men taken from the Chesapeak as the simple and sufficient act of reparation: to which, however, His Majesty would still be willing to add, as a spontaneous act of his own generosity, a provision for the widows and orphans of the men killed in action.

The second dispatch of Mr. Secretary Canning to Mr. Erskine, dated the 23d of January 1809, disclosed the principal objects of the negotiation, and stated clearly and distinctly, the conditions to be stipulated on both sides. The same anxiety which led to a reconsideration of the subject in general, seems to have suggested to the British Secretary of State, the alternative of making those conditions immediate or eventual: from which alternative, however, proceeded, subsequently, an unfortunate misunderstanding; as was, indeed, undoubtedly to have been expected. If time had been taken to reduce the respective pretensions of the two parties to the form of a treaty, or other solemn instrument, that equivocation which afterwards took place would have been prevented. On these in

disavow the arrangement he had made with the Americans; that no loss, however, should accrue to the American merchants, or captains of ships, who had proceeded to England under the idea that Mr. Erskine had understood and accomplished the object of his mission, as has been already stated in our last volume *.

Attempts were repeatedly made to prove that the agreement made by the envoy Erskine, was not unauthorized by our government. A very heavy charge against the good faith of our government was made in both houses of parliament, which was supported by another charge, viz. that ministers had presented, in justification of their conduct, a defective account of the documents relating to it, and withheld those which, if published, would have justified the arrangement. These charges, accompanied with strong expressions of indignation at such an instance of duplicity, called forth repeated denials, in the session of parliament 1810, both from Mr. Canning, who was no longer in the foreign office, and from Mr. Perceval, who

ment entered into with the Americans, by the envoy and plenipotentiary, on the behalf of his government. But government considered Mr. Erskine's arrangement not only as inconsistent with, but as being directly in opposition to his instructions. Mr. Canning, in dispatches to Mr. Erskine, specified wherein that inconsistency and contradiction consisted; and he added, that by these reasons His Majesty was compelled to

maintained that Mr. Erskine had not only acted without authority, but in direct contradiction to his instructions. Of these instructions those relating to the orders in council was all that was at first communicated to parliament, because, it was said, the negotiation was still pending. But, in the subsequent session, when the assertion was renewed, that the envoy would be justified in what he had done by other parts of his in

structions, Mr. Canning seconded a motion for the production of the whole of them. The whole were printed, and open to public inspection. The public was satisfied that Mr. Erskine had acted even in contradiction to his orders. And the members of opposition, in both houses of parliament, were silent.

In America, the disavowal of Mr. Erskine's agreement, was received by government with great dissatisfaction. It was unequivecally stated, even by the president himself, that Mr. Erskine had been duly authorized to do what he had done. The president's ministers openly declared that only a partial information had been given to the public of Mr. Erskine's instructions, and that one of them, if published, would be found to authorize the whole of his conduct. By these means, which, as afterwards appeared, were employed with a view to some electioneering interests, a violent degree of irritation was excited against Great Britain, which was displayed (more especially amongst the democratic party, and in the democratic parts of the union) in the usual course of newspaper dissertations, town meetings, and dinners, and harangues at taverns.

Together with the disavowal of the agreement, notice was sent to Mr. Erskine that his Majesty had been pleased to recall him, and to appoint Mr. Jackson in his stead. This gentleman, on Lis arrival in America, early in September, found that the government of the

United States, in addition to the motives of irritation so industriously disseminated amongst the people, had taken exception to him personally, for having before been employed by his Sovereign on a particular service, viz. the expedition to Zealand, of which we gave an account in another volume. * The part that Mr. Jackson acted, on that occasion, was not of a nature to recommend him either to the court of France, or the French party in America. Accordingly that party tried their best endeavours to prevent his reception at Washington. After some delays, he was admitted to present his credentials as etivoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to the United States. But a month elapsed before the president would leave his country house to give him the accustomed audience of reception. The American ministers absented themselves for the same period from the seat of government, and when they did come, the British minister, after two interviews with the secretary of state, was debarred from all personal intercourse with them on the subject of his instructions. Meanwhile the newspapers, under the influence of government, teemed with every species of personal abuse and invective against Mr. Jackson, of the grossness and vulgarity of which no idea can be formed from that of the most licentious and scurrilous publications of this country.+ Mr. Jackson was in a situation of great delicacy and and difficulty, being placed between the alternative of suffering the most injurious imputations on the honour and good faith of his country to pass unnoticed, or of vindicating them at the risk of giving offence to the American

government.

The unaccommodating firmness of Mr. Jackson was contrasted with the amiable pliancy of Mr. Erskine. It served the political views of the American ministers, to nourish the popular prejudice against him. It was not to be expected that, in such circumstances, he should succeed in his negotiation. From subsequent information it is now known to have been absolutely impossible, upon the terms of bis instructions. It could not, however, be foreseen that his mission would terminate, as it did, in the suspension of all official communication between him and the government to which he was deputed, and in the adoption by the national or representative, the Jegislative, and the executive branches of the government, of ail those measures and denunciations of personal obloquy and insult which had, till then, been apparently confined to the populace, and the papers calculated for their perusal.

