The New York Herald Newspaper, August 4, 1853, Page 2

Tene yEnc the French Miniter, Aprit, Gant wr.) eppesition, a6 well as the ministry, are pery'exed with the prevent situation of adhirs, and know not which way to tarn themacives, or whether it i» best te go backward or forward, er what steps to take to extricate that nesion from ite present dangerous sit- mation.” ‘Mr. Hartley, with the consent of Lord North, made @ cenfidential proposition to Dr. Franklin, the next , April, 1779, for a truce of five or seven years, Kite plan was not Approved of by Franklin. ‘The British Ministry had resolved never to acknow- fedge the act of the American Congress of July 4, W%, declaring independence. Peace the Ameri @mms could have hed at any moment after 1778; @pery grievance would have been redrewed ; the mother country then required no other condition fom the cobonies than that they should enter into me commereial arrangements as would have given te the trade of Great Britain superior advantages to @at of other nations. The power of Parliament was @mereed absolute and unlimited, but the government ef Lerd North’s administration was willing to admit, fe a teaty, limitations and exceytions to it in favor @f America. Bat the dovluration of indepen tence nd added a new feamre to the war; other questions were absorbed by that vast and simple stipulation. Phis was the only basis on which America, when fee commission for concilimtian was appointed ia #38, would treat for peace. But Hagland was not yet prepared for that concession, nor could a minis- fy have been formed that would have had the @arage to have submitted to that act of humiliation. Lard Chatham, it is well known, declared himself in Bie last speech, in April, 1778, opposed to the dis wemberment of the ‘ancient and noble British mo wereby.” Indee?, a motion made im the House of @ommons by Mr. Powys, in April, 1778, to authorize the commis-iouers, employed to treat with Amerisa, t® acknowledge the mdependence cf the States, fhvagh supported by Mr. Fox and Mr. Barke, seems fo been generally discountenanced, and was finally rejected without a division. Commissioners were, however, appointed ander Lord North's act, ‘whe proceeded to America, and landed at Philadel phie about the Ist of June, 1778. They were the Er! of Oartisle, Governor Johnston, and Mr. Bden; Bat the Continental Congress refused to treat with fen. ‘The adminiesration of Lord North made no farther from these conversations that the | @ecisive attempt for a cessation of hostilities. They | held to the rms proposed im the commission of February, 1778, with a zeal and resolution that fivally proved fatal to them. This effort of the mother eountry to conclude a peace with the United States is interesting as a matter of history, although it was est accompanied with the least success, nor can it in my way be connected with the treaty of 1783. But B belongs (says Lyman) to the diplomatic history of fie period, and it is worthy of attention, as illustra. | tog the decided progress, the ‘rebellion im the Massachusetts,’ as the first Lord of the treasury was fe the habit of calling it, had already made iw the ewurre of four years. It will not escape observation ‘that these terms, if embraced, substantially amounted te independence, or very speedily must have resulted im that s‘ate of things.” Ia 1781 @ proposition was made by the impe- iad courts of Russia and Austria to arrange, im a Qvegres under their mediation, the terms of a @pneral peace. This business occupied the atten- fom of the Buropean ooarts during several months. Peamce was anxious for peace, and endeavored te render the mediation effectual. Tie terms were @bviously inadmissible with Americans, as the inde. pendence of the United States was not mude the Basis of the mediation. Austria and Russia were not much disposed, at that time, to acknowledge American independence. The French Minister at &t Petersburg wrote to Mr. Dana, American Com. msiesioner at that court, September, 1789, and vamerked, ‘It is the design of the mediating powers ‘> avoid committing thenelves by acknowledging the independence of the United States, till England heseelf shall have proneunced such an acknowledg- ment.” Lord Nerth’s administration was finally prostrated im the British House of Commons, by a resolution fered by General Conway on the 27th of February, 3982, and which was earried by a vote of 234 to 215. 1s -was, in substance, a repetition of a motion which had been often unsuccessfully moved by the whigs against further prosecution of offensive war with Mmerica. During the interval from the time of the qaesage of Lord North’s concillatory bills, in 1778, ‘t the dissolution of Pariiament in September, 1759, Mme cause of the revolution made no progress in the Hhewse of Commons. The opposition made no gales from the ministerial side; on the eentrary, they appear to have been convinced ‘Ghat the question of peace or war, however much dis ‘eused in Partiament, was not there to be decided. Bmerica, itself, was the scene of action; and the weent proved that in this country the time and the ‘tewms of the treaty were to be dictated. The indig- mafion of the British nation was aroused at the alli- ance of the United States with France, their an- q@ent enemy. One party was desperate and indiffer- emt, and the other exhausted and disgusted. The proclamation for dissolving Parliament was, to the ‘whigs, sudden and unexpected. They were taken hay surprise, and appear to have remained astonished and inactive, while their opponents were prepared and vigorous. Ofthe one hundred and thirteen new members who were then elected, the great majority ‘were tories. The new Parliament was, of course, ‘Baighly favorable to the existing ministry; and on the meeting of the two houses, the tories carried their ‘qlivers to the King by a majority of 82 in the House @f Commons. It was in this house, at the following gencion, that General Conway, a whig, carried his motion above referred to, against ministers, by a ‘mmijsity of 19. Sach was the influence of the cap- ‘mre of the army of Cornwallis, by the allied dmericans and French, on a British Honse wt Commons, with a large tory majority. As suc- wes grew more hopeless, and disasters ac- snmulated, disapprobation of the war had increased % the nation, and the ministerial majority had gpadually diminished in the Commons. The scales ‘were for a short time nearly balanced; several ffimes they vibrated, now the fall was decisive, and ‘the war party kicked the beam. After several fur- ther struggles, Lord North announced to the House ‘that there was no administration, his Majesty having come to a fall determination of changing his minis- Yer. His lordship thereupon took leave of the ‘Heese as