--350--
18th Congress.] |
No. 379. |
[2d Session. |
CORRESPONDENCE WITH GREAT BRITAIN RELATIVE TO THE SUPPRESSION OF THE SLAVE TRADE.
COMMUNICATED TO CONGRESS WITH THE MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT, DECEMBER 7, 1824.
[See No. 378.]
DOCUMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.
Papers in relation to the convention between the United States and Great Britain for the suppression of the slave trade, communicated with the President's message to Congress, December 7, 1824.
1. Proceedings of the Senate at its last session, with copies of the messages, convention, and other papers communicated to that House.
2. Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, May 29, 1824.
3. Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams, June 28, 1824. Extract.
4. Same to same, July 5, 1824. Extract.
5. Same to same, August 9, 1824. Extract.
6. Same to same, August 30, 1824. Copy.
6. a. Mr. George Canning to Mr. Rush, August 21, 1824. Copy.
6. b. Mr. Rush to Mr. George Canning, August 30, 1824. Copy.
7. Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, November 12, 1824. Copy.
8. Mr. Addington to Mr. Adams, November 6, 1824. Copy.
9. Mr. Adams to Mr. Addington, December 4, 1824. Copy.
--360--
No. 1.
Message from the President of the United States, transmitting a convention between the United States and Great Britain for the suppression of the slave trade.
In Senate, Friday, April 30, 1824.
The following written message was received from the President of the United States by Mr. Everett, his Secretary:
[For this message and documents see No. 379. ]
In Senate, Saturday, May 8, 1824.
Mr. Barbour, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred, on the 30th April, the message of the President of the United States of that date, together with the convention with Great Britain, reported the same without amendment. The said convention was read the second time.
Wednesday, May 12, 1824.
The Senate proceeded to consider, as in Committee of the Whole, the convention with Great Britain, concluded at London the 13th of March, 1824; and, Ordered, That it lie on the table.
Tuesday, May 13, 1824.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the convention between the United States and Great Britain, and Mr. Barbour proposed the following amendment thereto; which was read:
"Article XII. This convention shall continue in force until one of the parties shall have declared its intention to renounce it; which declaration shall be made at least six months beforehand."
Monday, May 17, 1824.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the convention with Great Britain, together with the amendment proposed on the 13th instant; and, on motion, Ordered, That the further consideration thereof be postponed to and made the order of the day for Wednesday next.
IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY 21, 1824.
Message from the President of the United States.
[For this message see No. 374.]
Extract of a report of the 9th of February, 1821, to the House of Representatives, by the Committee to whom had been referred so much of the President's message as relates to the slave trade, and to whom were referred the two messages of the President, transmitting, in pursuance of the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 4th of December, a report of the Secretary of State and inclosed documents relating to the negotiation for the suppression of the slave trade.
[For this report see No. 346.]
Extract from a report made April 12, 1822, by the Committee on the suppression of the slave trade, to whom had been referred a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 15th of January preceding, instructing them to inquire whether the laws of the United States prohibiting that traffic have been duly executed; also, into the general operation thereof; and, if any defects exist in those laws, to suggest adequate remedies therefor, and to whom many memorials have been referred touching the same subject.
[For this report see No. 351.]
Mr. Addington to the Secretary of State.
Washington, May 16, 1824.
[For this letter see No. 374.]
--361--
In Senate, Friday, May 21, 1824.
Agreeably to the order of the day, the Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the convention with Great Britain, together with the amendment proposed on the 13th instant; and the amendment having been modified, as follows:
Provided, That an article be added, whereby it shall be free to either of the parties, at any time, to renounce the said convention, giving sis months' notice beforehand:
On the question to agree thereto, it was determined in the affirmative, yeas 36, nays 2.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Bell, Benton, Branch, Brown, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Elliott, Findlay, Gaillard, Hayne, Holmes, of Maine, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Josiah S. Johnston, Kelly, King, of Alabama, King, of New York, Knight, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, Lowrie, McIlvaine, Macon, Mills, Palmer, Parrott, Ruggles, Seymour, Taylor, of Virginia, Thomas, Van Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Chandler and D'Wolf.
And no further amendment having been made, the convention was reported to the Senate.
