seen that it will be impossible for the Congress to prohibit an intercourse between the United States and the West Indies, in British vessels, without producing a very serious effect on their whole navigation and commercial interests. We flatter ourselves, therefore, that it may be found practicable, and perhaps not difficult, to arrange this business hereafter to the satisfaction of both countries.

The seventh article relates to the appointment of consuls by each party in the territories and ports of the other. It was taken from the treaty of 1794.

The 8th article, which specifies the causes for which vessels may be captured or detained, including among them the circumstance of their having enemies' property on board, is (except the last clause) a transcript of the 17th article of the treaty of 1794. The stipulation contained in that clause, that the parties shall be allowed adequate damages and charges of the trial in all cases of unfounded detention or other contravention of the regulations of the present treaty, will, we presume, produce the salutary effect contemplated by it. There is, perhaps, no principle in the maritime pretensions of this country, which has been more abused in practice, than that which this provision is intended to remedy. That damages should be allowed in all such cases is, it is true, a doctrine recognised by the court of admiralty. It cannot, however, be doubted that, by providing for them in the treaty, the obligation to allow them will acquire greater force with the court, and even the government itself, while it cannot fail to give an useful admonition to the cruisers.

The ninth article regulates what shall be deemed contraband of war. You will observe that tar and turpentine, except when destined to a place of naval equipment, are not comprised in it, and that provisions are altogether omitted. We endeavoured to exclude from it naval stores, but without effect. We succeeded, however, in exempting the vessel on the return voyage, after depositing her cargo at the port of her destination, from being detained on the pretence that it consisted of contraband articles.

The provision in the tenth article, relative to vessels sailing without knowledge of a blockade, is somewhat altered from the treaty of 1794. The precise effect of the change cannot perhaps be pronounced with certainty; but it seems to be clear that it cannot be otherwise than advantageous. The alterations consist in the introduction into the preamble of "the distance and other circumstances incident to the situation of the contracting parties," and of the word "such" into the provision which follows. The first amendment appears to justify an inference, that, on account of the peculiar circumstances, local and relative, thus recited as the reasons why, in the opinion of the contracting parties, it may frequently happen that vessels may sail for a port or place without knowing that it is besieged, blockaded, or invested," our vessels ought not to be liable to be judicially affected with knowledge of a blockade, so as to subject them to penalty, by the evidence usually held to be sufficient for that purpose. Sir W. Scott decided in 1799, that, in consequence of the distance of the United States from Europe, we were entitled to a more favourable rule in that respect than other countries, and our article may be fairly considered as adopting that idea and acting upon it. On the foundation of the single fact of distance, Sir W. Scott justified a conjectural destination from America to Amsterdam, although the blockade of that port had been notified; and the parties concerned were proved to have known of the commencement of it. The article, as it now stands, seems necessarily to imply at least the same indulgence; and, if it does, it certainly goes farther than Sir W. Scott's opinion, which does not admit that an inquiry can be made of the blockading force, as our article unquestionably does, in the cases to which it applies. It does not appear to be unreasonable to hold, that, a peculiar motive being now assigned in the preamble for the provision which it introduces, a correspondent peculiar effect is contemplated by that provision; and no such effect can follow from it, if it be not that [as our distance makes it impossible "that we should have constant * VOL. III. 9

