130 



1f lie had rererred, at tlie same time, to Ihe'despatch of the 25th 

 December, 1814, (c/) he woiilii there have seen thal»infact, awta* 



(d) Extract J rom <j despatch from the American Plenipotentiaries to the Secrtta^ 

 ry of Stale, dated at Ghent, 25th of December j 1814?. 



At //te first confereuee, on the Sfh of August^ the British plenipotentiaries had 

 notified us, that the British government did not intend, henceforth, to alloxo 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 latter part of the third article of the treaty of peace of 1783. And 

 in the note of the lOlh of August, the British jolenipotentiaries 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 

 4)f ITSS, i^e could not perceive that Great Britain had any colourable pretext for 

 making. Our instructions had forbidden us to suffer our fight to the fisheries 

 to be brought into discussion, aiul hadnot authorized us to make any distinction 

 in the several provisions of the third article of the treaty of 17i>3, or between that 

 Article and any oilier of the same treaty. We had no equivalent to offer for a 

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

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

 fVe contended that the ichole treaty of 1783 must be considered as one entire and 

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

 sequent \J:ar between the parties to it, as an instrument recognising the rights and 

 liberties enjoyed by the people of the United Stales 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 tlie British jurisdiction, the people of the United States had 

 reserved to themselves the liberty, which they had ever before enjoyed, of fishing 

 an tlwt part of the coast, and of drying ajid curing fish upon the shores — and 

 this reservation had been, agreed to by the other contracti7ig party. We saw not 

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

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

 independence — or why we should need a new stipulattonfor its enjoyment more 

 than we needed a new article to declare thiij the king of Great Britain treated 

 ■with us as free, sovereign, and independent States. We slated tins 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 goveruinent necessary to secure to the pieople 

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

 treaty of l783, jN'b 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 Jor a right for British subjects to iiavigate the 

 Mississipjri,* icilhout 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 

 was necessary to secure to the subjects of Great Britain the right of navigaling^ 

 ihe Mississippi asj'ar as that right was secured by the treaty of 1783; as on ths 

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

 Slates the liberty to Jish and to dry and cure Jish, icitlnnthe exclusive jurisdic- 

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

 new claim, they could not expect we should grant it without an equivalent ; if 

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

 «f the pfoplt of the United States to the liberty to Jish and to dry a7id cure Jish 

 in quest 1071. 



To place both points beyond all future controversy, A majority of rs de- 

 Icrmiued to offer to admit an article confirming both rights. 



* I'his paf-tage !•< here, incorrectly quoted by erroneous fiuuclUAtioD ; exhibiting^ a sense dif- 

 iVr-ni fiom ihaiot the ofi^iual — fdi v\ tiicb bee y. Jo ; bulii i» here, as pubiisbed ta llie Bosto.:^. 