On the question to concur in the amendment made in Committee of the Whole, to wit:
Insert at the end of the resolution for the ratification of the convention—
Provided, That an article be added, whereby it shall be free to either of the parties, at any time, to renounce the said convention, giving six months' notice beforehand, It was determined in the affirmative, yeas 34, nays 2.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Bell, Benton, Branch, Brown, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Elliott, Findlay, Gaillard, Hayne, Holmes, of Maine, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Josiah S. Johnston, Kelly, King, of Alabama, King, of New York, Knight, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, Lowrie, McIlvaine, Macon, Mills, Parrott, Ruggles, Seymour, Taylor, of Virginia, Thomas, Van Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Chandler and D'Wolf.
Ordered, That the convention pass to a third reading.
Saturday, May 22, 1824.
The convention with Great Britain was read the third time. Whereupon Mr. Barbour submitted the following motion for consideration, which was read:
Resolved, Two-thirds of the senators present concurring therein, That the Senate do advise and consent to the ratification of the convention made and concluded at London the thirteenth day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four, between the United States of America and the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland: Provided, That an article be added, whereby it shall be free to either of the parties, at any time, to renounce the said convention, giving six months' notice beforehand.
On motion by Mr. Macon, to postpone the further consideration of the convention to the first Monday in December next, it was determined in the negative, yeas 16, nays 26. The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the senators present—
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Bell, Brown, Chandler, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Elliott, Gaillard, Holmes, of Maine, Knight, Lowrie, Macon, Ruggles, Smith, Thomas, Van Buren, and Ware.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Branch, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Findlay, Hayne, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Josiah S. Johnston, Kelly, King, of New York, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, McIlvaine, Mills, Noble, Parrott, Seymour, Taylor, of Indiana, Taylor, of Virginia, Van Dyke, and Williams.
On motion by Mr. Josiah S. Johnston, to strike out of the convention, article 1, line 4, the words "of America," on the question, "Shall these words stand as part of the article?" it was determined in the negative, yeas 23, nays 20.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Findlay, Hayne, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Kelly, King, of New York, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, McIlvaine, Mills, Noble, Parrott, Seymour, Taylor, of Indiana, Taylor, of Virginia, Van Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Bell, Benton, Branch, Brown, Chandler, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Elliott, Gaillard, Holmes, of Maine, Josiah S. Johnston, King, of Alabama, Knight, Lowrie, Macon, Ruggles, Smith, Thomas, Van Buren, and Ware.
On motion by Mr. Josiah S. Johnston, to strike out, article 1, line 5, the words "and of the West Indies"—
On the question, "Shall these words stand as part of the article?" it was determined in the affirmative, yeas 29, nays 14.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Brown, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Findlay, Hayne, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Kelly, King, of New York, Knight, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, Lowrie, McIlvaine, Macon, Mills, Noble, Parrott, Ruggles, Seymour, Taylor, of Indiana, Taylor, of Virginia, Van Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Bell, Branch, Chandler, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Elliott, Gaillard, Holmes, of Maine, Josiah S. Johnston, King, of Alabama, Smith, Thomas, Van Buren, and Ware.
A motion was made by Mr. Josiah S. Johnston to strike out the second article, and on the question, "Will the Senate advise and consent to the ratification of this article?" it was determined in the negative, yeas 27, nays 16.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Branch, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Findlay, Hayne, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Kelly, King, of New York, Knight, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, MIlvaine, Mills, Noble, Parrott, Ruggles, Seymour, Taylor, of Indiana, Taylor, of Virginia, Van Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Bell, Brown, Chandler, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Elliott, Gaillard, Holmes, of Maine, J. S. Johnston, King, of Alabama, Lowrie, Macon, Smith, Thomas, Van Buren, and Ware.
On motion to strike out of the 7th article the following words:
"And it is further agreed that any individual, being a citizen or subject of either of the two contracting parties, who shall be found on board any vessel not carrying the flag of the other party, nor
--362--
belonging to the subjects or citizens of either, but engaged in the illicit traffic of slaves, and seized or condemned on that account by the cruisers of the other party, under circumstances which, by involving such individual in the guilt of slave trading, would subject him to the penalties of piracy, he shall be sent for trial before the competent court in the country to which he belongs, and the reasonable expenses of any witnesses belonging to the captured vessel, in proceeding to the place of trial, during their detention there, and for their return to their own country, or to their station in its service, shall, in every such case be allowed by the court and defrayed by the country in which the trial takes place:"
On the question, "Shall these words stand as part of the article ?" it was determined in the negative, yeas 22, nays 21.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barton, Benton, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Findlay, Hayne, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Kelly, King, of New York, Knight, McIlvaine, Mills, Noble, Parrott, Seymour, Taylor, of Virginia, Tan Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Barbour, Bell, Branch, Brown, Chandler, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Elliott, Gaillard, Holmes, of Maine, Josiah S. Johnston, King, of Alabama, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, Lowrie, Macon, Ruggles, Smith, Taylor, of Indiana, Thomas, Van Buren, and Ware.