minister, thanking them for the honorable support they had given him through so long a course of years, and in 40 many trying occasions. A whig administration was socn after formed, ‘with the Marquis of Rockingham at ita head. Mr. Fox and Lord Shelburne were the Secretaries of Btate. This ministry were distracted by a want of mnanimity, and was soon dissolved by the death of fhe Marquis of Rockingham, on the first of July 1782. The whig party were divided upon the sul ject of America. Lord Shelburne and his friends were extremely unwilling to acknowledge ler inde- pendence, as had been advocated by Rockingham, Fox, and other whigs. Lord Shelbume was ap pointed successor to the Marquis, with the expecta tion that he would manage to retain some hold apon America. Fox and his friends, who saw no hope of peace while such a condition was insisted upon, re- signed, and the Shelburne cabinet was formed, in fe vain hope of carrying on the government, when such men as Fox, Surke. and Sheridan, were excluded from the whig councils, and the tory was strong and powerful. The proroga tien of Parliament prevented « of the strength or weakness of this new istry. Upon fhe mecting of Parliament in Decent! « was @eoovered that the question which had formed the setensible cause of the schism in the Kockinghar eabinet had been abandoned, and that Lord Shel- and his friends had at length resolved to con- wede the absolute independence of the Uniled States. Je September, 1722, the Shelbwrue cabinet wa therized their commissioner at Paris, Richard Oewald, te acknowledge the independence of the colonies. This is the first imstraction given by the British mivistry in which it was to recognize the declaration of a 4,2778. A great and immediate progress was made im. the pre- Mminaries, America could nut be dealroos of con- tinuing the war, bat she had shown her ability to maintain her Declaration of Independence. As carly as August, 1779, Congress prepared instructions, and in September following appointed John Adame, ‘of Maseachusetts, a commissioner to make @ treaty of peace, with subsequent instructions to conclude & commercial treaty with Great Britain. Mr. Adams went without delay to Hurope, being subsequently appointed Minister to Hvlland. Bat he was not authorised to make propositions to the British government, anj it does not appear that the United States, at apy time during the war, and after the act of July 4.1776, made any attempt at nego- tiation, either directly, or by means of her allies. Congress, at all times, rejected, with great emphasis, even the project of a short trace. This was consid ered highly dangerous to the liberties of the country, though a favorite notion with many of the best ‘riends of Ameriea im England. The, commission under whieh the preliminaries of the treaty were actually concluded, was issued by the Continental Congress in June, 1781. It empowered John Adams, Benja- min Franklin, Jobn Jay, Henry Laurens and Thomas Jefferson, or the majority of them, or such of them as may assemble, to repair to such place as might be fixed upon for opening negotiations for peace, and, in the name ot she United States, to conclude with the ambassadors or commissioners of other powars, treaties of peace, &c. All the commissioners were in Europe during the disenssions respecting the treaty, except Mr. Ji ffer-on, who was in America, and de- clined the appointment. Franklin, Jay and Oswald met at Paris in September, and were joined in Octo- ber by Adams and, in tmne to sign the treaty, by Laurens. The provisional treaty of peace was signed at Poris, the 30th of November, 1782, on the part of America, by Messrs. Adams, Franklin, Jay, and Laurens, and by Richard Oswald on the part of Great Britain. . ‘The preliminary articles being ratified within the time specified by the respective governments, the de. finitive treaty of peace, substantially a copy of the provisional one, was signed by Messrs. Franklin, Adams, and Jay, for the Uriited States, and by Mr. David Hartley for England, at Paris, September, 3, 1783. This treaty was unanimously ratified by Congress on the 14th of February, 1784. Hostilities had ceased by proclamation, in April, 1783. The British minis- ter refused to insert an article into the treaty on the subject of commerze. The treaty of 1783 was an instroment of a peca’lar character. It diflered in its most easential ciream- stances from most of the treaties made between na tions. It was a treaty of partition; a treaty to ascer- tain the boundaries and the rights of the nation which the mother country acknowledged to be ereat- ed by that imstrument. Independence was one of the st’pulations made in favor of America by Great Britain; the boundaries were another; the fisheries a@ third—for the mother country asserted equal claims for all these rights or privileges. This treaty was exceedingly favorable and honorable to the United States, and was negotiated by the American Commissioners with great ability and uncommon address. They took advantage, very successfally, of the ancient jealousy and enmity that existed between England and the house of Bourbon. Ameriea obtained an acknowledgment of her in- dependence in the fullest manner, as well as a con- firmation of the original boundaries of the colonies, and a recognition of her righta and privitiges m the fisheries. She made a much more favorable treaty with Great Britain than either Spain or France did at the same time. In England the treaty with America was exceed- ngly unpopular, and taken together with the oon- cessions Great Britain was absolutely under the ne- cessity of making at the time to France and Spain, threw the Shelburne ministry into a miuority in the first debate in the House of Commons, when the pro- visional treaty with America, and the preliminary treaties between Great Britain, France, and Spain, were laid before Parliement, in Febrvary,1783. A resolution offered im the House of Commons hy Tant John Cavendish, declared that “the concessions made to the adversaries of Great Britain by the pro- visional treaty, and preliminary articles, were greater than they were entitled to, eisser from the actual situation vf their respective possessions, or from their comparative strength.” This resolution was earried against the ministry by a vote of 207 to 190. The great object of the majority was to compel Lord Shelburne and some of his adherents to resign their places in the cabinet. This was effected by the extraordinary coalition of Lord North and Mr. Fox and their friends, composed of both tories and whigs. About three- fourths of the coalition were friends of Lord North, andon a trial of his own strength, Fox, who had calculated upon ninety followers, found himself sup. ported by only forty-six votes