BER 20, 1818.

Mr. Monroe to Mr. Baker, Chargé des Affaires from England.

Department of STATE, July 18, 1815. SIR: I have the honor to communicate to you a copy of a letter from the collector of the customs at Barnstable to the Secretary of the Treasury, by which it appears that an American vessel engaged in the cod fishery, in longitude 65° 20, latitude 42° 41", was warned off by the commander of the British sloop-of-war Jaseur, and ordered not to approach within sixty miles of the coast; with which order the commander of the American vessel immediately complied. It appears, also, that a similar warning had been given by the commander of the Jaseur to all the other American vessels that were then in sight.

This extraordinary measure has excited no small degree of surprise. Being altogether incompatible with the rights of the United States, it is presumed that it has not been authorized by your Government. I invite your attention to it, in the hope that as you have been charged by your Government with the execution of the late treaty of peace, and are acquainted with its views on all questions connected with it, you will consider yourself authorized to interpose to prevent the progress of an evil which will be so exten

JAMES MONROE. A. ST. JOHN BAKER, Esq., &c.

Collector of the Customs at Barnstable to the Secretary of the Treasury.

COLLECTOR'S OFFICE, BARNSTABLE, July 3, 1815. SIR: I think it my duty to inform you that the captain of a vessel regularly licensed for the cod fishery has just reported to this office that, on the 19th day of June last, being in longitude 65° 20", north latitude 42° 41", about forty-five miles distant from Cape Sable, he fell in with His Britannic Majesty's sloop-of-war Jaseur, N. Lock, commander, who warned him off, and endorsed his enrolment and license in the words following: "JUNE 19, 1815. "Warned off the coast by His Majesty's sloop Jaseur, not to come within sixty miles.

"N. LOCK, Captain."

diately left the fishing ground, and returned home In consequence of which, the fisherman immewithout completing his fare.

that all the fishing vessels then in sight were The captain of the fisherman further states, warned off in the same manner by the said Captain Lock. I am, sir, very respectfully, &c. ISAIAH L. GREEN,

Hon. A. J. Dallas.

Mr. Baker to Mr. Monroe.

Collector.

jesty's Government; and I have the satisfaction to acquaint you that orders have been given by the naval commanders-in-chief on the Halifax and Newfoundland stations, which will effectually prevent the recurrence of any similar interruption to the vessels belonging to the United States engaged in fishing on the high seas. I have the honor to be, &c.

ANTHONY ST. J. BAKER.

Hon. JAMES MONROE, &c.

Extract of a letter from Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, to Mr. Adams, dated

JULY 21, 1815. Among the acts which we have to complain of with greatest earnestness is a late warning given by a commander of a British sloop-of-war to our fishermen near the coast of the British northern colonies to retire thence to the distance of twenty leagues. This, it is presumed, has been done under a construction of the late Treaty of Peace, which, by being silent on the subject, left that important interest to rest on the ground on which it was placed by the Treaty of 1783. The right to the fisheries required no new stipulation to support it: it was sufficiently secured by the Treaty of 1783. This important object will claim your early attention. The measure thus promptly taken by the British Government, without any communication with this Government, notwithstanding the declaration of our Ministers at Ghent that our right would not be affected by the silence of the treaty, indicates a spirit which excites equal surprise and regret-one which by no means corresponds with the amicable relations established between the two countries by that treaty, or with the spirit with which it has been executed by the United States.

As you are well acquainted with the solidity of our right to the fisheries in question, as well as to those on the Grand Bank and elsewhere on the main ocean, to the limit of a marine league only from the coast, (for the pretension to remove us twenty leagues is too absurd to be discussed,) I shall not dilate on it, especially at this time. It is sufficient to observe here, that the right of the United States to take fish on the coast of Newfoundland, and on the coasts, bays, and creeks, of all other of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, and to dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbors, and creeks, of Nova Scotia, Magdalen islands, and Labrador-in short, that every right appertaining to the fisheries, which was secured by the Treaty of 1783, stands now as unshaken and perfect as it then did, constituting a vital part of our political existence, and resting on the same solid foundation as our independence itself. In the act of dismemberment and partition, the rights of each party were distinctly defined. So much of territory and incidental rights were allotted to one, so much to the other; and as well might it be said, because our boundary had not been retraced by the late treaty, in every part, that certain portions of our territory had reverted to England, as that our

right to fish, by whatever name secured, had experienced that fate. A liberty of unlimited duration, thus secured, is as much a right as if it had been stipulated by any other term. Being to be enjoyed by one, adjoining the territory allotted by the partition to the other party, it seemed to be the appropriate term. I have made these remarks to show the solid ground on which this right is deemed to rest by this Government, relying on your thorough knowledge of the subject to illustrate and support it in the most suitable manner.

It can scarcely be presumed that the British Government, after the result of the late experiment, in the present state of Europe, and under its other engagements, can seriously contemplate a renewal of hostilities. But it often happens with nations, as well as with individuals, that a just estimate of their interest and duties is not an infallible criterion of their conduct. We ought to be prepared at every point to guard against such an event. You will be attentive to circumstances, and give us timely notice of any danger which may be menaced.

Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe. LONDON, August 15, 1815.