On the question to agree to the resolution, amended accordingly, for the ratification of the convention, it was determined in the affirmative, yeas 29, nays 13.
Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Branch, Brown, Clayton, Eaton, Edwards, Findlay, Hayne, Holmes, of Mississippi, Jackson, Johnson, of Kentucky, Henry Johnson, Josiah S. Johnston, Kelly, King, of Alabama, King, of New York, Knight, Lloyd, of Massachusetts, Lowrie, McIlvaine, Mills, Parrott, Seymour, Taylor, of Indiana, Taylor, of Virginia, Van Dyke, and Williams.
Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Bell, Chandler, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Elliott, Gaillard, Holmes, of Maine, Macon, Ruggles, Smith, Thomas, Van Buren, and Ware.
So it was resolved, two-thirds of the senators present concurring therein, That the Senate do advise and consent to the ratification of the convention made and concluded at London the thirteenth day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four, between the United States of America and the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with the exception of the words "of America," in line four of the first article, with the exception of the second article, and of the following words in the seventh article: "And it is further agreed that any individual, being a citizen or subject of either of the two contracting parties, who shall be found on board any vessel not carrying the flag of the other party, nor belonging to the subjects or citizens of either, but engaged in the illicit traffic of slaves, and seized or condemned on that account by the cruisers of the other party, under circumstances which, by involving such individual in the guilt of slave trading, would subject him to the penalties of piracy, he shall be sent for trial before the competent court in the country to which he belongs, and the reasonable expenses of any witnesses belonging to the capturing vessel, in proceeding to the place of trial, during their detention there, and for their return to their own country, or to their station in its service, shall, in every such case, be allowed by the court and defrayed by the country in which the trial takes place:" Provided, That an article be added, whereby it shall be free to either of the parties, at any time, to renounce the said convention, giving six months' notice beforehand.
No. 2.
Mr. Adams to Mr. Bush.
Department of State, Washington, May 29, 1824.
Sir:
The convention between the United States and Great Britain for the suppression of the African slave trade is herewith transmitted to you, with the ratification on the part of the United States, under certain modifications and exceptions, annexed as conditions to the advice and consent of the Senate to its ratification.
The participation of the Senate of the United States in the final conclusion of all treaties, to which they are parties, is already well known to the British Government; and the novelty of the principles established by the convention, as well as their importance, and the requisite assent of two-thirds of the senators present to the final conclusion of every part of the ratified treaty, will explain the causes of its ratification under this form. It will be seen that the great and essential principles which form the basis of the compact are admitted, to their full extent, in the ratified part of the convention. The second article, and the portion of the seventh which it is proposed to expunge, are unessential to the plan, and were not included in the project of convention transmitted to you from hence. They appear, indeed, to be, so far as concerned the United States, altogether inoperative, since they could not confer the power of capturing slave traders under the flag of a third party—a power not claimed either by the United States or Great Britain, unless by treaty, and the United States having no such treaty with any other power. It is presumed that the bearing of those articles was exclusively upon the flags of those other nations with which Great Britain has already treaties for the suppression of the slave trade, and that, while they give an effective power to the officers of Great Britain, they conferred none upon those of the United States.
The exception of the coast of America from the seas upon which the mutual power of capturing the vessels under the flag of either party may be exercised had reference, in the views of the Senate, doubtless, to the coast of the United States. On no part of that coast, unless within the Gulf of Mexico, is there any probability that slave-trading vessels will ever be found. The necessity for the exercise of the authority to capture is, therefore, no greater than it would be upon the coast of Europe. In South America, the only coast to which slave traders may be hereafter expected to resort, is that of Brazil, from which it is to be hoped they will shortly be expelled by the laws of the country.
The limitation by which each party is left at liberty to renounce the convention, by six months' notice to the other, may, perhaps, be useful in reconciling other nations to the adoption of its provisions. If the principles of the convention are to be permanently maintained, this limitation must undoubtedly be
--363--
abandoned; and when the public mind shall have been familiarized to the practical operation of the system, it is not doubted that this reservation will, on all sides, be readily given up.