against two hundred and nineteen. The coalition, on the first trial against the ministers, carried amendments to the address to the King, by 2 majority of sixteen, the numbers being two hundred and twenty-four to two hundred and eight. The Earl of Shelburne and his friends having resigned after their defeat, a coalition administration was formed on the 2d of April, at the head of which was placed the Duke of Portland; and Lord North and Mr. Fox were made Secretaries of State. By this coalition ministry, in April, 1783, David Hartley was scent to Paris, in place of Mr. Oswald, to com- plete the negptiations between Great Britain and the United States before mentioned. The negotiators, however, were unable to agree on any alterations in the former articles; nor were they able to agree on arrangemeate for the future commercial inter- course between the two countries. Mr. Hartley therefore joined the American commissioners in signing the definitive treaty of peace on the 3d of September, 1783. The American Commissioners not having succeeded in making a treaty of com mer were compelled to defer the considern- tion of that subject. The English sought for delay, a3 they had not determined what course to i with their late colonies ; had hopes that the e hough successful in the Revo- lution, wae net thoroughly consolidated. Evidently an expectation was entertained thatthe American confederacy would diesol,e from weakness, and tha some portion of the wreck would seek again the sup- port of, and union with, the mother country—a sentl- ment which was universal at that time throughout or have anion The English government did not pay much atten tion to the concerns of America, for the first jive or six years after the peace of 1743. The affairs of the continent of Europe, India, and domestic matters 0, exciting interest, occupied the public mind and the attention of ministers far more than American politics, or commercial intercoarse with the newly acknowledged independent States. The British gov ernment sent no minister te the United States during the time of the confederation—refused to agree to any commercial arraur vent whatever—and con. tented iteelf with the i ut provoking satisfac- tion of holding, contrary treaty, the forts on the northern a Great anxiety nj aw v existed America on thr subject of commercial interconr-e, which was left in an unsettled state with Nogland, although other Faropean comme nations readily entered into treaties ¢ with the United States. In the me ¢, the nation rushed into w mest roinous commerce wilh that in a short time w 1 evile the Kevolntionary war and th of the cor y were deily casing. The very earliest meas: re adopted hy Congresa to ob- tain a forraal protection for the trads of the o On the ist of May, 178%, only ten day. ratification of pe 4 ordered a G ecomd oupaission % be prepared (or Messrs, Adwus, Franklin and Jay, or elther of them, to enter into a treaty ef commen te with Great Britain. But this commission apper we to have accomplished nothing in their attempts to negotiate with that power. They ot Paris in A 1785, and were Se dnea be) ofeommerce with several powers of Europe. Mr. Hartley, the British P! who signed the definitive treaty, was notified that the American Commissioners were furnished with powers for en- tering into a treaty of amity and commerce with his nation. He wrote to the court of London for in- structions, and* received a letter declaring the friendly disposition of the English government to- wards the United States and their readiness to re- ceive proposals for commercial regulations; but Mr. Hartley was soon after recalled. The Commis- sioners then addressed the Duke of Dorset, the British Ambassador at the court of France, on the subject. The Duke answered that he was authorized by the British ministers to say that they would take into consideration any proposals coming from the United States for the mutual benefit of the two countries; but that the British court proposed, as a previous stipulation, that the United States should send a minister properiy authorized, and vested with the necessary powers, to London, as more suitable to the dignity of either power, than wou'd be the carrying on at any third place negotia- tions of so great im; ce. The Commissioners replied, December 9,°1784, to the Duke, that they had fall power to treat and oonclnde a treaty, and were willing to repair to London for that purpose, as they were not limited by their instructions to any place. That they were not authorized to anawer the Proposition for a miuister to reside at the coart o Britain, but that they would send a copy of the Duke's letter to Congress, who would determine upon it according to their wisdom. In a subsequent letter, dated March 26,1780, the Duke informed the Commissioners that he was instructed to learn from them what was the real nature of the powers with which they were invested—whether they were merely commissioned by Congress, or had received separate powers from the respective States. ‘ The apparent determination ef the respective States,” says the Duke, ‘‘to regulate their own separate imterests, renders it absolutely necessary towards forming a permanent system of oommerce, that my court should be informed how far the Commissioners can be duly authorized to enter mto any engagements with Great Britain, which it may not be in the power of any one of the States to render totally froitless and ineffectual.” On the 16th of May, the Commission- ers wrote the Duke that they had delayed acknow- ledgement of his letter, in expectation of receiving turther iwstroctions from Congress. They now in- formed his Grace that Congress, on the 24th of Feb- ruary, appointed a minister plenipotentiary to reside at the court of his Brittannic Majesty, who proposed to proceed to London in the course of two or three menths, rendering a more particular answer unnec- cessary. This correspondence is curious, as showing the weakness of the old confederacy of States in the eyes of Europe, and the feelings of the English government towards America at that time. Mr. Adams in a letter to Mr. Jay, then United States Secretary for Foreign Affairs, alluding to the Duke of Dorset’s letter, remarks that from the limitation in the articles of confederation with regard to treaties of commerce would probably arise a great deal of difficulty. “ Ifthe British min'stry wish and seek for delay, (he remarks) this will be their pre- text.” In another letter, April, 1786, Mr. Adams re- minds Mr. Jay that Mr. Hartley, the British Commis- sioner, on the negotiation of the treaty of peace, had proposed in 1784 to the American Commissioners, ia the name of the King, and his minister, Mr. Fox, that ministers should be exchanged immediately, between