to cede any part, however insignificant, of the territories of the United States, although the proposal left it open to them to demand an equivalent for such cession either in frontier or otherwise.

The American plenipotentiaries must be aware that the boundary of the district of Maine has never been correctly ascertained; that the one asserted at present by the American government, by which the direct communication between Halifax and Quebec becomes interrupted, was not in contemplation of the British plenipotentiaries who concluded the treaty of 1783, and that the greater part of the territory in question is actually unoccupied.

The undersigned are persuaded that an arrangement on this point might be easily made, if entered into with the spirit of conciliation, without any prejudice to the interests of the district in question.

As the necessity for fixing some boundary for the northwestern frontier has been mutually acknowledged, a proposal for a discussion on that subject cannot be considered as a demand for a cession of territory, unless the United States are prepared to assert that there is no limit to their territories in that direction, and that availing themselves of the geographical errour upon which that part of the treaty of 1783 was founded, they will acknowledge no boundary whatever, then unquestionably any proposition to fix one, be it what it may, must be considered as demanding a large cession of territory from the United States.

Is the American government prepared to assert such an unlimited right, so contrary to the evident intention of the treaty itself? Or is his majesty's government to understand that the American plenipotentiaries are willing to acknowledge the boundary from the lake of the Woods to the Mississippi (the arrangement made by a convention in 1803, but not ratified) as that by which their government is ready to abide?

The British plenipotentiaries are instructed to accept favourably such a proposition, or to discuss any other line of boundary which may be submitted for consideration.

It is with equal astonishment and regret the undersigned find that the American plenipotentiaries have not only

declined signing any provisional article, by which the Indian nations who have taken part with Great Britain in the present contest may be included in the peace, and may have a boundary assigned to them, but have also thought proper to express surprise at any proposition on the subject having been advanced.

The American plenipotentiaries state, that their government could not have expected such a discussion, and appear resolved, at once, to reject any proposition on this head; representing it as a demand contrary to the acknowledged principles of publick law, tantamount to a cession of one third of the territorial dominions of the United States, and required to be admitted without dis

cussion.

The proposition which is thus represented is, that the Indian nations, which have been during the war in alliance with Great Britain, should at its termination be included in the pacification; and with a view to their permanent tranquillity and security, that the British government is willing to take as a basis of an article on the subject of a boundary for those nations, the stipulations which the American government contracted in 1795, subject, however to modifications.

After the declaration, publickly made to those Indian nations by the governour general of Canada, that Great Britain would not desert them, could the American government really persuade itself that no proposition relating to those nations would be advanced, and did lord Castlereagh's note of the 4th November, 1813, imply so great a sacrifice of honour, or exclude from discussion every subject excepting what immediately related to the maritime questions referred to in it?

When the undersigned assured the American plenipotentiaries of the anxious wish of the British government that the negotiation might terminate in a peace honourable to both parties, it could not have been imagined that the American plenipotentiaries would thence conclude, that his majesty's government was prepared to abandon the Indian nations to their fate, nor could it have been foreseen that the American government would have considered it as derogatory to its honour to admit a proposi

tion by which the tranquillity of those nations might be secured.

The British plenipotentiaries have yet to learn, that it is contrary to the acknowledged principles of publick law to include allies in a negotiation for peace, or that it is contrary to the practice of all civilized nations to propose that a provision should be made for their future security.

The treaty of Greenville established the boundaries between the United States and the Indian nations. The American plenipotentiaries must be aware, that the war, which has since broken out, has abrogated that treaty. Is it contrary to the established principles of publick law for the British government to propose, on behalf of its allies, that this treaty shall, on the pacification, be considered subject to such modifications as the case may render necessary? Or is it unreasonable to propose, that this stipulation should be amended, and that on that foundation some arrangement should be made which would provide for the existence of a neutral power between Great Britain and the United States, calculated to secure to both a longer continuance of the blessings of peace?

So far was that specifick proposition respecting the Indian boundaries from being insisted upon in the note, or in the conference which preceded it, as one to be admitted without discussion, that it would have been difficult to use terms of greater latitude, or which appeared more adapted, not only not to preclude but to invite discus

sion.

If the basis proposed could convey away one third of the territory of the United States, the American government itself must have conveyed it away by the Greenville treaty of 1795.

It is impossible to read that treaty without remarking how inconsistent the present pretensions of the American' government are, with its preamble and provisions. The boundary line between the lands of the United States, and those of the Indian nations, is therein expressly defined. The general character of the treaty, is that of a treaty with independent nations; and the very stipulation which the American plenipotentiaries refer to, that the Indian

nations should sell their lands only to the United States, tends to prove that, but for that stipulation, the Indians had a general right to dispose of them.

The American government has now for the first time, in effect, declared that all Indian nations within its line of demarcation are its subjects, living there upon sufferance, on lands which it also claims the exclusive right of acquiring, thereby menacing the final extinction of those

nations.

Against such a system, the undersigned must formally protest. The undersigned repeat, that the terms on which the proposition has been made for assigning to the Indian nations some boundary, manifest no unwillingness to discuss any other proposition directed to the same object, or even a modification of that which is offered. Great Britain is ready to enter into the same engagements with respect to the Indians living within her line of demarcation, as that which is proposed to the United States. It can, therefore, only be from a complete misapprehension of the proposition, that it can be represented as being not reciprocal. Neither can it, with any truth, be represented as contrary to the acknowledged principles of publick law, as derogatory to the honour, or inconsistent with the rights of the American government, nor as a demand required to be admitted without discussión.

After this full exposition of the sentiments of his majesty's government on the points above stated, it will be for the American plenipotentiaries to determine, whether they are ready now to continue the negotiations; whether they are disposed to refer to their government for further instructions; or, lastly, whether they will take upon themselves the responsibility of breaking off the negotiation altogether.

The undersigned request the American plenipotentiaries to accept the assurance of their high consideration.

GAMBIER,

HENRY GOULBURN,
WILLIAM ADAMS.

The American to the British Commissioners. Ghent, September 9, 1814.

THE undersigned have had the honour to receive the note of his Britannick majesty's plenipotentiaries, dated the 4th inst. If, in the tone or substance of the former note of the undersigned, the British commissioners have perceived little proof of any disposition on the part of the American government, for a discussion of some of the propositions advanced in the first note, which the undersigned had the honour of receiving from them, they will ascribe it to the nature of the propositions themselves, to their apparent incompatibility with the assurances in lord Castlereagh's letter to the American Secretary of State, proposing this negotiation, and with the solemn assurances of the British plenipotentiaries themselves, to the undersigned, at their first conferences with them.

The undersigned, in reference to an observation of the British plenipotentiaries, must be allowed to say, that the objects which the government of the United States had in view, have not been withheld.

The subjects considered as suitable for discussion were fairly brought forward, in the conference of the 9th ult. and the terins on which the United States were willing to conclude the peace, were frankly and expressly declared in the note of the undersigned, dated the 24th ult. It had been confidently hoped that the nature of those terms, so evidently framed in a sincere spirit of conciliation, would have induced Great Britain to adopt them as the basis of a treaty and it is with deep regret, that the undersigned, if they have rightly understood the meaning of the last note of the British plenipotentiaries, perceive that they still insist on the exclusive military possession of the lakes, and on a permanent boundary and independent territory for the Indians residing within the dominions of the United States.

The first demand is grounded on the supposition, that the American government has manifested, by its proceedings towards Spain, by the acquisition of Louisiana, by