In giving these explanations to the British Government, you will state that the President was fully prepared to have ratified the convention without alteration as it had been signed by you. He is aware that the conditional ratification leaves the British Government at liberty to concur therein or to decline the ratification altogether, but he will not disguise the wish that, such as it is, it may receive the sanction of Great Britain and be carried into effect. When the concurrence of both Governments has been at length obtained, by exertions so long and so anxiously continued, to principles so important and for purposes of so high and honorable a character, it would prove a severe disappointment to the friends of freedom and of humanity if all prospect of effective concert between the two nations for the extirpation of this disgrace to civilized man should be lost by differences of sentiment, in all probability transient, upon unessential details.
Should the convention, as ratified on the part of the United States, be likewise ratified on the part of Great Britain, you will exchange the ratifications and forthwith transmit the British ratified copy to this place. On exchanging the ratifications, a certificate of that act is usually executed under the hand and seal of the persons performing it and mutually delivered. A copy of the form of that used in exchanging the ratifications of the convention of 20th October, 1818, is herewith inclosed, and it appears to be the form generally used on such occasions by the British Government. You will transmit the certificate exchanged with the British ratification. To complete the documents belonging to the negotiation, a copy of the full power of the British plenipotentiaries and of the protocol of the third conference are yet to be forwarded to us.
By the ninth article of the convention it is provided that copies of it "and of the laws of both countries, actually in force, for the prohibition and suppression of the slave trade shall be furnished to every commander of the national vessels of either party charged with the execution of those laws." The fulfilment of this article will require the continued and particular attention of both Governments. I inclose, herewith, a printed pamphlet containing all the laws of the United States on this subject now in force. It is stated in your despatches to have been the intention of the British Government to consolidate into one act, during the present session of Parliament, all the British laws relating to the subject; and perhaps Congress, at their next session, may deem it expedient to do the same here. At all events, you will not fail to forward to me a copy of all the laws in force which come within the purview of the convention; and although not expressly stipulated in that instrument, you will suggest to the British Government that copies of the instructions relating to this object, given by each of the parties to its own naval officers, should be communicated to the other and furnished to all the officers, on either side, intrusted with the execution of the laws made by this convention common to both. Lists of the vessels of either party, and of their commanders, thus instructed, might also facilitate the accomplishment of the great purposes of both, and harmonize the practical operation of a system not less important by the magnanimous end to be obtained than by the novelty of the means adopted for its accomplishment.
The conclusion of this convention has been highly satisfactory to the President, whose entire approbation of the course pursued by you in the negotiation of it I am instructed to make known to you. He indulges the hope that it will, even as now modified, contribute largely to two objects of high importance: to the friendly relations between the two countries, and to the general interests of humanity. He sees in it, with much pleasure, that spirit of mutual accommodation so essential to the continuance and promotion of their harmony and good understanding, and welcomes it as an earnest of the same spirit in accomplishing the adjustment of the other interesting objects in negotiation between the two parties. I am, with great respect, sir, your very humble and obedient servant,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
Hon. Richard Rush, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary United States, London.
No. 3.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Bush to Mr. Adams, dated
London, June 28, 1824.
"I have this day had the honor to receive your despatch, No. 79, of the 29th of May, with the convention for the suppression of the slave trade, as ratified on the part of the United States, under certain modifications and exceptions, annexed as conditions to the advice and consent of the Senate to its ratification.
"I shall proceed immediately to lay the convention, as thus ratified, before this Government, and endeavor to recommend to its acceptance the modifications and exceptions, now a part of the instrument, by all the suggestions and arguments with which your despatch has supplied me."
No. 4.
Extract of a letter from Mr. Bush to Mr. Adams, dated
London, July 5, 1824.
"I have had one interview with Mr. Secretary Canning since the 28th of last month on the business of the convention for the suppression of the slave trade, but as yet am not able to communicate any of the sentiments of this Government in relation to it. You shall hear them from me at the earliest moment after I am myself apprised of them."
--364--
No. 5.
Extracts of a letter from Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams, dated
London, August 9, 1824.
"I have the honor to inform you that Mr. Secretary Canning has given me to understand, in an interview which I have this day had with him, that this Government finds itself unable to accede to the convention for the suppression of the slave trade, with the alterations and modifications that have been annexed to its ratification on the part of the United States. He said that none of these alterations or modifications would have formed insuperable bars to the consent of Great Britain, except that which had expunged the word America from the first article, but that this was considered insuperable."