Congress and the British court. Mr. Adams adds:— You have received before now the formal proposition transmitted to us through the Duke of Dorset, to the same effect. The appoint ment of Mr. Temple, as Consul-General, is a stil stronger imdication of a real wish im the ministry that this measore may be pursued, and of a secret consciousness that they shall be obliged to tveat. J make no scruple, no hesitation to advise that a mi- nister may be sent ; ner will I be intimidated from giving this advice, by any apprehension that I shal be suspected of a design or a desire of going to Eng- land myself. Whoowar ges» wut neither find it a lu- ccauve nor a pleasant employment, nor will he be envied by me. I know that for years, if he does his duty, he will find no personal pleasure or advantage. But the measure of sending a minister to England appears to me the corner-stone of the true American system of politics in Europe ; and, if it is not done, we shall have cause to repent it for a bong time when it will be too late.” In the Continental Congress, on the 31st January, 1785, it was resolved, on motion of Robert R. Livings- ton, that a Minister Plenipotentiary be appointed to represent the United States at the court of Great Britain, and that the Secretary for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Jay) report instructions. On the 18th of February, Congress resolved that commissions of ministers to any foreign courts, charges d’affuires, and secretaries, should not exceed three years. On the 24th of February, Congreas elected by ballot, John Adams, a3 Minister to the court of Great Britain, and on the 2d of March, Colonel William 8. Smith, was appointed Secretary of Legation to the same court. This gentleman had served in the army during the Revolutionary war, and was appointed Lieutenant Colonel of one of the bastalions raised by the State of Massachusetts. He was successively, Aid to General Sullivan, Inspector and Adjutant General under Lafayette, and finally Aid to General Washington, who, at the close of the war, certified to his great fidelity, bravery, and good conduct in the several military stations he had held. Colonel Smith, on his diplomatic appointment, immediately proceeded to London, where he joined Mr. Adams, on the 25th of May, 1785. They were not previously acquainted, but the intelligence, zeal, and a ity of Colonel Smith, commended him to the favor of Mr. Adams, whose daughter he married, while he was at- tached to the embassy. The correspondence of Col. Smith with Secretary Jay is highly interesting. He visited the various courts of the continent of Europe during periods of leisure, and took great pains to make himself useful, by ees t yalnable in- formation, collected during fis travels, for the bene- fit of his own government. His exemple is worthy of imitation by some of the young gentlemen in our times, of whom we seldom hear anything, after their appointment as Secretaries of Legation’ and their departures tor Europe. Mr. Adams, whe was also Minister to Holland, while acting a3 one of the commissioners to nego- tiate treaties at Paris, on receiving his appointment as Minister to England, concluded to repair to Lon- don without returning to the Hayue to take leave of the Dutch government. He felt under great obliga- tions to the latter, as he had neotiated a large lov for the United States in Holland, which relieved many of the pressing demands on the government. He proposed to make a special visit to Holland, 0 otherwise to take leave of that government in 4 re spectiul letter. Previous to his departure from Paris, the Duke of Dorset called on him with hi+ congiatulations, and offers of his services in Eng. land. “He then told me (writes Mr. A.) that I must be in London time enough to pay my respects to the King on the 4th of June, his birthday; to that end I must carry oyer from hence a fine new coat, ady made, for that it was a rule of etiquotte there for everybody to have new clothes npon that day. who went to court, and very rich ones, and that my family must be introduced to the Queen. { told him J was sorry to hear that, but that Thoped it was not indispensable, for that at the court of Versailles, the families of Ambassadors only were required to be presented, and Ministers Pleui- potentiaries and Envoys had their option; my family liad chosen to avoid it in France, for many reasons. He said, that in England it was otherwise as to eti- quette and the ladies and daughters of all the Miniatera must, be presented to the Queen. [ hope, sir, you will ot think this po inmaterial or » trifling conversa- tion, when you cansider that the single ciroumstance of presenting.a family to court will make a difference of several hundred pounds sterlimg in my inevitable anpual expenses, This is not the first serious Jeotare that T have bad wpon the subjects of etiquette and even drem, There ia @ certain in pro. portion terank, which all the courts of Burage ae a setious point of exacting from every’ FP) presented to them. I need not say to you, sir, that American ministers have never yet been able to make jhis appearance at court ; they are now Jess able $0 do it than ever.” ‘The appearanee ef a minister plenipotentiary from acountry heretofore in eolonial subjection to the British crown, was @ novel spectacle throughout Exrope, as well asim Bogland. Nor could the cir- camstance fail to wound the pride of the British nation. Mr. Adams was, however, received with courtesy and attention, particularly by the Marquis of Cermarthen, who was Secretary of Statejin the cabinet then recently formed by the younger Pitt as Premier. Asriving in London on the 25th of May, 178, Mr. Adams, by request, called on the Secretary the following day and presented his credentials. On the let day of June, he was presented to King George III. by the Marquis, and was received by his Majesty in bis private closet, where, after the usual salutations, and in conformity to ebigiette on gach cecasions, he madea brief apeech to the King, in which, among other remarks, he said— The ap- pointment of a minister fram the United States to your Majesty’s court, will form an epoch in the his- tory of England and of Amerisa, I think myself more fortunate than all my fellow-citizens in having the distinguished honor to be the first to stand in your Majesty’s royal presence in a diplomatic character, and shall esteom myself the happiest of men if I can be instrumental in recom- mending my country more and more to your Majesty's royal benevolence, and of restoring an entire esteem, confidence, and affection, or, in better words, the old good nature, and the old good humor, between people, who though separated by an ocean and underdifferent governments, have the same language, a