Page images
PDF
EPUB

I have therefore only to add, that I am in possession of some papers which throw considerable light on this subject, and which (with such other information as I have obtained or may obtain) I shall be happy to communicate to your lordship, whenever your lordship thinks proper. I have the honour to be, &c. &c. WM. PINKNEY.

(Signed)

Lord Wellesley to Mr. Pinkney.

The undersigned, his majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, has received his majesty's commands, to inform Mr. Pinkney, that the king has judged it expedient to signify his orders to the lords commissioners of the Admiralty, to give the necessary directions to the officers employed in the blockade and ports of Spain, from Gijon to the French territory, that they permit, notwithstanding the said blockade, Spanish or neutral vessels, laden with cargoes, the produce of Spain only, to sail from any port included in the limits of the said blockade; subject, nevertheless, (as to the ports to which they trade) to the restrictions of his majesty's orders in council of the 26th of April, 1809, and of the 7th of January,

1807.

The undersigned requests Mr. Pinkney to accept the assurances of his high consideration.

(Signed)

Foreign Office, May 14, 1810.

WELLESLEY.

SIR,

Mr. Smith to Mr. Pinkney.

Department of State, May 22, 1810.

Your despatch of the 27th of March, by the British packet, was received on the 17th of this month.

The President has read with surprise and regret the answer of Lord Wellesley to your letter of the 2d of January, and also his reply to your note requiring explanations with respect to the blockade of France. The one indicates an apparent indifference as to the character of the diplomatic intercourse between the two countries, and the other evinces an inflexible determination to persevere in their system of blockade.

The provision made for the diplomatic agency, which is to succeed that of Mr. Jackson, manifests a dissatisfaction at the step necessarily taken here with regard to that minister, and at the same time a diminution of the respect heretofore attached to the diplomatic relations between the two countries. However persevering the President may be in the conciliatory disposition which has constantly governed him, he cannot be inattentive to such an apparent departure from it on the other side, nor to the duty im posed on him by the rules of equality and reciprocity applicable in such cases. It will be very agreeable to him to find that the provision in question is intended merely to afford time for a satisfactory choice of a plenipotentiary successor to Mr. Jackson, and that the mode of carrying it into effect may be equally unexceptionable. But whilst, from the language of the Marquis Wellesley, with respect to the designation of a chargé d'affaires, and from the silence as to any other successor to the recalled minister, it is left to be inferred that the former alone is in contemplation, it becomes proper to ascertain what are the real views of the British government on the occasion; and should they be such as they are inferred to be, to meet then by a correspondent change in the diplomatic establishment of the United States at London. The President relies on your discretion for obtaining the

requisite

requisite knowledge of this subject in a manner that will do justice to the friendly policy which the United States wish to be reciprocal in every instance between the two nations. But in the event of its appearing that the substitution of a chargé d'affaires for a minister plenipotentiary, is to be of a continuance not required or explained by the occasion, and consequently justifying the inference drawn from the letter of Lord Wellesley, the respect which the United States owe to themselves will require that you return to the United States, according to the permission hereby given by the President, leaving charged with the business of legation such person as you may deem most fit for the trust. With this view a commission, as required by a statute of the last session, is herewith inclosed, with a blank for the secretary of legation. But this step you will not consider yourself as instructed to take, in case you should have commenced, with a prospect of satisfactory result, the negociation authorized by my letter of the 20th of January.

In a letter of the 4th of this month, I transmitted to you a copy of the act of congress, at their last session, concerning the commercial intercourse between the United States and Great Britain and France. You will herewith receive another copy of the same act. In the fourth section of this statute you will perceive a new modification of the policy of the United States, and you will let it be understood by the British government that this provision will be duly carried into effect on the part of the United States.

A satisfactory adjustment of the affair of the Chesapeake is very desirable. The views of the President upon this delicate subject you may collect not only from the instructions heretofore given to you, but from the sentiments that had been manifested on the part of this government in the discussion with Mr. Rose, and from the terms and conditions contained in the arrangement made with Mr. Erskine. And conformably with these views thus to be collected, you will consider yourself hereby instructed to negociate and conclude an arrangement with the British government in relation to the attack on the frigate Chesapeake.

(Signed)

I have the honour to be, &c. &c.

Wm. Pinkney, Esq. &c. &c. &c. London.

R. SMITH.

Extract of a Letter from Mr. Pinkney to Mr. Smith, dated

London, June 13, 1810.