information of the state of the blockade, whether it continues or is relaxed"] the mere notification of the blockade, or even the knowledge that the blockade has been commenced de facto, shall not be sufficient to make the destination illegal, but that, notwithstanding such notification or knowledge, we shall receive warning at the port or place blockaded. The words "without knowing that the same is either besieged, blockaded, or invested," will admit of this interpretation, since, by reason of our distance, it may in our case be truly said [and has in substance been judicially said] to be one thing to know that a blockade has been notified or instituted, and another that it continues. We endeavoured, without success, to obtain the consent of the British commissioners to the article proposed in your project. They would only agree, as you will perceive, to take its preamble and engraft it upon the article of 1794, observing that this would give to that article a new and more favourable, though certainly an undefined character; and that, at a moment when their maritime efforts in this mode of hostility might more than ever become indispensable to the national safety, it was impossible to do more. We pressed them long and earnestly to connect with the clause a definition of blockade, to which, in the early stages of our negotiation, it was believed there would be no objection. We found them, however, decidedly averse from such a definition by treaty, notwithstanding the precedent afforded by lord St. Helen's convention with Russia. They maintained that the British doctrine was already as explicit on this point as any definition could make it; that it was difficult, if not impracticable, to agree upon one which should be at the same time accurate and complete; that the clause in its present form would do much towards the accomplishment of our object; and that what remained it would be in their power, as it certainly was in their inclination, to supply, as effectually as in the treaty itself, by taking occasion to state, in a letter which it was intended should be delivered to us on their part at the time of the signature of the treaty, which you will

hereafter find explained, the theory and practice of the British government on this subject.

This reasoning was in no degree satisfactory, and it was resisted accordingly, but without effect. The proposed substitute for a definition by treaty might be of some value, and was not therefore opposed; but it was obvious that it would be greatly impaired, if not wholly destroyed, by the nature of the letter, of which we had received a full explanation, and in which the suggested statement was to be inserted.

The eleventh article regulates the great question of our commerce with enemies' colones, the interruption of which was one of the principal causes of the late disagreement between the two countries. We trust that the compromise which has been made on this point will be advantageous to our commercial interest, and satisfactory to our government. The British commissioners were very desirous of burdening this intercourse with several severe restrictions, to place, as they did not hesitate to state, their own merchants on an equal footing, in the great markets of the continent, with those of the United States. With that view, and to settle all questions concerning the continuity of the voyage, they proposed that all articles of West India produce should be stored in the United States for the term of one month, be transported thence to Europe in another ship from that in which they were brought, and be likewise subjected to a duty of at least four per cent. on re-exportation. They finally agreed, however, to relinquish all these pretensions, except the landing of the goods in the United States, and the payment [by which is understood the securing of the payment in the mode prescribed by our law] of one per cent. on such European articles as may be carried thence to the colonies, and of two per cent. on such West India productions as may be carried to Europe, including the parent and every other country. We are persuaded that this arrangement will be attended with less inconvenience to the parties than the other restrictions above mentioned, or either of them. The storing of the

goods especially for a month seemed to be peculiarly objectionable, as it would have subjected us to a serious injury, without being attended with any circumstance to alleviate the regret inseparable from it. We flatter ourselves that the sum agreed to be paid will not be felt as a heavy one on our merchants, whose patriotism will be gratified by the recollection that the duty which they pay will redound to the advantage of their country. By the compromise which is made the practical enjoyment of the rights of each party is forborne, in the manner stated and for the term specified, while the rights themselves are reserved. The stipulation, being in the form of a concession on the part of Great Britain, is intended to mitigate her principle where it applies, but in no respect to enlarge the sphere of its operation. No judicial decision of the court of admiralty in this country has hitherto extended the British principle to enemies' colonies in the East Indies, and it is understood that it does not apply to the greater part, if to any of them. Some cases are depending before it from the vice-admiralty courts of Halifax and Columbo, which will bring the point into question. Should the opinion of the court be that the principle is applicable to the colony to which the cause relates, then the party will have the advantage of the provision contained in this article; should it on the contrary decide that it does not apply to such colony, then the trade between it and the parent country will be free. This view of the subject was entertained equally by the British commissioners and ourselves, and is that, as they assure us, which the court of admiralty will adopt in its decisions. We endeavoured to exempt this branch of the trade with enemies' colonies from the operation of the British principle; but that was found to be impracticable. We flatter ourselves that the arrangement made respecting it will be deemed the next most eligible one that could have been adopted, and that it will produce in practice, in a great measure, if not altogether, the same effect.

The twelfth article establishes the maritime jurisdiction