similar religion, and kindred blood.” To this the King replied with mach emo- tion :—“‘Sir, the circumstances of this audience are so extraordinary, the langvage you have now held is 80 extremely proper, and the feelings you have dis- covered so justly adapted to the occasion, that I must say, that I not only receive with pleasure the assurance of the friendly dispositions of the United States, but that I am very glad the choice has fallen upon you to be their minister, I wish you, sir, to believe, and that it may be understood in America, that I have done nothing in the late oontest but wbat I thought myself indispensably bound to do, bythe duty which I owed to my people. I will be very frank with you. I was the last to con- sont to the separation ; bat the separation having been made and having become imevitable, J have always. said, as I say now, that I would be the first to meet the friendship of the United States as an independent power. The mo- ment I see such sentiments and language as yours prevail, and a disposition to give this country the preference, that moment I shall say, let the cireumstances of language, religion and blood have their natural and fall effect.” After this answer, the King inquired of Mr. Adams whether he came last from France? and being answered in the affirmative with his characteristic familiarity, he, with a smile said to him, “There is an opinion ameng some people that you are not the most attached of all your countrymen to the manners of France.” Mr. Adami surprised at the remark, said, ‘ That opinion, sir, is not mistaken ;, I must avow to your Majesty I have no attachment bat to my own country.” The King quickly replied, ‘An honest man will never have any other.” “The conversation with the King (writes Mr. Adams) Congress will form their own judgment if I may expect from it a residence less painful than I expected, as so marked an attention from the King will silence many grumblers ; but we can infer no- thing from all this concerning the success of my mission.” On the 10th June, Mr. Adams was presented to Queen Charlotte by the Lord Chamberlain, and hazing heew previously informed Vy tire Heosatary of State that a speech would be expected from him on the occasion, he made his compliments to the Queen, who was attended by the ladies of the court, in the following words :— ‘Madam, among the circumstances which have ren- derei my mission to his Majesty desirable to me, I have ever considered it a8 a principal one, that I should have an opportunity of making my court toa great Queen, whose royal virtues and talents have ever been acknowledged and admired in America, as well as in all nations of Europe,as an example to princesses and the glory of her sex. Permit me, madam, to recommend to your Majesty’s royal good- ness, a rising empire, and an infant virgin world. Another Europe, madam, is rising in America. Toa philveophieal mind like your Majesty’s, there cannot e a More aa contemplation’ than this pros- pect of doubling the human species, and augment- ing, at the same time, their ity and happi- ness. It will in future ages te an glory of these kingdoms to have peopled that country,and to have sown there those seeds of ae of liberty, of virtue, and permit me, madam, to add, of piety, whichalone constitute the prosperity of nations, and the happi- ness of the human race. After venturing upon such high insinuations to your Majesty, it seems to be de- scending too far to ask, as I do, por Majesty’s royal indulgenze to a person, who is indeed unquallit for courts, and who owes his elevation to his distin- guished honor of standing before your Majesty, not to any circumstances of illustrious birth, fortune, or abilities, but merely to an ardent devotion to his native country, and some little industry and perse- verance in her service.” The Queen answered— “T thank you, sir, for your civHities to me and my family, and am glad to see you in this eountry.” A few days after, the Secretary of Legation, Col. | Smith, and Mgs. Adams and daughter, were present- ed at court and well received. Although the British ministry did not think it proper or expedient to senda minfster plenipoten- tiary to the United States, after the arrival of Mr. Adams in London, they appointed Mr. John Tem- ple, (afterwards Sir John T.) Consul General, who arrived in New York in November, 1785, and presented his credentials as Consul-Gene- ral for the United States to Secretary Jay. The question was submitted to Congress, whether he should be received or rejected. By the advice of Mr. Jay, he was recognized by an act of Congress, as Consul-General for Great Britain throughout the United States, as 2 matter of favor, and not as a matter of course, there being no treaty of commerce between the two nations to givea right to send consuls. Mr. Temple expressed his cordial wishes for mutual accommodation, bat was under- stood to be opposed to a commercial treaty. He remained in the United States, residing in New York, as Consul General until his death in 1798. He was son of Robert Temple, Exq., and succeeded his kinsman, Sir Richard Temple, in 1786, a8 baronet. He married a daughter of Governor Bowdoin, of M chueetts. MAF Adams was of opinion that Congress should jusist upon a minister plenipotentiary being sent from England to the United States, even so far as to recall him if it were not done, The British ministers were informed, through Mr. Adams, that Congress expected a minister to be sent to the United States, and were ready to receive and treat him with the respect due to his sovereign. Mr. Adama made repeated but ineffectual efforts to obtain a settlement of mattera in dispute betweea England and the United States, and to conclude a treaty of commerce; and as the British court de- clined seading a minister to this country, the Ameri- can minister,in October, 1757, at his request, had leave to retarn home. Conprress, at the same time, expressed their high sense of the services which Mr. Adams had rendered to the United States, “in the execution of the various important trusts committed to him; and presented to him their thawks for the patriotiem, perseverence, integrity, and diligence with which he had ably and faithfally served his country.” He hod his audience of leave with the King on the 20th Rebruary, 1788, when hia Majesty seid—'Mr, Adaws, you may with great truth pssure the United States that whenever they sball fulfil the J,,en my part, will fulfil it in wll a ee Tea wale wnt pleasant voyage, and much comfort with your family and The Contwental declined appointing a wuecemor't Mr. A at the British court, and thes matters stood until after the organization of the gevernment under the constitution, in 1739. President Washington authorized Gouvernear