Relations with Great Britain. From the time when the projet of the treaty of the treaty of 1783, or between that article and presented by us was returned with the proposed any other of the same treaty. We had no equivalterations, it was apparent that, unless new pre-alent to offer for a new recognition of our right tensions on the part of Great Britain should be advanced, the only important differences remaining to be discussed were those relating to the mutual restoration of territory taken during the war, to the navigation of the Mississippi by British subjects, and to the right of the people of the United States to the fisheries within the British jurisdiction. Instead of a general restitution of captured territory, which we had proposed, the British Government at first wished to confine it to the territory taken by either party belonging to the other. On our objecting that this would make each party the judge whether territory taken did or did not belong to the other, and thereby occasion new disputes, they acknowledged it to be their object that each party should, until a de-jurisdiction, the people of the United States had cision had taken place with respect to the title, retain possession of all the territory claimed by both parties, which might have been taken by such party during the war. They proposed, how ever, to limit the exception from mutual restitution to the islands in the Bay of Passamaquoddy. As it had been on both sides admitted that the title to these islands was disputed, and as a method of settling amicably those disputes was provided for in the treaty, we had not expected that the British Government would adhere to the demand of retaining the temporary possession of those islands. We insisted, therefore, on their being included in the general restoration, until we had reason to believe that our further perseverance would have hazarded the conclusion of the peace itself. We finally consented, as an alternative preferable to the continuance of the war, to this exception, upon condition that it should not be understood as impairing in any manner the right of the United States to these islands. We also urged for a stipulation requiring an ultimate decision upon the title within a limited time; but to this we also found opposed an insuperable objection, and we were finally induced to accept in its stead a declaration of the British Plenipotentiaries, that no unnecessary delay of the decision should be interposed on the part of Great Britain. At the first conference, on the 8th of August, the British Plenipotentiaries had notified to us that the British Government did not intend henceforth to allow to the people of the United States, without an equivalent, the liberties to fish and to dry and cure fish within the exclusive British jurisdiction, stipulated in their favor by the latter part of the third article of the Treaty of Peace of 1783. And in their note of the 19th of August, the British Plenipotentiaries had demanded a new stipulation, to secure to British subjects the right of navigating the Mississippi; a demand which, unless warranted by another article of that same treaty of 1783, we could not perceive that Great Britain had any colorable pretence for making. Our instructions had forbidden us to suffer our right to the fisheries to be brought into discussion, and had not authorized us to make any distinction in the several provisions of the third article 13th CoN. 3d SESS.-44 to any part of the fisheries, and we had no power to grant any equivalent which might be asked for it by the British Government. We contended that the whole treaty of 1783 must be considered as one entire and permanent compact, not liable, like ordinary treaties, to be abrogated by a subsequent war between the parties to it; as an instrument recognising the rights and liberties enjoyed by the people of the United States as an inde pendent nation, and containing the terms and conditions on which the two parts of one empire had mutually agreed, thenceforth, to constitute two distinct and separate nations. In consenting, by that treaty, that a part of the North American continent should remain subject to the British reserved to themselves the liberty, which they had ever before enjoyed, of fishing upon that part of its coasts, and of drying and curing fish upon the shores, and this reservation had been agreed to by the other contracting party. We saw not why this liberty, then no new grant, but the mere recognition of a prior right always enjoyed, should be forfeited by war, any more than any other of the rights of our national independence; or why we should need a new stipulation for its enjoyment more than we needed a new article to declare that the King of Great Britain treated with us as free, sovereign, and independent States. We stated this principle in general terms to the British Plenipotentiaries, in the note which we sent to them with our projet of the treaty, and we alleged it as the ground upon which no new stipulation was deemed by our Government necessary to secure to the people of the United States all the rights and liberties stipulated in their favor by the treaty of 1783. No reply to that part of our note was given by the British Plenipotentiaries, but, in returning our projet of a treaty, they added a clause to one of the articles, stipulating a right for British subjects to navigate the Mississippi. Without adverting to the ground of prior and immemorial usage, if the principle were just that the treaty of 1783, from its peculiar