were now more effectually protected against violence or frauds, from any quarter, than they had been under any former Government; that even our citizens were not allowed to purchase their lands; that when they gave up their title to any portion of their country to the United States, it was by voluntary treaty with our Government, who gave them a satisfactory equivalent; and that through these means the United States had succeeded in preserving, since the treaty of Greenville of 1795, an uninterrupted peace of sixteen years with all the Indian tribes a period of tranquillity much longer than they were known to have enjoyed heretofore. It was then expressly stated on our part, that the proposition respecting the Indians was not distinctly understood. We asked whether the pacification and the settlement of a boundary for them were both made a sine qua non? which was answered in the affirmative. The question was then asked the British commissioners, whether the proposed Indian boundary was intended to preclude the United States from the right of purchasing by treaty from the Indians, without the consent of Great Britain, lands lying beyond that boundary, and as a restriction upon the Indians from selling, by amicable treaties, lands to the United States, as had been hitherto practised? To this question it was first answered, by one of the commissioners, that the Indians would not be restricted from selling their lands, but that the United States would be restricted from purchasing them; and, on reflection, another of the commissioners stated that it was intended that the Indian territories should be a barrier between the British dominions and those of the United States; that both Great Britain and the United States should be restricted from purchasing their lands; but that the Indians might sell them to a third party. The proposition respecting Indian boundaries, thus explained, and connected with the right of sovereignty ascribed to the Indians over the country, amounted to nothing less than a demand of the absolute cession of the rights both of sovereignty and of soil. We cannot abstain from remarking to you, that the subject of Indian boundary was indistinctly stated when first proposed, and that the explanations were at first obscure, and always given with reluctance; and it was declared, from the first moment, to be a sine qua non, rendering any discussion unprofitable until it was admitted as a basis. Knowing that we had no power to cede to the Indians any part of our territory, we thought it unnecessary to ask, what probably would not have been answered till the principle was admitted, where the line of demarcation of the Indian country was proposed to be established. The British commissioners, after having repeated that their instructions on the subject of the Indians were peremptory, stated that, unless we could give some assurance that our powers would allow us to make at least a provisional arrangement on the subject, any further discussion would be fruitless; and that they must consult their own Government on this state of things. They proposed, accordingly, a suspension of the conferences until they should have received an answer; it being understood that each party might call a meeting whenever they had any propositions to submit. * * * We Before the proposed adjournment took place, it was agreed that there should be a protocol of the conferences; that a statement should, for that purpose, be drawn up by each party; and that we should meet the next day to compare the statements. accordingly met again on Wednesday, the 10th instant, and ultimately agreed on what should constitute the protocol of the conferences. A copy of this instrument we have the honor to transmit with this dispatch; and we also enclose a copy of the statement originally drawn up on our part, for the purpose of making known to you the passages to which the British commissioners objected. Their objection to some of the passages was, that they appeared to be argumentative; and that the object of the protocol was to contain a mere statement of facts. They, however, objected to the insertion of the answer which they had given to our question respecting the effect of the proposed Indian boundary; but they agreed to an alteration of their original proposition on that subject, which renders it much more explicit than is stated either in the first conference or in their proposed draft of the protocol. They also objected to the insertion of the fact, that they had proposed to adjourn the conferences until they could obtain further instructions from their Government." * EXHIBIT 116. Draft of original Protocol made by the American Ministers of the first two conferences held with the British Commissioners.1 At a meeting between the commissioners of His Britannic Majesty and those of the United States of America, for negotiating and concluding a peace, held at Ghent, 8th August, 1814, the following points were presented, by the commissioners on the part of Great Britain, as subjects for discussion: * * * 2. The Indian allies of Great Britain to be included in the pacification, and a boundary to be settled between the dominions of the Indians and those of the United States. Both parts of this point are considered by the British Government as a sine qua non to the conclusion of the treaty. The American commissioners were requested to say whether their instructions from their Government authorized them to treat upon these several points; and to state, on their part, such other points as they might be further instructed to propose for discussion. The meeting was adjourned to Tuesday, the 9th August, on which day the commissioners met again. The American commissioners, at this meeting, stated * that on the second and fourth of these points, there not having existed heretofore any differences between the two Governments, they had not been anticipated by the Government of the United States, and were, therefore, not provided for in their instructions. That in relation to an Indian pacification, they knew that the Government of the United States had appointed commissioners to treat of peace with the Indians; and that it was not improbable that peace had been made with them. * * * They, the American commissioners, were asked whether, if those of Great Britain should enter further upon the discussion, particularly respecting the Indian boundary, the American commissioners could expect that it would terminate by some provisional arrangement, which they could conclude subject to the ratification of their Government? They answered that, as any arrangement to which they could agree upon the subject must be without specific authority from their government, it was not possible for them, previous to dis 1American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. III, p. 707. cussion, to decide whether an article on the subject could be formed, which would be mutually satisfactory, and to which they should think themselves, under their discretionary powers, justified in acceding. The British commissioners declined entering upon the discussion, unless the American commissioners would say that they considered it within their discretion to make a provisional arrangement on the subject, conformable to the view of it prescribed by the British Government, and proposed to adjourn the conferences for the purpose of consulting their own Government on this state of things. The British commissioners were asked whether it was understood, as an effect of the proposed boundary for the Indians, that the United States would be precluded from the right of purchasing territory from the Indians within that boundary, by amicable treaty with the Indians themselves, without the consent of Great Britain? And whether it was understood to operate as a restriction upon the Indians from selling, by such amicable treaties, lands to the United States, as has been hitherto practised? They answered, that it was understood that the Indian territories should be a barrier between the British possessions and those of the United States; that the United States and Great Britain should both be restricted from such purchases of lands; but that the Indians would not be restricted from selling them to any third party. EXHIBIT 117. Protocol of Conference August 8th, 1814.1 The British and American commissioners having met, their full powers were respectively produced, which were found satisfactory, and copies thereof were exchanged. The British commissioners stated the following subjects, as those upon which it appeared to them that the discussions between themselves and the American commissioners would be likely to turn: * 1American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. III, p. 708. EXHIBIT 116. Draft of original Protocol made by the American Ministers of the first two conferences held with the British Commissioners.1 At a meeting between the commissioners of His Britannic Majesty and those of the United States of America, for negotiating and concluding a peace, held at Ghent, 8th August, 1814, the following points were presented, by the commissioners on the part of Great Britain, as subjects for discussion: * * * * 2. The Indian allies of Great Britain to be included in the pacification, and a boundary to be settled between the dominions of the Indians and those of the United States. Both parts of this point are considered by the British Government as a sine qua non to the conclusion of the treaty. The American commissioners were requested to say whether their instructions from their Government authorized them to treat upon these several points; and to state, on their part, such other points as they might be further instructed to propose for discussion. The meeting was adjourned to Tuesday, the 9th August, on which day the commissioners met again. * The American commissioners, at this meeting, stated * that on the second and fourth of these points, there not having existed heretofore any differences between the two Governments, they had not been anticipated by the Government of the United States, and were, therefore, not provided for in their instructions. That in relation to an Indian pacification, they knew that the Government of the United States had appointed commissioners to treat of peace with the Indians; and that it was not improbable that peace had been made with them. * * * They, the American commissioners, were asked whether, if those of Great Britain should enter further upon the discussion, particularly respecting the Indian boundary, the American commissioners could expect that it would terminate by some provisional arrangement, which they could conclude subject to the ratification of their Government? They answered that, as any arrangement to which they could agree upon the subject must be without specific authority from their government, it was not possible for them, previous to dis 1American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. III, p. 707. |