Morris, who was then io Burope, on his own private busi- ness, to aet as government agent, for the purp»e of ascertainiog whether, if another minister were ap- pointed, the British government would reciprocate the compliment, and also what their views might be a8 to carrying into full exeontion the treaty of peace, and entering imto commercial arrangements. A promice to reciprocate the appointment of minister was readily made, but on the other pointa Mr, Mor- ris could obtain little satisfaction, and his pride was touched at the indifference with which American affhirs rcemed to be regarded in England. The strength and dignity added to the American government, under the covetitotion, had its effect on ioreign uations. Great Britain at last condescended to appoint a mivister plenipotentiaryto the United States in the person of George Hammond, Esq., who arrived in this couptry, and presented his credentials in August, 1791. Soon after his arrival a correspondence was opened between him and Mr. Jefferson, Secre- tary of State, on the subjects in controversy between ihe two countries. The British minister having nO authority id ¢onelude @ commercial treaty, the con- sideration of there subjects was postponed. The limited powers of Mr. Hammond was matter of just complaint in the United States against the British overnment Negotiation on this side of the At- ntic was, however, attended with no better success than on the other. In 1792 Thomas Pinckney, of South Carolina, was appotnted by President. Wash- ington and the Senate, Minister Plenipotentiary to Great Britaio. This period is rendered exceedingly important in the diplomatic history of the country by the extraordinary condition of Europe. It was the beginning of a lene of blockades and oppres- sive acta committed by the belligerents, that, toge- ther with incalculable mischief to the trade of the United States, inilicted a serious wound upon the prosperity of the country, and in the end, led, after an interval of nearly twenty years unprotitable ne- gotiation, to a war with Great Britain. sf In the spring of 1793 France declared war against England and Holland. Tbe United States had trea- ties of amity with these powers, and with Frauce a treaty of alliance, made in 1778. Soon after the state of war in Europe was knowa in the United States, the President fssued strict neutrality on all the citizens. Wushiogton was resolved, notonly to maintain a neutral position for this country, but the hope of concluding a com- mercial arrangement with one of the great bellize rents was not entirely abandoned. The despatches received from England indicated a wish not to drive this country into a war; at avy rate, it was desirable to ascertain beyond a doubt the disposition of the British ministry, and either to remove the causes of quarrel, or to obtain satisfactory evidence that Great ritain was indifferent to their existence. The Pre- sident accordingly, on he léthof April, 1794, sent a message to the Senate stating the importanze of a special mission, notwithstanding his undiminished evofidence in Mr. Pinckney, the accredited Minister | to London, and he therefore nominated John Jay as envoy extraordinary to his Britannic Majesty. This has been considered one of the boldest and mort decided measures adopted by Gen, Wash- ington during his administration, It is one that is often referred to ia our political history, as baving awakened at the moment the utmost reproach and censure; but there are those among candid men of our own times, unpreju- diced by the politics of furmer days, who doubt whe- ther any one measnre proposed by the illustrious first President has been in the end, accompanied with more good consequences to the nation. ‘It confirmed at the time, (says Lyman,) the neutrality of the country; and consequently, extended to trade and commerce a!l the confidence and security the cer- ey of that fact could bestow. No one feared that the United States would take part with Eogland. This was impossible. Her neutrality could not be disturbed in that direction. And, when an envoy ex- treordinary was 1 ominated to his Britannic Majesty, the nation was satisfied, that the Executive at least, was determined not to take’part with France. This no- mination (of Mr. Jay) settled the question of neutra- lity for many years. The oppressive acts of the bel- ligerents were then in their infancy. America had, comparatively, suffered little; and though not a sti- pulation in favor of neutral rights was made in Jay’s treaty of 1794, Great Britain appeared to rest, for a moment, from the unjust increase of her vast power ‘on the ocean. America escaped a war at this time, and she escaped an evil infinite in its consequences. ‘The wasting wars of the French revolution were just then beginning; and if this country had, at that early period with al} the heat and excitement of the moment upon ber, rnshed into the fray, no one could have meted out the degree of honor or dishonor that would have attended her course, or have foretold the dirneters that would havo vovertuken her own matchless institutions. The progress’ of events at last drove her into a war with one of the great belli- xcrents; but this was toward the close of a scene of which she had been for twenty years a spectator. The distance of America from Europe, the youth and caliarity of her government, the narrowness of r resources, the entire absence of Srey Spee of military armament, powerfally combined to point out. the course she should adopt. This was a most extra- ordinary per'od, not only from the remarkable cir- cumstance that France had now become Vii eid a republic, and was threatened with annihilation by a European coalition, at the head of which was Eng- land, but more extraordinary still, from the moral phenomenon that the minds of men, in all civil'zed countries of the world, were infinitely excited by a universal and overwhelming political infatuation. The government of the United States, depending solely on opinion, had to contend with this spirit. And that opinion, to which it looked for mivpat and defence, was of itself exceedingly infected and be- wildered.” The conduct of the British government at the time had greatly embarrassed Washington's admin. istration. The western forts on the lakes were still oceupied by the British, contrary to the treaty of 1783. Aimerican vessels were seized on their way to French ports, and American seamen were impressed into the British navy. The President, after many remonstrances with the British government, was sensible that a crisis was approaching which would involve the United States in a war with England, unless the calamity could be averted by negotiation. John Ji ay who was then Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, having