"The reasons which Mr. Canning assigned for this determination on the part of Great Britain I forbear to state, as he has promised to address a communication in writing to me upon the subject, where they will be seen more accurately and at large; but to guard against any delay in my receiving that communication, I have thought it right not to lose any time in thus apprising you, for the President's information, of the result."
No. 6.
No. 11.] Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams.
London, August 30, 1824.
Sir: I had the honor to apprise you in my letter of the 9th instant that Mr. Secretary Canning had informed me, in an interview that I had with him on that day, that this Government would decline acceding to the convention for the suppression of the slave trade as ratified in May on the part of the United States, and that he promised to address me an official note upon this subject. This note I received on Saturday the 28th instant, the delay having arisen from an attack of fever under which he has been laboring. A copy of it is herewith inclosed.
I lost no time after receiving your instructions of the 29th of May in laying the matter of them before Mr. Canning, having, on the 30th of June, written him a note to request an interview for the purpose of executing this duty, which he granted me at the Foreign Office, on the first of July. It was in that interview that I laid fully before him all the considerations and arguments for the adoption of the treaty as ratified at Washington, with which your above instructions had charged me, omitting no part of them. He gave no opinion at that time on the course which this Government would be likely to pursue, but afterwards, on the 9th of August, informed me, as I have heretofore mentioned, that the omission of the words "and America," from the first article of the treaty, was considered by Great Britain as an insuperable objection to its acceptance on her part, and to this effect is the note which I now transmit from him. A copy of my answer to it, dated to-day, is inclosed.
It may be proper for me to state, that, whilst Mr. Canning, in the interview I had with him on the ninth of August, was assigning the reasons of this Government, as they will now be seen in his note, for not acceding to the treaty, took occasion to remark that Great Britain would be willing to give to the omitted words a meaning that would restrict their operation to the southern portion of North America as proximate to the British West Indies, excluding the range of coast which comprehended the middle and northern States, if I thought that such a plan would be acceptable to my Government. I immediately and most decidedly discountenanced such a proposition as objectionable under every view. He replied, that, having no other object in making the intimation than that of preventing the treaty from falling through, and not knowing himself in what light it might be received, he had, of course, nothing more to say, after learning from me that it would be objectionable.
I avail myself of this opportunity to forward to you a copy of the act of the last session of Parliament for consolidating the laws of this realm for the abolition of the slave trade, as requested in your communication of the 29th of May.
I have the honor to remain, &c,
RICHARD RUSH.
Hon. John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State.
No. 6, (a.)
Mr. George Canning to Mr. Rush.
Foreign Office, August 27, 1824.
Sir: In pursuance of what I stated to you in our late conference, I have now the honor to address you on the subject of the qualified ratification, on the part of your Government, of the treaty for the more effectual suppression of the slave trade, which was concluded and signed in the month of March last by you and his Majesty's plenipotentiaries.
His Majesty's Government have given the most anxious and deliberate consideration to this subject, and if the result of that consideration has been to decide that they cannot advise his Majesty to accept the American ratification, (notwithstanding the arguments alleged by you, in the name of your Government, in favor of such acceptance,) I entreat you to believe it is not from any diminished sense of the importance of the matter to which that treaty relates.
--365--
Nor do they at all underrate the desire which, as you have assured me, and as they really believe, was felt by the President of the United States to adopt the provisions of the treaty, such as it was transmitted to America. But the result is not the less inconvenient.
A treaty of which the basis was laid in propositions framed by the American Government was considered here as so little likely to be made a subject of renewed discussion in America that not a moment was lost in ratifying it, on the part of his Majesty; and his Majesty's ratification was ready to be exchanged against that of the United States when the treaty came back; not as it had been sent to America, but with material variations: variations not confined to those stipulations or parts of stipulations which had been engrafted upon the original projet, but extending to that part of the original projet itself which had passed unchanged through the negotiation.
The knowledge that the Constitution of the United States renders all their diplomatic compacts liable to this sort of revision undoubtedly precludes the possibility of taking exception at any particular instance in which that revision is exercised; but the repetition of such instances does not serve to reconcile to the practice the feelings of the other contracting party whose solemn ratification is thus rendered of no avail, and whose concessions in negotiation having been made (as all such concessions must be understood to be made) conditionally, are thus accepted as positive and absolute, while what may have been the stipulated price of those concessions is withdrawn.
