 negative of this proposition was certainly contended, but very feebly, 

 by the American plenipotentiaries, which is proved almost to the 

 extent of an admission of the principles contended for on the part of 

 this Government by their tendering an article in which the same 

 privileges were, by a fresh stipulation, to be again secured to the 

 subjects of the United States upon an equivalent offered on their part. 



The subsequent correspondence will show the nature of the claim 

 put forward by the American Government soon after the peace. The 

 orders issued to the British officers on the Halifax station to resist 

 any encroachment on the rights of this country, and, finally, the 

 friendly offer of a specified accommodation for the convenience of 

 the American fishery which Mr. Bagot was authorised to tender to 

 the Government of the United States. You will see by that Min- 