character, remained in force in all its parts, notwithstanding the war, no new stipulation was necessary to secure to the subjects of Great Britain the right of navigating the Mississippi, so far as that right was secured by the treaty of 1783, as, on the other hand, no stipulation was necessary to secure to the people of the United States the liberty to fish, and to dry and cure fish, within the exclusive jurisdiction of Great Britain. If they asked the navigation of the Mississippi as a new claim, they could not expect we should grant it without an equivalent; if they asked it because it had been granted in 1783, they must recognise the claim of the people of the United States to the liberty to fish and to dry and cure fish, in question. To place both points beyond all future controversy, a majority of us determined to offer to admit an article confirming both the rights, or we offered at the same time to be silent in the Relations with Great Britain. treaty upon both, and to leave out altogether the article defining the boundary from the Lake of the Woods westward. They finally agreed to this last proposal, but not until they had proposed an article stipulating for a future negotiation for an equivalent to be given by Great Britain for the navigation of the Mississippi, and by the United States for the liberty as to the fisheries within British jurisdiction. This article was unnecessary with regard to its professed object, since both Governments had it in their power, without it, to negotiate upon these subjects if they pleased. We rejected it, although its adoption would have secured the boundary of the forty-ninth degree of latitude west of the Lake of the Woods, because it would have been a formal abandonment, on our part, of our claim to the liberty as to the fisheries, recognised by the treaty of 1783. parties to the precise objects to be adjusted be tween the two nations, and to hasten the conclusion of the peace so desirable to both. Finding in the note of the British Plenipotentiaries of the 21st ultimo a mere reference to the points proposed by them in the first conference, with the offer of assuming the basis of uti possidetis, on which the undersigned had, in substance, already declined to treat, they did not consider it as the projet of a treaty, presented in compliance with their request. They proposed, in their note of the 24th ultimo, that the exchange of the two projets should be made at the same time. And it is not without some surprise that the undersigned observe in the note to which they now have the honor of replying, that the British Plenipotentiaries consider their note of the 21st ultimo as containing the projet of a treaty, to which the undersigned are supposed to be pledged to return a contre projet. the first draught is not of a magnitude to be made a subject of controversy, and convinced that their Government is too sincerely desirous of that auspicious result to approve of its being delayed for a moment upon any question of etiquette, the undersigned have the honor to enclose herewith the projet of a treaty, accompanied with some observations upon several of the articles, which may more fully elucidate their objects in proposing them. You will perceive by the correspondence, that the ninth article was offered us as a sine qua non and an ultimatum. We accepted it, not without Believing that where both parties are sincerely much hesitation, as the only alternative to a rup-desirous of bringing a negotiation to a happy terture of the negotiation, and with a perfect under-mination, the advantage of giving or of receiving standing that our Government was free to reject it, as we were not authorized to subscribe to it. To guard against any accident which might happen in the transmission of a single copy of the treaty to the United States, the British Plenipotentiaries have consented to execute it in triplicate; and as the treaty with the British ratification may be exposed to the same danger, the times for the cessation of hostilities, the restoration of captures at sea, and the release of prisoners, have been fixed, not from the exchange of ratifications, but from the ratification on both sides, without alteration by either of the contracting parties. We consented to the introduction of this latter provision at the desire of the British Plenipotentiaries, who were willing to take a full, but were unwilling to incur the risk of a partial ratification, as the period from which the peace should be considered as concluded. We are informed by them that Mr. Baker, their secretary, is to go out to America with the British ratification. We have the honor to be, yours, &c. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, JONATHAN RUSSELL, The SECRETARY OF STATE of the United States. No. 1. The American to the British Plenipotentiaries. The undersigned have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note addressed to them by His Britannic Majesty's Plenipotentiaries on the 31st ultimo. The British Plenipotentiaries stated in their last note that they had no other propositions to offer, nor other demands to make, than those contained in their note of the 21st ultimo, which, with the reference to their former declaration respecting the fisheries, contains only two propositions, viz: that of fixing the boundary from the Lake of the Woods to the Mississippi; and that of adopting, with respect to the other boundaries, the basis of uti possidetis. In answer to the declaration made by the British Plenipotentiaries