In the instance before us the question is not one merely of form. A substantial change is made in the treaty, and, as I have said, on a point originally proposed by yourself, sir, as the American plenipotentiary, and understood to be proposed by the special direction of your Government.
The right of visiting vessels suspected of slave trading, when extended alike to the West Indies and to the coast of America, implied an equality of vigilance, and did not necessarily imply the existence of grounds of suspicion on either side.
The removal of this right as to the coast of America, and its continuance to the West Indies, cannot but appear to imply the existence on one side and not on the other of a just ground either of suspicion of misconduct, or for apprehension of an abuse of authority.
To such an equality, leading to such an inference, his Majesty's Government pan never advise his Majesty to consent. It would have been rejected if proposed in the course of negotiation. It can still less be admitted as a new demand after the conclusion of the treaty.
"With the exception of this proposed omission, there is nothing in the alterations made by the Senate of the United States in the treaty (better satisfied, as his Majesty's Government undoubtedly would have been if they had not been made,) which his Majesty's Government would not rather agree to adopt than suffer the hope of good to which this arrangement had given rise to be disappointed.
Upon this omission they trust the Senate of the United States will, on another consideration of the subject, see that it is not equitable to insist.
A full power will therefore be sent to Mr. Addington, his Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at "Washington, to conclude and sign, with any plenipotentiary to be appointed by the American Government, a treaty verbatim the same as the returned treaty would be with all the alterations introduced into it by the Senate, excepting only the proposed omission of the words "and America," in the first article; which treaty, if transmitted to England with the ratification of the Government of the United States, his Majesty will be ready to ratify.
But I am to apprise you, sir, that his Majesty will not be advised to appoint plenipotentiaries to conclude and sign the like treaty here, to be, as before, ratified by his Majesty and to be again subjected, after ratification by his Majesty, to alterations by the Senate of the United States.
I am confident that you will see in this distinction nothing more than a reasonable safeguard for his Majesty's dignity and a just desire to ascertain, before his Majesty again ratifies a diplomatic instrument to what conditions that ratification is affixed.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient servant,
GEORGE CANNING.
Hon. Richard Rush, &c.
No. 6, (b.)
Mr. Bush to Mr. G. Canning.
London, August 30, 1824.
Sir:
I had the honor to receive, on the 28th instant, your note of the 2d of this month, giving me information that his Britannic Majesty's Government have declined, for the reasons you have enumerated, advising his Majesty to accept the ratification by the President and Senate of the United States of the treaty for the suppression of the slave trade, lately signed on behalf of the two powers, in manner and form as that ratification had been made known by me to his Majesty's Government.
Having already, sir, had the honor to lay before you all the reasons that operated with my Government for giving way to the desire and the hope that his Majesty's Government might have felt able to accept the treaty with the alterations introduced by the Senate as conditions of its ratification, I have only to express my regret at the disappointment of this hope.
All power over the instrument on my part, as the plenipotentiary of the United States at his Majesty's court, ceasing by this decision, it only remains for me to say that I will, with promptitude, transmit to my Government a copy of your note, at which source it will receive, I am sure, all the attention due to the high interests of which it treats.
I have the honor to be, with distinguished consideration, sir, your most obedient servant,
RICHARD RUSH.
The Right Honorable George Canning,
His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
--366--
No. 7.
No. 82.] Mr. Adams to Mr. Bush.
Department of State, Washington, November 12, 1824.
Sir: Your despatches to Nos. 395 and 12, inclusive, have been received. The proposal for the negotiation of a new convention for the suppression of the slave trade will receive the deliberate consideration of the President.
It is observed with regret that the reasons assigned in Mr. Secretary Canning's letter of August 27 to you, as having induced the British Government to decline the ratification of that which you had signed, as modified by the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, appear to have arisen from impressions altogether erroneous. It is stated that, under the expectation that the treaty would not be made a subject of renewed discussion in the United States, it had actually been ratified on the part of the British Government as at first concluded; and hence an argument of inconvenience is deduced that a second and qualified ratification could not be given without impairing the dignity of the Government, by the implication that the former ratification had been an act of the sovereign performed in vain.