I have not yet obtained from Lord Wellesley an answer to my letter of the 30th of April, concerning British blockades of France before the date of the Berlin decree. In a short conference on Sunday last, (the 10th instant) I pressed for a prompt and favourable reply, and shall, perhaps, receive it in the course of a few days. I had requested an interview on this subject on the 18th of last month, in consequence of a letter brought by Mr. Lee from General Armstrong, dated 2d of May; but the state of Lord Wellesley's health prevented its taking place sooner than the 10th

instant.

I have sent Mr. Craig (a young gentleman of Philadelphia) as a messenger to General Armstrong. He carries a newspaper copy of the late act. of congress, respecting commercial intercourse.

I have prepared an official letter to you on the affair of the Chesapeake; but as Mr. Irving leaves town for Liverpool in the morning, there is not time to copy it. It shall be forwarded, however, by Mr. Morier, who is about to sail in the British frigate Venus, for New York; or sent to Liverpool to the care of Mr. Maury. In the mean time it will be sufficient to GEN. CHRON. VOL. III. NO. XV. 2 N state

state to you that I am expecting every day Lord Wellesley's written over ture in that affair, and that in our conferences, which resulted in an understanding that he would make such an overture, no objection was made by him to an engagement to restore the men to the ship from which they were forcibly taken, without the offensive reservation prescribed to Mr. Rose and Mr. Erskine, and contained in Mr. Jackson's project; to offer a suitable provision, without any reservation, for the families of the sufferers, as a part of the terms of satisfaction; to forbear all reference, in the papers leading to or containing the arrangement, to the President's proclamation, or to any thing connected with it; to adopt in those papers a style and manner not only respectful, but kind to our government; to recite in them (as in Mr. Erskine's letter to you in April, 1809) that Admiral Berkeley had been promptly disavowed, and as a mark of his Britannic majesty's displeasure, recalled from an important command. I have on this occasion met with nothing of a discouraging nature, except on the impracticable point of the trial and punishment of the offending officer. On that point it is impossible to prevail; but there will be no objection to my declaring, in a reply to the overture, the expectation of the American government, that the officer shall be tried and punished, or to a rejoinder, (if I wish it) on the part of Lord Wellesley, suggesting in a friendly way the reasons for not fulfilling that expectation."

SIR,

Mr. Pinkney to Mr. Smith.

London, July 1, 1810. I have this day had the honour to receive your letter of the 23d and 2od of May by Mr. Parish, and have sent a note to Lord Wellesley requesting an interview. He is out of town, but will return to-night, or in the morning. The instructions contained in your letter concerning the inequality, supposed to be intended by this government in the state of our diplomatic relations, shall be executed with the discretion which undoubtedly they require; and I am persuaded that the result will be perfectly satisfactory to the President. In the mean time I think I can undertake to assure you, that no change has taken place in the opinion of Lord Wellesley, as announced in my private letter to you of the 4th of January, that a minister plenipotentiary of rank should be sent to the United States. Certainly, no idea has been entertained here of a permanent or long continued chargé d'affaires. It could only be intended to send one in the first instance. And I have reason to be confident that for some time past it has been in agitation to appoint a minister plenipotentiary without delay, that Lord Wellesley has in fact thought of and mentioned a person, and that Mr. Morier's departure has been put off in consequence.

In the case of the Chesapeake I have already stated to you that I think there will be no difficulty, if the farther punishment of Berkeley is not made on our part a sine qua non. Your instructious are very clear, that this is not to be peremptorily insisted on.

I have nothing to add to my communication of the 26th ultimo, concerning the British blockades of France, before the Berlin decree, except that I mean to press Lord Wellesley on that subject at our next interview, as I did at our last. I shall not fail at the same time to draw his attention to the orders in council, and the intercourse act.

I need scarcely say that if events should make it proper for me, in obedience to the President's commands, to return to America (leaving a chargé d'affaires) I shall lose no time in doing so.

(Signed)

I have the honour to be, &c. &c.

WM. PINKNEY.

Mr.

Mr. Smith to Mr. Pinkney.

SIR, Department of State, July 2d, 1810. Your several letters of the 8th and 9th April, and 2d and 3d of May, have been received.

Whilst it was not known, on one hand, how far the French government would adhere to the apparent import of the condition, as first communicated, on which the Berlin decree would be revoked, and on the other hand, what explanation would be given by the British government with respect to its blockades, prior to the decree, the course deemed proper to be taken, was that pointed out in my letter to you of the 11th November, and in that to General Armstrong, of the 1st of December. The precise and formal declaration since made by the French government, that the condition was limited to the blockades of France, or part of France, of a date prior to the date of the Berlin decree, and the acknowledgment by the British government of the existence of such blockades, particularly that of May, 1806, with a failure to revoke it, or even to admit the con structive extinguishment of it, held out in your letter to the Marquis Wellesley, give to the subject a new aspect and decided character.