respecting the fisheries, the undersigned, referring to what passed in the conference of the 9th of August, can only state that they are not authorized to bring into discussion any of the rights or liberties which the United States have heretofore enjoyed in relation thereto. From their nature, and from the peculiar character of the treaty of 1783, by which they were recognised, no further stipulation has been deemed necessary by the Government of the United States to entitle them to the full enjoyment of all of them. The undersigned have already, in their last note, explicitly declined treating on the basis of uti possidetis. They cannot agree to any other principle than that of a mutual restoration of territory, and have accordingly prepared an article founded on that basis. They are willing even to The undersigned had considered an inter- extend the same principle to the other objects in change of the projet of a treaty as the course dispute between the two nations; and in proposbest calculated to exclude useless and desulto-ing all the other articles included in this projet, ry discussion, to confine the attention of both they wish to be distinctly understood that they Relations with Great Britain. are ready to sign a treaty placing the two countries, in respect to all the subjects of difference between them, in the same state they were in at the commencement of the present war; reserving to each party all its rights, and leaving whatever may remain of controversy between them for future and pacific negotiation. The British Plenipotentiaries having, in their note of the 4th of September, communicated the disposition of their Government to receive favorably a proposition which should acknowledge the boundary from the Lake of the Woods to the Mississippi, or to discuss any other line of boundary which might be submitted for consideration, the undersigned answered, that, as soon as the proposition of Indian boundary should be disposed of, they would have no objection, with the explanation given by the British Plenipotentiaries, to discuss the subject. The Government of the United States had, prior to the acquisition of Louisiana, been disposed to agree to the boundary from the Lake of the Woods to the Mississippi, from a wish, not only to arrange that subject, but also to settle, in a definitive manner, the differences respecting the boundary and islands in the bay of Passamaquoddy; and its assent to the proposed stipulation of that boundary was refused, on account of the acquisition of Louisiana, the boundaries of which might have been affected by it. The undersigned cannot agree to fix the boundary in that quarter, unless that of Louisiana be also provided for in the arrangement. They accordingly submit for consideration the article on that subject, which appears to have been agreed on between the British and American Commissioners in the projet of convention of the year 1807. In respect to the intended revision of the other boundaries between the British and American territories, with the view to prevent future uncertainty and dispute, the undersigned propose the reference of the whole subject to Commissioners; and they present, accordingly, five articles, drawn on the principle formerly adopted by the two Powers for settling the question respecting the river St. Croix. ing purely conditional, and limited in duration, each party will be bound only so far and so long as the other shall fulfil its conditions, and at the end of the term fixed for the duration of the article, or whenever either party may fail to perform his engagement, the rights of both will be as valid and entire as they were before the agreement. The article respecting blockades is believed to be in perfect conformity with the principles of the law of nations, as acknowledged by both nations. The definition is borrowed from the treaty of 1801, between Great Britain and Russia, and the residue of the article from the unratified treaty of 1806, between Great Britain and the United States. That relating to indemnities consists of two parts; the first for irregular seizures, captures, and condemnations, of American property, contrary to the established laws and usages of nations, previous to the commencement of the war; and the second, for similar irregularities, committed during the war, and contrary to the known and established usages of war between civilized nations. The cases of the first apply exclusively to claims of the citizens of the United States, because the causes for such claims were then confined, by the relative situation of the parties, to one side. It is presumed that the British Government will itself be sensible of the justice of making indemnity for injuries committed by its officers, in violation of principles avowed and recognised by itself, particularly in the letter from Lord Hawkesbury to Mr. King of the 11th of April, 1801; and in that from Mr. Merry to Mr. Madison of the 12th of April, 1804; and that the same justice will be admitted in cases where the territorial jurisdiction of the United States was violated; and where the injury was occasioned by the retrospective effects of the British Orders in Council of June, 1803, as to the return from contraband voyages, and of the Orders in Council of January 7, 1807. With regard to the Orders in Council of November, 1803, and of April, 1809, the undersigned will observe, that these orders having been issued solely on the ground of retaliation against France, The article already agreed on respecting the and their