"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 his Government finds itself unable to accede to the convention for the suppression of the slave trade, with the alterations and modifications which 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 this 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." Mr. Rush to Mr. Adams, Sec. of State, Aug. 9, 1824. 5 Am. St. Pap. (For. Rel.), 364. The opponents of the slave trade "were introducing, and had already obtained the consent of Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, to a new principle of the law of nations more formidable to human liberty than the slave trade itself—a right of the commanders of armed vessels of one nation to visit and search the merchant vessels of another in time of peace." Mr. J. Q. Adams, April 29, 1819, as reported in 4 J. Q. Adams's Mem., 354. The United States cannot accede to a treaty stipulation extending the right to search supposed slavers to the coasts of the United States. Mr. McLane, Sec. of State, to Mr. Serurier, Mar. 24, 1834 MSS. Notes, For. "The circumstances under which the right of boarding and visiting vessels at sea is usually enforced are defined with sufficient clearness; and even where the right is admitted, usage among civilized nations has prescribed with equal precision the manner in which it is to be exercised. The motive of this communication is, that the British Government should be clearly made sensible that the United States cannot, in justice to their own citizens, permit the recurrence of such causes of complaint. If, in the treaties concluded between Great Britain and other powers, the latter have thonght fit, for the attainment of a particular object, to surrender to British cruisers certain rights and authority not recognized by maritime law, the officers charged with the execution of those treaties must bear in mind that their operation cannot give a right to interfere in any manner with the flag of nations not party to them. The United States not being such a party, vessels legally sailing under their flag can in no case be called upon to submit to the operation of said treaties; and it behooves their Government to protect and sustain its citizens in every justifiable effort to resist all attempts to subject them to the rules therein established, or to any consequent deductions therefrom. "It is a matter of regret that this practice [of fraudulently using the flag of the United States to cover slavers] has not already been abandoned. The President, on learning the abuses which had grown out of it, and with a view to do away with every cause for its longer continuance, having now directed the establishment of a competent naval force to cruise along those parts of the African coast which American vessels are in the habit of visiting in the pursuit of their lawful commerce, and where it is alleged that the slave trade has been carried on under an illegal use of the flag of the United States, has a right to expect that positive instructions will be given to all Her Majesty's officers to forbear from boarding or visiting vessels under the American flag." Mr. Forsyth, Sec. of State, to Mr. Stevenson, July 8, 1840. MSS. Inst., Gr. An elaborate report of Mr. Forsyth, Sec. of State, Mar. 3, 1841, in relation to "The President directs me to say that he approves your letter, and warmly commends the motives which animated you in presenting it. The whole subject is now before us here, or will be shortly, as Lord Ashburton arrived last evening; and without intending to intimate at present what modes of settling this point of difference with England will be proposed, you may receive two propositions as certain: "1st. That in the absence of treaty stipulations the United States will maintain the immunity of merchant vessels on the sea to the fullest extent which the law of nations authorizes. "2d. That if the Government of the United States, animated by a sincere desire to put an end to the African slave trade, shall be induced to enter into treaty stipulations for that purpose with any foreign power, those stipulations shall be such as shall be strictly limited to their true and single object; such as shall not be embarrassing to innocent commerce; and such especially as shall neither imply any inequality, nor can tend in any way to establish any inequality, in their practical operations." Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Cass, Apr. 5, 1842. MSS. Inst., France. "It is known that in December last a treaty was signed in London by the representatives of England, France, Russia, Prussia, and Austria, having for its professed object a strong and united effort of the five powers to put an end to the traffic [the slave trade]. This treaty was not officially communicated to the Government of the United States, but its provisions and stipulations are supposed to be accurately known to the public. It is understood to be not yet ratified on the part of France. "No application or request has been made to this Government to become party to this treaty; but the course it might take in regard to it has excited no small degree of attention and discussion in Europe, as the principle upon which it is founded, and the stipulations which it contains, have caused warm animadversions and great political excitement. "In my message at the commencement of the present session of Congress I endeavored to state the principles which this Government supports respecting the right of search and the immunity of flags. Desirous of maintaining those principles fully, at the same time that existing obligations should be fulfilled, I have thought it most consistent with the honor and dignity of the country that it should execute its own laws and perform its own obligations by its own means and its own power. The examination or visitation of the merchant vessels of one nation by the cruisers of another for any purpose except those known and acknowledged by the law of nations, under whatever restraints or regulations it may take place, may lead to dangerous results. It is far better, by other means, to supersede any supposed necessity or any motive for such examination or visit. Interference with a merchant vessel by an armed cruiser is always a delicate proceeding, apt to touch the point of national honor, as well as to affect the interests of individuals. It has been thought, therefore, expedient, not only in accordance with the stipulations of the Treaty of Ghent, but at the same time as removing all pretext on the part of others for violating the immunities of the American flag upon the seas, as they exist and are defined by the law of nations, to enter into the articles now submitted to the Senate. "The treaty which I now submit to you proposes no alteration, mitigation, or modification of the rules of the law of nations. It provides simply that each of the two Governments shall maintain on the coast of Africa a sufficient squadron to enforce, separately and respectively, the laws, rights, and obligations of the two countries for the suppression of the slave trade." President Tyler's message, transmitting the Treaty of Washington to the Senate, Aug. 11, 1842. 