directed to this subject. The American Commissioners expressed a willingness to enter into the discussion of this topic, and a particular anxiety to ascertain the full extent of the views with which the British Government had made it a sine qua non of a Treaty. Nothing fell from them which induced us to believe that they considered it practicable to conclude any provisional arrangement which would be satisfactory to their Government. One of them, Mr. Clay, stated his opinion that none could be framed. It appeared to us, and we so stated it to the American Commissioners, that a proposal to discuss without a prospect of some arrangement at least of a provisional kind, would be fruitless. They appeared to wish to go into the discussion on the ground that they should be able to shew that the objects of the British Government might be attained without making this point sine qua non of a Treaty. We gave no particular encouragement to the notion of the utility of the discussions in this point of view. Under these circumstances it would be satisfactory to us to be furnished with Instructions of the most specific kind how far His Majesty's Government would be disposed to accept of a provisional Article as to an Indian Boundary, subject to very dubious contingency of its ratification by the President of the United States. And also whether His Majesty's Government would wish the negotiations to proceed upon any and what points in the event of no provisional Article of this kind being agreed to, which latter contingency, unless specific instructions are received from the United States, appears to us by no means unlikely to happen.

On the subject of the fisheries the American Commissioners stated nothing of the nature of a claim to take fish within the limits of British Sovereignty, or to use any British Territory for purposes connected with the fisheries.

As to regulations for commerce we informed them that we had no instructions on this head, but we did not mean to preclude them from proposing regulations of that kind, which we would transmit to our Government for future consideration.

The Conference closed with mutual acknowledgments that the discussions had been opened with frankness and candour. The American Commissioners particularly requested that their sense of the conciliatory manner in which the conferences has been

hitherto conducted should be made known by us to His Majesty's

Lord Castlereagh to the Commissioners.1

FOREIGN OFFICE, August 14, 1814. Your dispatch with its Inclosures of the 9th from Ghent has been received and laid before the Prince Regent.

It appears from the communications you have had with the American Commissioners that upon two out of the four points referred to in your Instructions, namely, upon the second and fourth, the American Negotiators have received no Instructions from their Government, and that they have on their part suggested three additional topicks for discussion.

Upon the point of the Fisheries it does not clearly appear whether in the absence of Instructions they consider themselves authorized, supposing all other questions arranged, to sign a Treaty of peace upon the distinct understanding that the right of fishing and drying within the British jurisdiction does not thereby as of right revive. Their mode of receiving your remarks on this head seems to countenance such an interpretation of their meaning, but you will feel the importance of not leaving this matter in doubt.

Upon the question of the Indians there is also room for farther Explanation. You will observe that this subject in your Instructions divides itself into two Propositions; 1st. The Indians being included in the peace: 2ndly. Such arrangement of limits, as whilst it secures to the Indians the benefits of the peace, may tend the better to preserve hereafter the relations of amity between

'Foreign Office, America, Vol. 101.

the British and American Governments. On both of these points it would seem that. the American Commissioners are equally unauthorized to conclude, and although the second point might possibly not have been foreseen, yet it appears unaccountable, upon the first, that the American Government should have left their negotiators without Instructions, inasmuch as they could have had no reason to suppose that the British Government would, for a moment listen to a separate peace to the exclusion of the Indians, who have acted with them as allies during the war.

But upon the practicability of prosecuting the negotiation with any utility in the present imperfect state of the instructions of which the American Negotiators avow themselves to be in possession, the whole seems to turn upon the point you have so properly suggested; viz: whether the Commissioners will or will not take upon themselves to sign a provisional agreement upon the points on which they have no instruction. If they decline this, the British Government sees no advantage in prosecuting the discussions further, until the American Negotiators shall have rereceived instructions upon these points. If on the contrary upon a candid explanation of the principles upon which Great Britain is prepared to treat on these subjects, they are willing upon their own responsibility to sign a provisional agreement, the negotiation may proceed, and the Treaty when concluded may be sent with the British Ratification to America, to be at once exchanged, if the American Government shall think fit to confirm the act of their Commissioners. The British Government cannot better evince their cordial desire for peace than by placing the negotiation upon this issue.