object having altogether ceased, it is Indian pacification is included in the projet of the just to indemnify the citizens of the United undersigned. In conformity with their former States for losses now experienced by the effect suggestions, they offer another, intended to re- of measures intended to operate against the enemy strain the hostilities, and to prevent the employ- of Great Britain, and which fell almost exclusivement of the savages in war, and one reciprocallyly on a country which was no party to the war. granting a general amnesty. The only other subjects which had been presented by the undersigned as suitable for discussion, were those respecting seamen, blockades, and indemnities. Keeping in view the declarations made by Lord Castlereagh, in his note of the 29th of August, 1812, to Mr. Russell, and in his letter of the 4th of November, 1813, to Mr. Monroe, the undersigned propose only a temporary article, intended, without affecting the rights or pretensions of either country, to attempt to accomplish, by means less liable to vexation, the object for which impressment has hitherto been thought necessary by Great Britain. The proposed agreement be The United States have never ceased, and at this time continue to demand from France, indemnity for the losses they have experienced by the effect of the decrees of her Government, in violation of the law of nations. The cases of the second part of this article apply equally to both belligerent parties. They have been, during the war, subjects of crimination on both sides. The American Government can give no stronger and more signal proof of its disapprobation of every departure, under color of its authority, from the established usages of legitimate warfare between civilized nations, than by the offer of mutual reparation. Relations with Great Britain. The article fixing a limitation for captures at sea does not seem to require any comment. The undersigned present their entire projet in this specific form, with the full expectation of receiving from the British Plenipotentiaries their explicit answer respecting all the articles embraced in it, and a projet also reduced to specific propositions and embracing all the objects which they intend to bring forward. The undersigned renew to the British Plenipotentiaries the assurances of their high consider Copy of a projet of a Treaty of Peace submitted by the American to the British Plenipotentiaries at Ghent, on the 10th day of November, 1814, and of the alterations and propositions made by the latter in the margin of the said projet, returned by them to the American Plenipotentiaries. British Alterations. TREATY OF Peace and amITY BETWEEN HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, desirous of terminating the war which has unhappily subsisted between the two countries, and of restoring, upon principles of perfect reciprocity, peace, friendship, and good understanding between them, have, for that purpose, appointed their respective plenipotentiaries, that is to say, His Britannic Majesty, on his part, has appointed the Right Honorable James Lord Gambier, Admiral of the White Squadron of His Majesty's fleet; Henry Goulburn, Esq., a member of the Imperial Parliament, and Under Secretary of State, and William Adams, Esquire, Doctor of Civil Laws; and the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, has appointed John Quincy Adams, James A. Bayard, Henry Clay, Jonathan Russell, and Albert Gallatin, citizens of the United States, who, after a reciprocal communication of their respective full powers, have agreed upon the following articles: The following marginal remarks and alterations were made and proposed by the British Plenipotentiaries. Note. It is proposed to omit altogether the words that are underlined. ARTICLE 1. There shall be a firm and universal peace between His Britannic Majesty and the United States, and between their respective countries, territories, cities, towns, and people, of every degree, without exception of (1) persons or places. All hostilities, both by sea and land, shall immediately cease; (2) all prisoners on both sides shall be set at liberty. All territory, places, and possessions, without exception, taken by (3) either party from (4) the other during the war, or which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, shall be restored without delay and without causing any destruction, or carrying away any artillery or other public property, or any slaves (5) or other private property; (6) and all archives, records, deeds, and papers, either of a public nature or belonging to private persons, which, in the course of the war, may have fallen into the hands of the officers of either party, shall be (7) forthwith restored, and delivered to the proper authorities and persons to whom they respectively belong. ARTICLE 2. Immediately after the respective ratifications of this treaty, (2) orders shall be sent to the armies, squadrons, officers, subjects, and citizens of the two Powers, to cease from all hostilities; and to prevent all causes of complaint which might arise on account of the Relations with Great Britain. prizes which may be taken at sea, after the (3) signing of this treaty, it is reciprocally agreed that the vessels and effects which may be taken in the channel, and in the North seas after the space of —, from (1) that of the signature hereof, shall be restored on each side; that the term shall be, from the channel and the North seas to the Canary islands inclusively, (2) whether in