6 Webster's Works, 353. "Without intending or desiring to influence the policy of other Governments on this important subject this Government has reflected on what was due to its own character and position as the leading maritime power on the American continent, left free to make such choice of means for the fulfillment of its duties as it should deem best suited to its dignity. The result of its reflections has been that it does not concur in measures which, for whatever benevolent purpose they may be adopted, or with whatever care and moderation they may be exercised, S. Mis. 162-VOL. III-9 129 have yet a tendency to place the police of the seas in the hands of a single power. It chooses rather to follow its own laws, with its own sanction, and to carry them into execution by its own authority. Disposed to act in the spirit of the most cordial concurrence with other nations for the suppression of the African slave trade, that great reproach of our times, it deems it to be right nevertheless that this action, though concurrent, should be independent; and it believes that from this independence it will derive a greater degree of efficiency. * "You are furnished, then, with the American policy in regard to this interesting subject. First, independent but cordially concurrent efforts of maritime states to suppress, as far as possible, the trade on the coast by means of competent and well-appointed squadrons, to watch the shores and scour the neighboring seas. Secondly, concurrent becoming remonstrance with all Governments who tolerate within their territories markets for the purchase of African negroes. There is much reason to believe that if other states, professing equal hostility to this nefarious traffic, would give their own powerful concurrence and co-operation to these remonstrances, the general effect would be satisfactory, and that the cupidity and crimes of individuals would at length cease to find both their temptation and their reward in the bosom of Christian states and in the permission of Christian Governments." Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Cass, Aug. 29, 1842. MSS. Inst., France. 6 Webster's Works, 367. "The objection seems to proceed still upon the implied ground that the abolition of the slave trade is more a duty of Great Britain, or a more leading object with her, than it is or should be with us; as if, in this great effort of civilized nations to do away the most cruel traffic that ever scourged or disgraced the world, we had not as high and honorable, as just and merciful, a part to act as any other nation upon the face of the earth. Let it be forever remembered that in this great work of humanity and justice the United States took the lead themselves. This Government declared the slave trade unlawful; and in this declaration it has been followed by the great powers of Europe. This Government declared the slave trade to be piracy, and in this, too, its example has been followed by other states. This Government-this young Government, springing up in this New World within half a century; founded on the broadest principles of civil liberty, and sustained by the moral sense and intelligence of the people-has gone in advance of all other nations in summoning the civilized world to a common effort to put down and destroy a nefarious traffic, reproachful to human nature. It has not deemed that it suffers any derogation from its character or its dignity, if, in seeking to fulfill this sacred duty, it act, as far as necessary, on fair and equal terms of concert with other powers, having in view the same praiseworthy object. Such were its sentiments when it entered into the solemn stipulations of the Treaty of Ghent; such were its sen timents when it requested England to concur with us in declaring the slave trade to be piracy; and such are the sentiments which it has manifested on all other proper occasions." Same to same, Nov. 14, 1824; ibid. 6 Webster's Works, 380. "The rights of merchant vessels of the United States on the high seas, as understood by this Government, have been clearly and fully asserted (in the Ashburton treaty). As asserted, they will be maintained; nor would a declaration, such as you propose, have increased its resolution or its ability in this respect. The Government of the United States relies on its own power and on the effective support of the people, to assert successfully all the rights of all its citizens on the sea as well as on the land, and it asks respect for these rights not as a boon or favor from any nation. The President's message, most certainly, is a clear declaration of what the country understands to be its rights, and his determination to maintain them, not a mere promise to negotiate for these rights or to endeavor to bring other powers into an acknowledgment of them, either express or implied." Same to same, Dec. 20, 1842; ibid. 6 Webster's Works, 388. As to the Ashburton treaty see supra, § 150e; 3 Phill. Int. Law, 527. It is to be observed that by the first article of the treaty of 1862 (hereafter criticised) "The two high contracting parties mutually consent that those ships of their respective navies which shall be provided with special instructions for that purpose, as hereinafter mentioned, may visit such merchant vessels of the two nations as may, upon reasonable grounds, be suspected of being engaged in the African slave trade, or of having been fitted out for that purpose; or of having, during the voyage on which they are met by the said cruisers, been engaged in the African slave trade, contrary to the provisions of this treaty; and that such crusers may detain, and send or carry away, such vessels, in order that they may be brought to trial in the manner hereinafter agreed upon." After certain specifications it is provided, "Fourthly. The reciprocal right of search and detention shall be exercised only within the distance of two hundred miles from the coast of Africa, and to the southward of the thirty-second parallel of north latitude, and within thirty leagues from the coast of the island of Cuba." The objections to the clause in italics are hereafter noticed. "Upon the reception of the President's message of December, 1842, in England, Lord Aberdeen, on the 18th of January, 1843, addressed a dispatch to Mr. Fox, still British minister here, and directed him to read it to Mr. Webster. It took notice of that part of the President's message which related to the right of search, and denied that any concession on this point had been made by Great Britain in the late negotiations. * Mr. Fox was informed by Mr. Webster that an answer to this dispatch would be made in due time through Mr. Everett." 2 Curtis' Life of Webster, 149 ff., where the debates in Parliament on this topic are given. "In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 22d instant, requesting me to communicate with the House 'whatever correspondence or communication may have been received from the |