126 THE ARGUMENT OF THB UNITED STATES. 



James Monroe and William Pinkney, Commissioners on behalf of 

 the United States, and Lord Holland and Lord Auckland, Commis- 

 sioners for Great Britain, met in London in 1806 to negotiate a new 

 treaty of amity, commerce and navigation. 



A treaty was concluded by these Commissioners December 31, 

 1806, but was rejected by the United States for the reason, as stated 

 by Mr. Madison, then Secretary of State, in an instruction to the 

 Commissioners, following the receipt of the treaty: 



Without a provision against impressments, substantially such as 

 is contemplated in your original instruction, no treaty is to be con- 

 cluded. 



Article 12 of this unratified treaty stipulated : 



And whereas it is expedient to make special provisions respecting 

 the maritime jurisdiction of the high contracting parties on the 

 coast of their respective possessions in North America on account of 

 peculiar circumstances belonging to those coasts, it is agreed that in 

 all cases where one of the said High Contracting Parties shall be en- 

 gaged in war, and the other shall be at peace, the belligerent power 

 shall not stop, except for the purpose hereafter mentioned, the ves- 

 sels of the neutral power, or the unarmed vessels of other nations, 

 within -five marine miles from the shore belonging to the said neutral 

 power on the American seas. 



Provided, That the said stipulation shall not take effect in favor 

 of the ships of any nation or nations which shall not have agreed to 

 respect the limits aforesaid, as the line of maritime jurisdiction of the 

 said neutral state. And it is further stipulated, that if either of the 

 High Contracting Parties shall be at war with any nation or nations 

 which shall not have agreed to respect the said special limit or line of 

 maritime jurisdiction herein agreed upon, such contracting party 

 shall have the right to stop or search any vessel beyond the limit of a 

 cannon shot, or three marine miles from the said coast of the neutral 

 power, for the purpose of ascertaining the nation to which such ves- 

 sel shall belong; and with respect to the ships and property of the 

 nation or nations not having agreed to respect the aforesaid line of 

 jurisdiction, the belligerent power shall exercise the same rights as if 

 this article did not exist; and the several provisions stipulated by 

 this article shall have full force and effect only during the continu- 

 ance of the present treaty. 6 



The last paragraph of Article 19 of the treaty provided : 



Neither of the said parties shall permit the ships or goods belong- 

 ing to the subjects or citizens of the other to be taken within cannon 

 shot of the coast, nor within the jurisdiction described in article 12, 

 so long as the provisions of the said article shall be in force, by ships 

 of war or others having commissions from any prince, republic, or 

 state whatever. But in case it should so happen, the party whose 

 territorial rights shall thus have been violated shall use his utmost 



U. S. Counter Case, Appendix, 100. 

 *U. S. Counter Case, Appendix, 22. 