the ocean or the Mediterranean, of from the said Canary islands to the equinoctial line, or Equator, and of in all other parts of the world without exception. ARTICLE 3. Whereas that portion of the boundary between the dominions of His Britannic Majesty in North America and those of the United States, from the mouth of the river St. Croix (as the said mouth was ascertained by the Commissioners appointed for that purpose,) to the Bay of Fundy, has not yet been regulated and determined; and whereas the respective rights and claims of His Britannic Majesty and of the United States to the several islands in the Bay of Passamaquoddy and to the island of Grand Menan, have never been finally adjusted and determined, the said islands being claimed on the part of the United States as lying within twenty leagues of their shores, and south of a line drawn due east from the mouth af the river St. Croix and on the part of His Britannic Majesty as having been, at or before the former treaty of peace between the two countries, within the limits of the province of Nova Scotia. In order, therefore, finally to decide these several questions, it is agreed that they shall be referred to three Commissioners, to be appointed in the following manner, viz: one Commissioner shall be appointed by His Britannic Majesty, and one by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and the said two Commissioners shall have power to choose a third; and, if they cannot agree, they shall each propose one person; and of the two names so proposed one shall be drawn by lot, in the presence of the two original Commissioners. And the three Commissioners so appointed shall be sworn impartially to examine and decide the said questions, according to such evidence as shall respectively be laid before them, on the part of the British Government and of the United States. The said Commissioners shall meet at and shall have power to adjourn to such other place or places as they shall think fit. The said Commissioners, or a majority of them, shall, by a declaration under their hands and seals, determine the boundary aforesaid, from the mouth of the river St. Croix to the Bay of Fundy, and decide to which of the two contracting parties the several islands aforesaid do respectively belong, in conformity with the true intent of the former treaty of peace. And both parties agree to consider such decision as final and conclusive. (3) exchange of ratifications. (1) the period of the exchange of the ratifications. (2) The same term of for all parts of the Mediterranean. ARTICLE 3. Whereas it was stipulated by the second article in the Treaty of Peace of 1783, between His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, that the boundary of the United States should comprehend "all islands within twenty leagues of any part of the shores of the United States, and lying between lines to be drawn due east from the points where the aforesaid boundaries, between Nova Scotia on the one part and East Florida on the other, shall respectively touch the Bay of Fundy and the Atlantic ocean, excepting such islands as now or heretofore have been within the limits of Nova Scotia." And whereas claims have been made by the Government of the United States to certain islands in the Bay of Fundy, which said islands are claimed as belonging to His Britannic Majesty, as having been at the time and previous to the aforesaid Treaty of 1783, within the limits of the province of Nova Scotia. In order, therefore, finally to decide upon these claims, it is agreed that they shall be referred to two Commissioners to be appointed in the following manner, viz: one Commissioner shall be appointed by His Britannic Majesty, and one by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and the said two Commissioners so appointed shall be sworn impartially to examine and decide upon the said claims, according to such evidence as shall be laid before them on the part of His Britannic Majesty and of the United States, respectively. The said Commissioners shall meet at ―, and shall have power to adjourn to such other place or places as they shall think fit. The said Commissioners shall, by a declaration or report under their hands and seals, decide to which of the two contracting parties the several islands aforesaid do respectively belong, in conformity with the true intent of the said Treaty of Peace of 1783; and if the said Commissioners shall agree in their decision, both parties shall consider such decision final and conclusive. It is further agreed that, in the event of the two Commissioners differing upon all or any of the matters so referred to them, or in the event of both or either of the said Commissioners refusing or declining, or wilfully omitting to act as such, they shall make, jointly or separately, a report or reports, as well to the Government of His Britannic Majesty as to that of the United States, stating in detail the points on which they differ, and the grounds upon which their respective opinions have been formed, or the grounds upon which they, or either of them, have so refused, declined, or omitted to act. And His Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United States hereby agree to refer the report or reports of the said Commissioners to some friendly Sovereign or State, to be then named for that purpose, and who shall be requested to decide on the differences which may be stated in the said report or reports, or upon the report of one Commissioner, together with the grounds upon which the |