172 



'< the Mississippi precisely as she could have navigated it imme- 

 «' diately after the treaty of 1783 ; as if her territories extended 

 " to it, and as if Spain was in entire possession of one of its banks, 

 " and of a considerable portion of the other. The revival of the 

 *' British rii^ht to navigate the Mississippi, would be, under exist- 

 ** ing Circumstances, a new and complete grant to her, measured by 

 " these circumstances, and thence embracing not only the entire 

 " freedom of the whole extent of the river, but the uwrestrained 

 *' access to it across onr territories. If we did not intend this, we 

 *' intended nothing which Great Britain could accept." 



Now observe the amendment to the 8th article of the projected 

 treaty, as it was proposed on the 1st of December, 1814, and re- 

 jected : 



'' The inhabitants of the United States shall continue to enjoy the 

 *' liberty to take, dry, and cure fish, in places within the exclusive 

 "jurisdiction of Great Britain, as secured by the former treaty of 

 ** peace ; and the navigation of the river Mississippi, within the 

 " exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, shall remiiin free and 

 *' open to the subjects of Great Britain, inthe manner secured by the 

 " said treatif ; and it is further agreed that the subjects of his Bri- 

 *' tannic majesty shrill at all times have access, from such place as 

 " maij be selected for that purpose, in his Britannic majesty's afore- 

 <' said territories, west, and within 300 miles of the Lake of the 

 *< Woods, in the aforesaid territories of the United States, to the 

 '* river Mississippi, in order to enjoy the benefit of the navigation 

 *' of that river, with their goods, effects, and merchandise, whose 

 *' importation into the said States shall not be entirely prohibited, 

 '* on the payment of the same duties as would be payable on the 

 *' importation of the same into the Atlantic ports of the said States, 

 " and on conformiu^; with the usual custom-house regulations." 



After reading this, if you inquire how it was/>o55i6/c for Mr. Rus- 

 sell to say, inthe passage of his letter immediately preceding it, that 

 we offered the navigation of the Mississippi to the British otherwise 

 than as it had been secured to them by the treaty of 1783, and that 

 we offered them unrestrained access to it across our territories ; 

 the only possible answer to the question will be, that it was neces- 

 sary for his argument to say so ; for the very proposition which he 

 says was nothing which Great Britain could accept, was the identi- 

 cal proposition which we did make, and which she did not accept. 

 We <!id offer, m express terms, and in no others, the navigation, w 

 the maimer secured by the treaty of 1783. We offered the access 

 to it, restrained to a single point of departure, 300 miles west of 

 the Lake of the Woods ; restrained to the admission only of goods 

 not prohibited, to the payment of duties on merchandise admitted, 

 and to compliance with all the custom-house regulations. Mr. Rus- 

 sell says that it embraced the entire freedom of the whole, extent 

 of the river. And so it did nt the peace of 1783 : for it was then 

 secured to Great Britain, not only by the treuty with the United 



