315 



bynnntliprnrtirlo of Mint Knmo Trrntv nf 17flJ^, 



wo roiiM not pp'Tpivn ('mf Dront 'nritnin hnd tiny rolmir- 



nlili' |iirlrii,r r,,r iiiiiliiiiu' Oiii- iiiMnr.li.iii.-i In.l t'l'il'iiMi'ii iis in sntVi i- hiu- ii^;lii to ilic tislicncs t«i lio 

 liidii'.'lii Jiii.i .|i-( n»'\n],, I li.i.l ii,ii ;iiiilii.ii/,r.| in tii iiinki' iiiiv ilisiiiii timi in ilic scvcml MoviHimiM of 



till' IIImI Ai'iidc ol'tl 



ir TlVMlv (il IT.H.!. Ml' lirlHii'ii tlmt Allicji' nr iiIIV cilll"'!' cil' tin 



T 



■I'lllV 



W. 



hail III) (•(|iiiviiliiit ti) ollii fill ,1 iii'w IV. ii..'iiiii.iii ,,r niir ii;,'|it to aiiv imil dl' tin' tishnicH, and we liad no 

 piwci- Id ^,'111111 ail V cinivaliMl wlii.li mi.^lii 1.. iHki'il l.ir ii liv lln- Iliitisli (l.ivriiinu'iit, Wo cniitciKlcil 

 tliiil llii' wlinlv Tnalv (pf I7><:i liiiMl lie iKiisjilcivd iH niic iiitiiv and |iiMiiialiiMit cniiiiiac t, iml liaMi-, 

 liLr ni;liniii-ii Imiliis, to \w a1iin;,Mtccl hy a NiilM(.,|iii.nf war luMwci'ii tin' |iiirlirs tc. it ; as an iiMtninirnt 

 r(M'(i«;iii/iii',' till' nV'lil^i and lilicilii'S ciiiMy.-d l,y ih.. piMipli' n)' tlic I'liilcd Slates iw aij indcp.'iidotit 

 naliiiii, and rniiiiiiniii',' tlic tcnns and nindiliiai.s im wliicli llir tw(i jiaitu ol' one ciiipiiv laid nintnally 

 n^'ici'd Ihciintniili til ciiiniitiiti' iwn disiinrt and srpanitc natiimH. In miisciitin',', liy ilmi TiiMty, llint 

 a I 111 It III' till' Nurlh AMuriran Cuiitinciil sIimuJiI ivniain siiliiirt to llii' r.iiti'<li jiilisdictiiin, the pcuplo 

 of llic I'nilnl Slates liad icsnved In tliiiiisidvcs llii> liliiily, wliidi tiny laid ever lieriiiv I'lijnycd, 

 nl' lisliiiiL; iipnii ilmt )iait nt the cna.sli, niid of iliyin;» uiid diriny lisli "iipnn the sIiiuch; nmrtliiH 

 rescrviiliiili had heeli aijieed tii liy the ipIIici etiiitractiiiK parly. We saw iint why this liherty, then no 

 new u'laiit, lail a mere iviiijiiiitiiin III' a piiiir iiL,'ht always eii'inycd, sliinild he InVfeited hy a war, nny 

 inme than any ntlni' nf the lights id'uiii naliiiii.il indipeiideiiii', ur why we slaiiild need a new Htipnlii- 

 tiiiii Inr ils enjnyiniiit tnnn' than we needid a new ailiije tu dec laie lliat liie Kile,' nf (irent Itritnin, 

 treated wilii in as I'lve .siivereii,'n and indeprndeiu Stales. We Htuted liiis piiiirlple, in ^,'eiiiMiil terms, 

 til the I'liilish rienipni(.iiiiiiii,-,>, ill ill,, unti. whieh we seiil In Iheiii willi mir prnjeel ul' the Tiealy ; 

 and we iilK'Ljed it as the ..'iniind npiiii wlii.-h nn new stipiilnlioii was deemed |.y nur (in'ernnient 

 Ileee-saiy In seiiiiv In the pinple nt the I'liited States .ill the iii,'lits and lil). 'tics stiinilateii in their 



i'aviiiir liy the Tl ly nt I7>'n. No iijily tn that part ol mir imte was ;,'iveii tiy the liritish I'leni- 



pntriiliaries; lait, in reluming' niir |iinjeet nl' a trealy, lliev added a elanse to one of the iirtieles, 

 siipiiliiiiiiL,' a ri'.'ht Inr l!iii,-li siilijeds to navii;ate the Mississippi. Wiihniit ailvertiii(; to the ;.'round 

 of prior and iiiiiiieninrial iisai,''', if llie priniiple were just that the Treaty of 17HM, troin its [)eeuliar 

 characli r, reniaiiied in I'mvi. in all ils |i;irls. notwilhslandiii;.' the war. no new stipulation was iieeessary 

 to seeiiie lotlie siili,ei-ts of (lieiit Uritaiii llieriulil In iiavipii iiii,' the Mississi]ipi. as far as tlmt riyht wiia 

 seeiired hy the Tnaly of IT.'^'i ; as, on the nilur hiiid. nn siip'ilatinii wa.s iiet'essaiy tn secure to tlio 

 jien|ih' nf the I'liiteil Stales the lilierly tn lish.iind In dry and eiir.' tish, within the exeliisive jurisdiction 

 of (ileal liiilaiii. If liny asked the iinvi^'alion of the Mississippi as a new i laiiii, they could not expect 