been confirmed by the Senate, arrived in London in June, 1794. Colonel John Trumbull, the artist, accompanied Mr. Jay, as Secretary. Gen. Thomas Pinckney, them minister of the United States at the Court of St. James, received the special minister with courtesy, and the greatest cordiality prevailed between Mr. Jay and him throughout the negotiation. The reception of Mr. Jay by the British government was calm and decor- ous, and his own conduc! was quiet and conciliatory. The younger Pitt was prime minister, with a tory cabinet and parNament in power. Lord Grenville, then Secretary of State, was appointed to meet Mr. Jay, with full powers to confer and conclude a treaty. The negotiation was difficult and complicated in the extreme. To facilitate the discussion of matters in dispute, it was proposed by Mr. Jay, and agreed toby Lord Grenville, to dispense with the weual form of diplomatic notes, and to meet and discuss in convention the points in controversy. No notes were taken of these conversations, the two ministers only Pane present at the meetings, without secreta- ries. Atlength, after along and tedious negotiation, the work was brought to an amicable termination, by the terms agree Me @ treaty, and then sec- retaries and copyists ample occupation. The treaty was signed on the 19th November, 1754. Three objects were contemplated by Mr. Jay’s structions. These were, 2 compensation for the losses sustained by American merchants in conse- quence o! the British orders in council, a settlement. of all existing disputes in relation to: the treaty of peace of 1785, and a commercial treaty. ‘The treaty was to remain in force for twelve years. In a letter to the Hecretary of State, Mr. Jay observed, “ The difficulties which retarded its accomplishment, fre- a had the Cope) of being insurmounta- ble. They have at last yielded to mionitiontions, and to that mutual disposition to agree which reconciled Lord Glenville and myself to an unusual degree of trouble and application. I have no reason to believe or conjecture that a treaty more favorable to as is attainable.” Mr. Jay returned to the United States in the spring of 1795. Itis well known that this treaty ‘was exceedingly unpopular with the democratic or republican party inthe United States. President Washington sobmitied it to the Senate, on the sth sane, 175, and it was ratified by that body on the 24th of that month, with the exception of one arti- cle which reguiated the trade between the United States and io West Indies, The President signed and it was ratified in the usual sts on the western fron- they having been held by the years, in violation of the treaty of xception, it removed every cause of ars the right claimed by Eng- land to impress h@ own seamen when found on board neutral vessels at sea. Groat aommercial privileges were secured, contributing to the wealth and pros- i rity of the United States. ‘The compensation for British spoliation on American commerce, secured hy thix treaty, amonnted to over ten muillions of dol- lars, which was paid to American mer: hante. The treaty ratified by Great Britain was laid hy the Presi- dent’ before Congress, March 1, 176 Attempts were made in the [louse to refuse the nee ar riations to carry it into effect, but, after Lo bates, the requisite laws were passed by g wajority, li roclamation e-joining a | ap: | aT “The ratification of this treaty,” says Lyman, “may: adeno Teandution of the came the United States, It first act government tha! proved the i of the federal constitution, it. yas s severe trial ¢ 4 the ng which the government See e shook, a in some personal characer of the itent.”” pial The treat; 1794, notwithstonding the advan- tages ft—among whic! was the fact that war was pro! averted there!) — in reality settled but few of the important points 1» discussion. ‘The war poate England and France led to blockades, and jiation became a prelext 3 Om peutral rights, The peace, or Bog a Amiens, in 1802, afforded a short respite ; bat, with that slight exception, it niust be considered that the two. belligerents ed it motile War upon the United States from 1792 to 1bt:. ARs Court of St Juve, 10.1796-. We ge jinister to the Court jawes, io Te mained in England until 1803. [le discussed with the British min’ the principal provisions of mari- time =, eee this country feels an interest 5. though wit e the exception of two cont relation do dayia treakwot 1794, he did not succeed: in agreeing on any formal instrument re; pees debning the rights of neutrals, Mr, King returned to this country in 1903, and was sue coated by James Monroe Early in 1804, Mr. Mom- Toe proposed to the British ministry a ooavention: regulating the right of search, locksdes, contrac bands, &c. Mr. King had previously paid mach at tention to the subject of ressment of Americare seamen. But the British government refused ta settle that and otber questions of maritime rights, and from that period to 1812 the American oom: Iéree to the British possessions in every part of the world rested upon the uncertain and unsatiafactory protection of acts of parliament. Mr. Pitt died in Junnary, 1505, and a whig minie try coming into power, iv» whici: Fox was Seere+ tary for Foreign Affairs, the American government determined to make fresh aud stronger efforts for @ maritime treaty. In May, 150), » commission waa. iseued appointing Mr. Monn. <till resident in Lon don, ri William Pincvey, of Maryland, jointly and severally, Ministers Plenipote:tiary and Envoys Ex- truordinary at the Court of St. james. Mr, Fox died in September, but a whig inintstyy was still continued in power. The Commissioners succeeded in von- eluding with Lords Heliand and Auckland, a treaty of amity, navigation and commerce, on the 3ist De cember, 1806. Although this instrument was not ratified by the United States, i: i- an important event in the diplomatic history of tie country, Tt was mainly a renewal of the priicija! provisions in Jay’s treaty of 1794. Presicent Jefferson, without oon> sulting the Senate. refused to ratify this treaty, prine | cipally because it did not contain 4 provision against impressments on the high seas Wnyvland has always insisted on the abstract right of impressment; not 80 much, perhaps, on account of the .amber of her seamen in foreign serv! « to prevent them from | leaving her own, and s! ed her right | teke her seamen from foreign « aot vessels, Whe ther naturalized or not in the United States or elaee where. i Mr. Monroe returned home, and Mr. Pinckney ré mained in London, as Minister, uutil 1811, when he also returned home, leaving Mr John Spear Smith ax Charge d’Affhires, The same year he waa suc+ | ceeded by Jonathan Russell. Mr. G. H, Rose was | sent to the United States in 108, with