To give weight to this reasoning, it would seem an essential part of the facts that the ratification alluded to had been transmitted to the United States, or at least that it was known to have taken place by the Government of the United States at the time when the convention came under the consideration of the Senate. This, however, was not the case. That it had been ratified in Great Britain was neither known nor believed. It appears to have been an act altogether voluntary, and in nowise referring to that which was expected on the part of the United States. The argument, therefore, rests upon facts other than those which were really applicable to the subject.
While admitting that the knowledge of those provisions of our Constitution which reserve to the Senate the right of revising all treaties with foreign powers, before they can obtain the force of law, precludes the possibility of taking exception to any particular instance in which that revision is exercised, Mr. Canning urges that this part of our system operates unfavorably upon the feelings of the other contracting party, whose solemn ratification, he says, is thus rendered of no avail, and whose concessions in negotiation, having been made (as all such concessions must be understood to be made) conditionally, are thus accepted as positive and absolute, while what may have been the stipulated price of those concessions is withdrawn.
It may be replied, that, in all cases of a treaty thus negotiated, the other contracting party being under no obligation to ratify the compact before it shall have been ascertained whether and in what manner it has been disposed of in the United States, its ratification can in no case be rendered unavailing by the proceedings of the Government of the United States upon the treaty; and that every Government contracting with the United States, and with a full knowledge that all their treaties, until sanctioned by the constitutional majority of their Senate are, and must be, considered as merely inchoate and not consummated compacts, is entirely free to withhold its own ratification until it shall have knowledge of the ratification on their part. In the full powers of European Governments to their ministers, the sovereign usually promises to ratify that which his minister shall conclude in his name; and yet, if the minister transcends his instructions, though not known to the other party, the sovereign is not held bound to ratify his engagements. Of this principle Great Britain has once availed herself in her negotiations with the United States. But the full powers of our ministers abroad are necessarily modified by the provisions of our Constitution, and promise the ratification of treaties signed by them only in the event of their receiving the constitutional sanction of our own Government.
If this arrangement does in some instances operate as a slight inconvenience to other Governments, by interposing an obstacle to the facility of negotiation, it is, on the other hand, essential to guard against evils of the deepest import to our own nation utterly incompatible with the genius of our institutions; and it is supported by considerations to which the equitable sense of other nations cannot fail to subscribe.
The treaties of the United States are, together with their Constitution, the supreme law of the land. The power of contracting them is, in the first instance, given to the President, a single individual. If negotiated abroad, it must be by a minister or ministers under his appointment; and if in Europe, with powers largely discretionary—the distances seldom permitting opportunities to the minister of consulting his Government for instructions during the progress of negotiation. Were there no other check or control over this power, and were there an obligation, even of delicacy, requiring the unqualified sanction of every treaty so negotiated, the result would be an authority possessed by every minister of the United States entrusted with a full power for negotiating a treaty to change the laws of this Union upon objects of the first magnitude to the interests of the nation.
In their negotiations with each other, the European nations are generally so near, and the communications between them are so easy and regular, that a negotiator can seldom have a justifiable occasion to agree to any important stipulation without having an opportunity of asking and receiving the instructions of his Government; a practice always and peculiarly resorted to by British plenipotentiaries. With an intervening ocean, this is seldom possible; and it is, therefore, just and proper that the right of judgment upon all the stipulations agreed to by a minister should be reserved in the most unqualified manner to both Governments parties to the treaty, and that every compact so negotiated should be understood to be signed by the minister remote from his own country only sub spe rati; not conclusive upon his nation until its Government shall have passed sentence of approbation upon it.
These general observations are submitted in order that you may make such use of them as you shall deem expedient to satisfy the British Government that in this established principle of our Constitution there is nothing to which any foreign Government can justly take exception, and that it only reserves to our Government a power of supervision necessary for our own safety which the European Governments effectively reserve to themselves, and none more cautiously than Great Britain.
I am, with great respect, sir, your very humble and obedient servant,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
Hon. R. Rush, Envoy, &c., London.
--367--
No. 8.
Mr. Addington to Mr. Adams.
Washington, November 6, 1824.
Sir: You have already been apprised of the circumstance of his Majesty, my sovereign, having declined affixing his ratification to the convention concluded in London on the 13th of March last, between the British and American plenipotentiaries, for the more effectual suppression of the slave trade, amended and qualified as that instrument had been by the Senate of the United States.
In lieu of that convention, however, his Majesty proposes to the American Government to substitute another, verbatim the same as the amended instrument, one point alone excepted. That exception is the erasure of the word "America," in the first article, a word which stood in the original projet of the article as proposed by the President to the British Government, but which the United States thought fit, after the mutual acquiescence of both parties in it, to expunge.