I had mentioned the subject of the slaves in my first interview with him, [Lord Castlereagh,] and he had then expressed an intention to refer it to the Commissioners with whom we were then negotiating the commercial convention. But they received no instructions relative to it, and considered their powers as limited to the objects upon which my colleagues were authorized, conjointly with me, to treat. The day before Lord Castlereagh left town, I spoke to him again concerning it. He had just received despatches from Mr. Baker relating to it, but had not had time to read them, and merely told me that, during his absence, Lord Liverpool or Lord Bathurst would attend to the business of his department. After writing the note, of which the copy is enclosed, I requested an interview with Lord Liverpool, for which he appointed last Saturday; but an accident prevented me from then meeting him. I have renewed the request; but as he was not in town when my note was sent, it may be deferred until after Mr. Bagot's departure.

spatch is inserted among the papers relating to the [NOTE. The letter referred to in the above dedeportation of slaves-Appendix, 2d session, 14th Congress.]

Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Monroe.

LONDON, September 5, 1815.

In compliance with your instructions of July 21, I have this day addressed Lord Castlereagh, claiming payment from the British Government for the slaves carried away from Cumberland island and the adjoining waters, after the ratification of the treaty of peace, and in contravention to one of the express stipulations of that treaty.

My preceding despatches, Nos. 9 and 10, will have informed you of the steps I had taken, by an official letter to Lord Castlereagh, and by a personal interview with the Earl of Liverpool, in relation to this subject, previous to the receipt of your last instructions. The letter to Lord Castlereagh has hitherto remained unanswered; and Lord Liverpool made no attempt to answer either the reasoning of your letter on the subject to Mr. Baker, or the statement of the proof with regard to the meaning of the article, resulting from the manner in which it had been drawn up and agreed to. The substance of what he said was, that, in agreeing to the article as it stands, they had not been aware that it would bind them to restore the slaves whom their officers had enticed away by promises of freedom.

The case of these slaves carried away from Cumberland seems not even to admit of the distinction to which Mr. Baker and Lord Liverpool resorted. Yet the prospect of obtaining either restoration or indemnity appears to me not more favorable in this case than in any others of the same class. If there were any probability that this Government would admit the principle of making indemnity, it would become necessary for me to remark, that the list of slaves transmitted to me, and of which I have sent to Lord Castlereagh a copy, is not an authenticated doc

LONDON, September 19, 1815.

The transactions to which your instructions of the 21st July have reference were of a character to excite in the highest degree the attention of the Government of the United States. So many simultaneous acts of British officers, at various stations and upon both elements, indicating a marked spirit of hostility, were calculated to inspire serious doubts with regard to the pacificnot to say the amicable-dispositions of the British Government; and the latter part of your despatch made it incumbent upon me, under certain contingencies, to take measures, of which nothing that had occurred here had induced me even to think, as precautions which the course of events might render expedient. The commercial convention had shown how excessively difficult it was for British and American Plenipotentiaries to agree upon any one point in which the mutual interests of the two countries were involved. It had shown how very few points there were upon which any agreement could be made; and it was evident, from everything excepting the personal courtesies of the Prince and his cabinet, that the animosities of the condition from which the two nations had lately emerged had very little subsided. I had, however, before the receipt of your despatch, not a suspicion that

an immediate renewal of hostilities was contemplated; and even now, although I perceive no reason for flattering myself that any satisfaction will be given us upon any one of our causes of complaint, yet I do not apprehend that any act of open and avowed hostility will be sanctioned by the British Government at the present moment. It must however be added that the most-perhaps the only-unequivocal pledge of pacific intentions is the reduction of the fleet, not only to a peace establishment, but to an unusually small one. Your despatch, and the several procedures to which it related, awakened an anxiety that nothing should be omitted which could be of any possible utility to our interests in this quarter.

Having formally renewed the claim of the restitution of the slaves carried away contrary to the engagements of the Treaty of Peace, or for payment of their value as the alternative, there were other objects which I deemed it necessary to present again to the consideration of this Government. In the first instance, it seemed advisable to open them by a verbal communication; and I requested of Lord Bathurst an interview, for which he appointed the 14th instant, when I called at his office in Downing street. I said that, having lately received despatches from you respecting several objects of some importance to the relations between the two countries, my first object in asking to see him had been to inquire whether he had received from Mr. Baker a communication of the correspondence between you and him relative to the surrender of Michilimackinac; to the proceedings of Colonel Nicholls in the southern part of the United States; and to the warning given by the captain of the British armed vessel Jaseur to certain American fishing vessels to withdraw from the fishing grounds to the distance of sixty miles from the coast. He answered, that he had received all these papers from Mr. Baker about four days ago; that an answer with regard to the warning of the fishing vessels had immediately been sent; but on the other subjects there had not been time to examine the papers and prepare the answers. I asked him if he could, without inconvenience, state the substance of the answer that had been sent. He said, certainly; it had been that as, on the one hand, Great Britain could not permit the vessels of the United States to fish within the creeks and close upon the shores of the British territories, so, on the other hand, it was by no means her intention to interrupt them fishing anywhere in the open sea, or without the territorial jurisdiction-a marine league from the shore; and, therefore, that the warning given at the place stated, in the case referred to, was altogether unauthorized. I replied, that the particular act of the British commander in this instance being disavowed, I trusted that the British Government, before adopting any final determination upon the subject, would estimate in candor, and in that spirit of amity which my own Government was anxiously desirous of maintaining in our relations with this country, the considerations which I was instructed to pre