instructions | to settle the dispute respecting the outrage upon the | frigate Chesapeake. But his mission was unsatis- factory. The Chesapeake affiir was finally settled hy Mr. Foster, in November, i511, on terms proposed | by Mr. Erskine, in 1509. War with Great Britain was declared by the United States, in June, 1812; and early in 1813, President | Madison accepted the offer of wiediation made by the Emperor of Russia, and appointed commissioners to | negotiate accordingly. The British ministry refased | the mediation of Russia, but offered to n te dis | rect with the United States. This negotiation termi- nated ina peace concluded at Ghent, the 24th of December, 1814, and ratified by tue President and | Senate in February, 1815. The diplomatic inter+ course of the two countries wag, renewed by the ape intment on the part of the ed States of Johz ntuey, Adams, in February, 1815, and of Charles Bagot, on the part of Great Britain, in June of the | same year; both as Envoys Extraordinary and Minky ters Plenipotentiary. The following is a list of the treaties between the United States and Great Britain, exeepting the postal treaty; and other minor negotiations, princi- pally of recent dates, The West Indian Commercial question was settled by acts of Congress and Partias | ment, in 1830 :-— UNITED STATES TREATIES WITH GREAT BRITAIN, 1. Provisional articles of peace, November 30. 1782, me- gotiatea at Paria. Sanctioned by Cougress April, 11, 1788, 2 Armistice, declaring a cessation of ho tilities, Janus ry 20. 3783: regotinted a: Verrmuiles oy Albyne Fits Her- bert, Jobn Acama, and Bevjamm Franklin, Sanctioned by Congiesa, April 21, 1783. 3 Debinitive treaty of peace. September 3, 1783, n tiated at Paris, qatified by Congress, January 14, 37 4. Treaty of Muity, commerce aod navigation, No- yersber 19, 1794, negotiated at Inadon, by Wittiant Wyndham (Baron Grenville) and John Jay. “The ratifi- cations were exchanged at London, October 28, 1795. 5. Convention relative to the ¢xecution of the atxth ar- tele of Jay’s treaty, negotiated at London, January 8, | 1802, by Tord Hawkesbury, King. Ratified April 26, 1802. 6. Treaty of peace and amity, negotiated at Ghent. De« cember 24, 1814. by James, Lord Gambier, Haary Goule etter eee leno ie Jobo sae he bona james are lenry Clay, Jonathon Rassel, and bert Gallatin, Ratified Febroary 17. 1815. 7. Convention to regulate commerce between the Uni- ted States and Britich dominions. negotinted at | ty 1815, by Adwms, Clay. aud Gu intin, on the perk of the United Siates, and Freck. J. Robinson, Heary Goulbourne, and William Adams, on the pt of Great july 31, 1815, 22, 1815. | Britain. Ranfied by the Vrince Regent, and by the President and Seuaio Dec. 8. Convention respecting fisheries, boundaries, &e,, zegotiated at Londen October 29 1613, by Gallatin and Rush, on the part of the United States, amd Robiason and Goulbourne on the part of Great B itaim. Ratifications exchanged at Washington, Jan. 30 1819. 9. Convention of St. Petersburg, of the 12th July, 1822, respecting indemnification for slaves taken during the late war with Great Britain, scsording to the first article of the treaty of Ghent, nevoliated ot St Petersburg by Henr. jon, on the part of the United Stavan, Count Nesrel¥odo and Count Cepodistria, on the part of Ranting and les Bagot on she part of Great Britain, Ratifica~ tions exchanged Jan. 10, 1823, 10. Convention awarding the amount of indempifica- tion under the St. Petersburg oonventien, 3 at Loncon Nov, 13, 1826. by A Gallatin on the part ef tha nited States, and Wm, Huskisaom and Hamry U. Ad- Gipgton on the part of Great Britata, Ratifiestions ex- changed in London Feb, 6, 1827. 11 Decision of commissioners under the fourth article | of the treaty of Ghent, respecting certain islands in the Bay of Passamaquoddy, adjusted by Johm Holmes and The mas Barely. 12. Declaration of commissionors under fourth article of treaty of Ghent. 13, Decision of commissioners under Pair article of treaty of Ghent, respecting boundaries at Utiea, N. Y., June 18, 1522. 14. Convention to refer the decision of the fifth article cf Ghent, respecting the northeast haber ‘tos friendly { fovereien, negotiated at Londen Sept 1827, by Gallatin, for the United States, and Charles Graat and Heory U. | Addirgton for Great Britain. Ratified May 14, 1928; but the decision of the King of the Netherlands, the r not confirmed, Be en 2 Washington. ee ye en | mundary uestion, negotiated at Waa Bortheast n in 1842, by Daniel Webster, Secretary of State, and Ashbartos, Special Minister. Ratified by the Sonete Aug. 20, 1842, 16 Oregon partition treaty, rettloment of morthwest- orn boundary question, signed at Was hingtom June, 146, by James Bachanan, Recretary of State, and Richard Lon has British Minister, Ratified by the Senate Jung , 1886, UNITED STATES MINIS‘ ERS, ETO., TO GREAT BRITAIN: Appointed, Joln Adams, Mass,, Minister Tienipotentiary: | Gouvernour Horris, N, Y., Oontideath Agent ‘Thomas Pinckney, 8. C., Minister Plenipotentiary. John Jay, New York, Special ...... épeeeceres Rufus King, New York, Minister Plenipotentiary James Monroe, Virginia, Joint ao, Williom Pinckney, Md., 5°°™ id Jobn Spear Smith, Charge........+6 | Jone. ep eteery tenet Change, seve eee elBLE | Jobn Quincy Adams, Mass., Minister 815 | Richard Rush, Pennsyivanis, oe bevtes 1113 S 1835 Rafus King, New York. Albert Galiatin, Pennsylvania William Beach Lawrenve. 3 Jamer Barb ur, Virgin, Louis hiclane, Delaware, Martin Ven Buren, New York, Aaron Vai, New York Charge. .sssssseeseene Andrew Stevenson, Va., Minister Plenipotentiary. | Edward Everett, Maesachustta, do, Louls McLane, Maryland, do. George Bancroft, Massacbusetds, a>. Abbott Lawrence, do, do. Joreph R Ingersoll, Pennsylvania, do, James Buchanan, do. do, « COMMISSIONERS TO GHENT TO NEGOTIATE TREATY OF PEACK. , John Quincy Adams, } James A. Bayard, = [ Hemy Clay, PP sis sevvewed 1813 and 1816 } Jona: Russell, J ‘Alvert Gallatin, MINISTERS, ETC., FROM GREAT UNITED STATES. BRITAIN TO THE Sir Jobn Temple, Consul General...,... o George Hammond, Minister Plenipotentiary do. do, Robert Liston, Avthony Merry, do, do, G, H. Rose, Special do... . David M. Eevbine, Minleter’ Pou! | Francie Jax, Jackson, do, yt Nl bie eo. athony St. Jobn Baker, Uharge...,.- Charles Bogot, Miniater Plenipotentiary Cerin ticket beige: Mwy ea . rlew Richard Vat ‘tor Plonipotentiary. . 1826 Charles Bankbends Chenee Prereree . Henry 8 Fox, Miniator Fritpaits . word Ashburton, Special Minister Monipotentiary Richard Pakenham, do, i ; John F. Crampton, Charge . | Sir Henry Lytton Farle Bulwer, | Jobn F. Crampton, Minister Penipotentiac: } COMMISSIONERS AT GHENT. ) Tard Gambler, | Berry Goulbourne, >,........ 4 William Adame, seer sree MOM