As the British government constantly alleged, that the Berlin decree was the original aggression on our neutral commerce; that her orders in council were but a retaliation on that decree, and moreover, on that ground asserted an obligation on the United States, to have effectual measures against the decree, as a preliminary to a repeal of the orders, nothing could be more reasonable than to expect, that the condition in the shape last presented would be readily accepted. The President is therefore equally disappointed and dissatisfied at the abortiveness of your correspondence with Lord Wellesley, on this important subject. He entirely approves the determination you took to resume it, with a view to the special and immediate obligation lying on the British government to cancel the illegal blockades, and you are instructed, in case the answer to your letter of the 30th April should not be satisfactory, to represent to the British government in terms, temperate but explicit, that the United States consider themselves authorized, by strict and unquestionable right, as well as supported by the principles heretofore applied by Great Britain to the case, in claiming and expecting a revocation of the illegal blockades of France, of a date prior to that of the Berlin decree, or preparatory to a further demand of the revocation of that decree.

It ought not to be presumed, that the British government, in reply to such a representation, will contend, that a blockade like that of May, 1806, from the Elbe to Brest, a coast of not less than one thousand miles, proclaimed four years since, without having been at any time attempted to be duly executed by the application of a naval force, is a blockade conformable to the law of nations, and consistent with neutral rights. Such a pretext is completely barred, not only by the unanimous authorities both of writers and of treaties on this point, not excepting even British treaties; but by the rule of blockade, communicated by that government to this, in the year 1804, in which it is laid down, that orders had been given not to consider any blockade of those islands, (Martinique and Guadaloupe) as existing, unless in respect of particular ports, which may be actually invested, and then not to capture vessels bound to such ports, unless they shall previously have been warned not to enter them, and that they (the lords of the Admiralty) had also sent the necessary directions on the subject to the judges of the Vice-Admiralty courts in the West Indies and

America.

America. In this communication, it is expressly stated, that the rule to the British courts and cruisers was furnished in consequence of the representations made by the government of the United States, against blockades not unlike that now in question, and with the express view of redressing the grievance complained of. Nor ought it to be presumed, that the British government will finally resort to the plea, that her naval force, although unapplied, is adequate to the enforcement of the blockade of May, 1806, and that this forms a legal distinction between that and the Berlin decree of November following. Were it admitted, that an adequate force existed, and was applicable to such a purpose, the absurdity of confounding the power to do a thing, with the actually doing of it, speaks for itself. In the present case, the absurdity is peculiarly striking. A port blockaded by sea, without a ship near it, being a contradiction in terms, as well as a perversion of law and of common sense.

From the language of Lord Wellesley's two letters, it is possible he may endeavour to evade the measure required, by subtle comments on the posture given to the blockade of May, 1806, by the succeeding orders of 1807. But even here he is met by the case of the blockade of Copenhagen, and the other ports of Zealand, in the year 1808, at a time when these, with all Danish ports, were embraced by those very orders of 1807; a proof that, however the orders and blockades may be regarded as in some respects the same, they are regarded, in others, as having a distinct operation, and may consequently co-exist without being absolutely merged in or suspended the one by the other.

In the difficulty which the British government must feel in finding a gloss for the extravagant principle of her paper blockades, it may perhaps wish to infer an acquiescence on the part of this government, from the silence under which they have, in some instances, passed. Should a disposition to draw such an inference show itself, you will be able to meet it by an appeal, not only to the successful remonstrance in the letter to Mr. Thornton, above cited, but to the answer given to Mr. Merry, of June 1806, to the notification of a blockade, in the year 1806, as a precise and authentic record of the light in which blockades, and the notifications of them, were viewed by the United States. Copies of the answer have been heretofore forwarded, and another is now inclosed, as an additional precaution against miscarriage.

Whatever may be the answer to the representation and requisition which you are instructed to make, you will transmit it without delay to this department. Should it be of a satisfactory nature, you will hasten to forward it also to the diplomatic functionary of the United States at Paris, who will be instructed to make a proper use of it, for obtaining a repeal of the French decree of Berlin, and to proceed, concurrently with you, in bring ing about successive removals, by the two governments, of all their predatory edicts. I avail myself of this to state to you, that it is deemed of great importance, that our ministers at foreign courts, and especially at Paris and London, should be kept, the one by the other, informed of the state of our affairs at each. I have the honour to be, &c. &c.

(Signed)

William Pinkney, Esq. &c. &c. &c.

R. SMITH.

SIR

Mr. Smith to Mr. Pinkney.

Department of State, July 5th, 1810.

Your last communications having afforded so little ground for expecting that the British government will have yielded to the call on it to originate

the

« PreviousContinue »