The British government considered the transaction between the United States and Mr. Erskine, as terminated by the formal and public disavowal of the envoy's authority to do what he had done, and Mr. Jackson was directed to

take the business up where the disavowal had left it, and to proceed on the terms which were anew prescribed to him. But the president thought it proper to call repeatedly on Mr. Jackson for an explanation of the disavowal. This gentleman declared, that the disavowal was occasioned by Mr. Erskine's deviations from his instructions. He took occasion, at the same time, to contradict a surmise that Mr. Erkine had other instructions besides those that were laid before parliament, and had been communicated. Unfortunately for Mr. Jackson, though otherwise for the cause entrusted to him, he discovered that Mr. Erskine had so far adhered to his instructions, as to propose to the acceptance of the American minister the conditions contained in them; and that, it was owing only to his subsequent relinquishment of them, that all the present embarrassments arose. The Americans therefore had no right to express so much surprize at the agreement not being approved in England. But Mr. Jackson, who did not scruple to say so, was told that he had insulted the government, and that no farther communication would be received from him. It was asserted that he had reproached the American government with knowing, at the time of their making the agreement with Mr. Erskine, that he was exceeding his powers. He had, indeed, abundant reason to do so. It is, nevertheless, most certain,

that this charge against Mr. Maddison and his minister, is not to be found in any of his official letters. It was not indeed said to exist in direct terms, but to have been somewhere implied. In every in stance where Mr. Jackson has occasion to mention or allude to the knowledge of the restrictions which ought to have governed Mr. Erskine's conduct, he refers not to the period when the agreement was concluded, but that of this subsequent discussion and demand of explanation, when the American government knew every particular of the transaction.

The president, in breaking off all communication with the British envoy, found it advisable to fortify himself with a set of legislative resolutions, approving of his conduct in doing so. These resolutions were carried in the house of representatives, after a continued discussion of twentyfive days, and being signed by the president, assumed the shape of a solemn legislative act. But the legislature of Massachuset passed a joint resolution expressive of their opinion that the negotiation with the British ministry had been broken off without any just or adequate cause. The line of conduct pursued by the president towards Mr. Jackson, was exactly the same with that which he had observed to other British ministers. It was his aim to ascertain beforehand,

what was the point to which Mr. Jackson would not be able to agree, and thereupon to insist and take his stand. But Mr. Jackson adhered to his orders, which expressly enjoined him not to propose any thing respecting the grand subject of difference, the orders in council, but to receive from the American minister, whatever might be proposed by him on that head. In plain terms, England was satisfied with things as they were. The orders in council she said must remain, unless their object. could be accomplished otherwise. The main object which the American minister seems to have had in view, in the course, and by the issue of this transaction, was, to feed the animosity of the democratic party against England, and thus to increase the ardour which that party had evinced in support of his power. Nor was the appeal of the chief magistrate to the passions of the people made in vain. The British minister was exposed to repeated insults, and nothing, but the utmost prudence and forbearance on his part, could have averted the most serious personal danger. It is but justice to add that all these indecencies and excesses were regretted and reprobated by all the dispassionate and respectable part of the American community.

The official account of these transactions was brought to Eng

land, land by the secretary of the British legislation. And Mr. Pinkney, the American resident at London, in consequence of the orders he had received, demanded the recall of Mr. Jackson; which was, of course, without hesitation, acceded to *

The Marquis Wellesley, the British secretary of state, told the American minister "that his Majesty was always disposed to pay the utmost attention to the wishes and sentiments of states in amity with him, and had therefore been pleased to direct the return of Mr. Jackson to England. But his Majesty had not marked with any expression of his depleasure the conduct of Mr. Jackson, whose integrity, zeal, and ability had long been distinguished in his Majesty's service;" and who did not appear, on the present occasion, to have committed any intentional offence against the government of the United States.

Thus ended the third attempt that was made, by the British government, to accommodate those differences with the United States which had arisen out of the peculiar maritime situations of the two countries, and the unfortunate rencontre which, in the year 1807, occurred between two of their ships of war. And it is to be apprehended that, without a departure of one of the two parties from their respective tenets, no perma

nent adjustment of their views, at least as long as the present war lasts, can be expected. The experiment of concessions to the utmost extent to which it was found practicable to carry it, was tried under the Grenville administration; and consigned to an unequivocal form in 1806, between the Lords Holland and Auckland, and the American minister. Thattreaty was returned unratified, as being yet an insufficient propitiation. The surrender of the right of taking our seamen by force out of American ships was, among other things, expressly refused by the British government. And it has since been as peremptorily declared by the Americans, that, without that surrender, no treaty can ever be agreed to.

The great argument of the Americans, is, that the sea is as open to all men as the atmosphere we breathe in. So also was the land before conquests were made, and the boundaries of different states and governments established. The different provinces of the earth have been assigned, in the progress of society, to the nations who possessed the inclination, and the means of acquiring and preserving them. A preponderating power at sea has been acquired by the superior skill and valour of Britain; and she maintains it in the same manner, as other sovereigns do their territories, by the strength