You will with this view again call the attention of the America Commissioners to the Indian Question, and as connected with it, to the Question of Boundary.

I am desirous of particularly directing your attention to these points as the others suggested on either side for deliberation, if you have rightly interpreted the meaning of the American Commissioners as to the fisheries do not appear necessarily calculated to create an insurmountable obstacle to the immediate restoration of peace. In illustration of this you may remark that upon the first of the British points, we are not disposed to insist upon any express stipulations and are willing to leave the Questions therein involved to rest as heretofore upon the principles of general Law.

In throwing out these as the topics of discussion which had suggested themselves to us, and in requesting to be informed whether the American Commissioners were instructed to enter upon them, we expressed our willingness to receive from them any other topics for discussion which they might consider material, and should they consider as immaterial any of the topics so thrown out by us, their statement to that effect might possibly tend to prevent fruitless discussions. We then communicated to them the intention of His Majesty's Government not to renew the privileges derived under the Treaty of 1783 with respect to the North American Fisheries, not as necessarily forming a topic of discussion, but as a point upon which we in candour thought it proper to afford them information in this early stage of our proceedings. The American Commissioners having requested time for consultation together as to the answer to be returned to our enquiries, the Conference was accordingly adjourned to this day. It began by a distinct communication from them, that upon two of the points suggested by us as topics for discussion, viz: the 1st and 3rd they were prepared with ample instructions from their Government, but that with respect to the second, viz: a defined boundary to the Indian Territories, they had no instructions whatever, that they were equally uninstructed on the subject of the fisheries -and that there were other points not specified by us which the of the United States considered it material to discuss, and upon which they had received authority and instructions to conclude an arrangement.

These points were. 1. The Law of the Blockade, and some definition of Blockade, and also the general subject of belligerent and neutral Rights.

2. The claims which the United States had against Great Britain on the ground of Captures made previous to the commencement of the War, and as to captures, or some particular captures made during its continuance.

3. The regulation of the commerce of the two Countries.

Upon this statement it appeared to us, material to ascertain how far the American Commissioners, although not specially instructed as to the question of Indian Boundary, felt themselves at liberty under any general discretion to conclude a provisional Article on this important point. Our Enquiries were therefore

directed to this subject. The American Commissioners expressed a willingness to enter into the discussion of this topic, and a particular anxiety to ascertain the full extent of the views with which the British Government had made it a sine qua non of a Treaty. Nothing fell from them which induced us to believe that they considered it practicable to conclude any provisional arrangement which would be satisfactory to their Government. One of them, Mr. Clay, stated his opinion that none could be framed. It appeared to us, and we so stated it to the American Commissioners, that a proposal to discuss without a prospect of some arrangement at least of a provisional kind, would be fruitless. They appeared to wish to go into the discussion on the ground that they should be able to shew that the objects of the British Government might be attained without making this point sine qua non of a Treaty. We gave no particular encouragement to the notion of the utility of the discussions in this point of view. Under these circumstances it would be satisfactory to us to be furnished with Instructions of the most specific kind how far His Majesty's Government would be disposed to accept of a provisional Article as to an Indian Boundary, subject to very dubious contingency of its ratification by the President of the United States. And also whether His Majesty's Government would wish the negotiations to proceed upon any and what points in the event of no provisional Article of this kind being agreed to, which latter contingency, unless specific instructions are received from the United States, appears to us by no means unlikely to happen.

On the subject of the fisheries the American Commissioners stated nothing of the nature of a claim to take fish within the limits of British Sovereignty, or to use any British Territory for purposes connected with the fisheries.

As to regulations for commerce we informed them that we had no instructions on this head, but we did not mean to preclude them from proposing regulations of that kind, which we would transmit to our Government for future consideration.

The Conference closed with mutual acknowledgments that the discussions had been opened with frankness and candour. The American Commissioners particularly requested that their sense of the conciliatory manner in which the conferences has been