In announcing to you the fact of my having been furnished with full powers to conclude and sign with the American Government a new treaty, such as I have above described, it will be unnecessary for me to enter at length into the motives which have actuated his Majesty in coming to this decision, as you have already been made acquainted with those motives through the medium of an official letter addressed on the 27th of August last by his Majesty's Secretary of State to the American Envoy in London, in which all the grounds of that determination are fully expounded.
A few observations on my part, however, in brief allusion to one or two points connected with this subject, may here be not misplaced.
In the acquiescence of his Majesty in all the alterations, with one only exception, effected by the Senate in a treaty originally projected by this Government at the spontaneous recommendation of the House of Representatives, the President will, I doubt not, see the clearest manifestation of the earnest desire of his Majesty's Government to carry into effect the important and salutary object for which that treaty was designed, however they may have deemed the original form in which the treaty was presented for the ratification of this Government the best calculated to attain that object.
To the amendment which would exempt the shores of America from that vigilance which is to be employed on those of the British West Indies, thereby destroying that equality which is the prevailing principle of the provisions of the treaty, and which cannot be withdrawn on the one side or on the other consistently with the mutual respect and confidence which subsist between the two contracting parties, his Majesty has found himself unable to accede; and I doubt not that, upon a fair and unbiassed reconsideration of that point, the American Government will see and acknowledge the justice of his Majesty's views, and will not hesitate to prove that acknowledgment by consenting to re-admit the expunged word "America" into the treaty.
It will not fail, sir, to occur to you that the condition required of Great Britain prior to the signature of the treaty by the American plenipotentiary, namely, the denunciation as piracy by the British Parliament of the slave trade, when exercised by British subjects, has already been fulfilled.
On the justice of accepting the value already paid for a stipulated act, and withholding the performance of that act, I leave it with confidence to your own sense of honor and equity to determine.
The sanction of this Government of the original provisions of the treaty in full was the equivalent to be received by his Majesty for his performance of the condition required of him, namely, his sanction of an act of Parliament declaring the slave trade piracy. Those provisions have been in part rejected, in part modified by this Government, and yet his Majesty is still willing to abide by his original agreement, provided this Government will recede from one alone of the various amendments made by them in the treaty.
I might here cite as a proof, if proof were necessary, of the unlimited confidence which his Majesty reposed in the good faith of the Government of this republic, and their sincerity in wishing to execute the treaty signed by their plenipotentiary in London—a treaty, I repeat, projected in conformity with the express recommendation of the House of Representatives, that his Majesty affixed without delay his own ratification to the treaty, in the full security of that instrument being equally invested with that of this Government. No shadow of a suspicion ever entered, ever could enter, his Majesty's mind that that ratification could be withheld in whole or in part.
Under all the circumstances of the case, sir, I cannot but feel an entire conviction that the sense of justice and the right feelings which animate the American Government will lead them to accede without hesitation to the proposition now submitted to them on the part of his Majesty, and that the President will find no difficulty in sanctioning the conclusion of a treaty the provisions of which must eventually result in such incalculable benefits to a most oppressed and afflicted portion of the human race.
With this conviction I need not assure you, sir, of my readiness to wait upon you at any time which you may think fit to appoint, in order to give effect to the instructions which I have received from his Majesty's Secretary of State, by affixing my signature to the convention as newly modelled. I beg, sir, that you will receive the assurances of my distinguished consideration.
H. U. ADDINGTON
No. 9.
Secretary of State to Mr. Addington.
Department of State, Washington, December 4, 1824.
Sir:
Your note of the 6th ultimo has been submitted to the consideration of the President of the United States. While regretting that it has not been found conformable to the views of his Britannic Majesty's Government to concur in the ratification of the convention for the suppression of the slave trade, as recommended by the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, he has thought it most advisable, with reference to the success of the object common to both Governments, and in which both take
--368--
the warmest interest, to refer the whole subject to the deliberate advisement of Congress. In postponing, therefore, a definitive answer to the proposal set forth in your note, I have only to renew the assurance of the unabated earnestness with which the Government of the United States looks to the accomplishment of the common purpose, the entire extinction of that odious traffic, and to the concert of effective measures to that end between the United States and Great Britain.
I pray you, sir, to accept the assurance of my distinguished consideration.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.