We shniild pliant it witlmiil an e.piivaleiil ; if lliey nsked it ' .iiise it had lieeii ^.'ranted in 17S:?, they 



Iiiiisl rernL.'iiize the ihiiin of the ]ienp||. of the riiiled States to the liherty to lisli, and to dry and euro 

 tish, in i|iiestinii. Tn place lioth points lieyniid all future eniilroversy, a inajniity of us doterniined to 

 offer to luliiiit. nn article cnnlirmiii;.' hnth rii,'lils ; nr, wi. olleied at the same time to lie .silent in the 

 Treaty upon Imlli, and to h'ave nut allnj,'ether the Article detiniiio the lionndai frnni the Lake of the 

 Woods wt'.stward. They tiiially ai.'reed tntliis l,is| prnpnsal, hiit not until tliev had pro)iiised an Article 

 stipiilatiiii,' for a future ne.jntiatinii lor ail ei|iiivalciil to he u'iveii liy (ireat Urilaiii hir the iiiivii:ation 

 of the Mississippi, and hy the United States for the lilierty as to the lislieries within the liritish juris- 

 diclinii. 'I'liis Article was unnecessary, with lesjiect to ils )iriifessed oliject, since hoth (invernnieiits 

 had it in their pnwer, wi'liniit it, to ne;,'otiate upon these sulijects if they pleased. We rejected it, 

 althou^di ils adnplioii would have .secured the lioiindary of the 4'.Mh de^'fee of liitituih' west of the Like 

 of the Woods, liccaiise it would have liecii a formal ahaiuloumeiit on our part, of our cluiui to the 

 liberty as to the ti.slieries rocoj;uized hy the I'realy of ITS.'J.'' 



Mr. Ciallaliii wroto to the Secretary of State on the 2i;ili December, the day 

 following tlic .sio;nattirL' of the 'IVeaty, ii'^ follows ; — 



(Kxtract from Letter of Mr. Ciallaliii to Secretary of State, 25th December, 1814, 

 page oH.) 



"On tlin suliject of tlie fisheries within the jurisdiction of Orent liritnin, wii Imvn certainly done 

 all that couM lie done. If, aicnnliiiL; to the coii.stnic.inn nf the Treaty of IT.'^o, which we a.ssuined the 

 riu'lil was not aliro._'atcd hy the war, it remains entire, since we most explicitly refused to teiiounce it 

 eilliir directly or indirectly. In that case it is only an unsettled suliject of dilfcrciice hetweeii the two 

 coiinlrics. If the ri-^'liL must he considered as iilirnL;ated hy the war, we canieil re.,'aiii it without an 

 eiiuivaleiit. We had none In i,'ive liul tlu' reco;,'nilinii of their ri],dit to navi^'iile the .Mississippi, and wo 

 oll'ered it. On this last sujiposiliou, this lijsht i.s al.so lost to theiu ; and in u geuuiul i>i(im of view we 

 havo certainly lost nothiu;^." 



Mr. Rnsscll, who j^avo rise to all this correspondence, wrote from Paris on tlie 11th 

 February, 181"), in the fdllouins tcrnis lo llic Sctrclary of Stale: — 



(Kxlraet from Letter of .Mr. Riissull to tiie Secretary ot State, 1 1th February, 1815, 

 page G(j.) 



" I could not helieve that the indcpondem-p of the United States was derived from the Treaty of 

 178;3 ; that till' recnuiiition nf thai iiulcpciideiice by fireat liritaiii i,'ave to this Treaty any ]ieculiar 

 character, or that such character, suppnsiin,' il exisud, would necessarily render this Treaty alisolutely 

 insepar.ililo in its ]irnvisiniis, ami make il one entire ami iiidivisililc wlmle, eipially im]ierisliahle in 

 all ils i.arls, hy any chance wliiih niinlit ncciir in the relalimis lielwecii the contracting' parlies. 



"The independence of the United States rests ii].nn those fiiinlamenlal iniiiciplcs sri forth and 

 acted on hv the .\mericaii ConLrr. ss in the dcclaralinii of .Inly. I77ii. and iioi on any British grant in 

 the Trealy of I7S;1, and its era is dated accordiiiiily. 



" Thu Treaty of 17a3 was meiely u 'I'rcaly of I'eoce, auJ therefore subject to the same rules of 



