notorious facts, to which I referred, as calling for a joint and impressive appeal to the good faith and good feelings of the French government, you seemed to be equally convinced with myself.

The reasons, indeed, which you allege for declining at that time to comply with a proposal, no less simple in its nature than useful in its object, I understood to be rather of a temporary character; and under this impression, I cannot but hope, that the period is now arrived when they will no longer be found to stand in opposition to the great considerations involved in this question.

In repeating, therefore, the invitation which I have already had the honour to convey to you on the part of his majesty's government, it only remains for me to request an early communication of the intentions at present entertained on this head by the government of the United States.

I beg, sir, that you will accept the assurance of my distinguished consideration. STRATFORD CANNING.

To the Hon. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS,

Secretary of State, &c.

Mr. Adams to Mr. Canning.

Department of State, Washington, 31st March, 1823. SIR: Your letter of the 29th of January, was, immediately after being received, submitted to the consideration of the President of the United States. The delay which has hitherto procrastinated a reply to it has been occasioned, not by any abatement of the interest, on the part of the government of the United States, with which it regards every effort and proposal for the full and final suppression of the African slave trade; nor by any hesitation with regard to the decision which had already been formed and declared respecting the proposal of submitting the vessels and citizens of the United States, to the search of foreign officers upon the high seas; but by an expectation that measures contemplated by the national House of Representatives, might, before the close of the session of Congress, indicate to the Executive government of this country, views upon which it would be enabled to substitute a proposal for accomplishing the total abolition of the traffick, more effectual to its purpose, and less liable to objections, on other accounts, than that to which the United States cannot be reconciled, of granting the right of search. These measures were matured in the branch of the Legislature where they originated, only at the very termination of the session; and the Senate had not the opportunity of pronouncing its opinion upon them. There is, however, no doubt on the mind of the President, that they would have obtained their sanction; and he has, therefore, no hesitation in acting, so far, upon the expressed and almost unanimous sense of the House, as to declare the willingness of this Union to join with other nations in the common engagement to pursue and to punish those who shall continue to practise this crime, so reprobated by the just and humane of every country, as enemies of the human race, and to fix them, irrevocably, in the class, and under the denomination, of pirates.

I have the honour of enclosing herewith, a copy of the 4th and 5th sections of a law of the United States, passed on the 15th of May, 1820; by which it will be seen, that any citizen of the United States, being of the crew or ship's company of any foreign ship or vessel engaged in the slave trade, or any person whatever, being of the crew, or ship's company of any ship or vessel, owned in the whole or part, or navigated for, or in behalf of, any citizen or citizens of the United States, participating in the slave trade, is declared to have incurred the penalties of piracy, and made liable to atone for the crime with his life. The legislation of a single nation can go no further, to mark its abhorrence of this traffick, or to deter the people subject to its laws, from contamination, by the practice of others.

If the inference in your letter of the 29th of January, from the documents to which it refers, be correct, that the French flag is more particularly employed to cover the illicit trade on the coast of Africa; and the conjecture likewise suggested in it, that this flag is used to cover the property, and the persons of individuals bound to other allegiances, be well founded, this statute makes every citizen of the United States, concerned in such covered traffick, liable, if detected in it, to suffer an ignominious death. The code of Great Britain herself, has, hitherto, no provision of equal severity in the pursuit of her subjects, even under the shelter of foreign banners, and to the covert of simulated papers and property.

I am directed by the President of the United States to propose, on their part, the adoption, by Great Britain, of the principle of this act; and to offer a mutual stipulation to annex the penalties of piracy to the off nce of participating in the slave trade, by the citizens or subjects of the respective parties. This proposal is made as a substitute for that of conceding a mutual right of search, and of a trial by mixed commissions, which would be rendered useless by it. Should it meet the approbation of your government, it may be sepa

:

rately urged upon the adoption of France, and upon the other maritime powers of Europe, in the manner most conducive to its ultimate success.

I have the honour of tendering to you the renewed assurance of my distinguished consideration.

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.

The Right Hon. STRATFORD CANNING,

Envoy Extraordinary, and Minister Plenipotentiary

from Great Britain.

Mr. Canning to Mr. Adams.

Washington, April 8th, 1823.

SIR: I have received your official letter, dated the 31st ult. in answer to that which I had the honour of addressing to you on the 29th of January; and, together with it, a transcript of the 4th and 5th sections of an act of Congress, approved the 15th of May, 1820.

From this communication, I learn that the government of the United States is willing to join with other powers in declaring slave trade piracy, under the law of nations, and treating the perpetrators of this crime as enemies of the human race; that the American government is further prepared to enter into a formal engagement with Great Britain, to the effect of carrying the principle just specified into immediate operation, reciprocally as to their respective subjects or citizens; and, finally, that as soon as this proposal shall be accepted by the British government, the United States will be ready to concur in pressing its adoption on the court of France, and other maritime powers, in such manner as may afford the fairest prospect of success.

In whatever degree his Majesty's government may be disposed to receive this offer, as an acknowledgment that measures more efficient than any now generally in force, are indispensable for the suppression of the slave trade, it is not difficult to foresee, that fresh sentiments of regret will be excited, by the unfavourable view which the American administration continues to take of the principal measure suggested on the part of his Majesty. That measure, you are well aware, sir, is a mutual limited concession of the right of search; and though, as I have frequently stated, his Majesty's government, in adopting it by treaty with several of the maritime powers, and in recommending it with earnestness to the acceptance of others, particularly of the United States, have never opposed the consideration of any other plan, brought forward as equally effective; yet, having, from the first, regarded it in copscience as the only true and practical cure for the evil in question, they are naturally anxious, from a deep sense of duty, to place it in its proper light, and to guard it, as far as possible, from prejudice or misconception. I, therefore, deem it of importance, on this occasion, to bring into one point of view, the several limitations under which it is conceived, that the right of search might be so exercised, as to clear it of every imaginable difficulty. To give the intended limitations their just value, it is requisite to bear in mind the particular objections, which have been urged against the interchange of a right of search; and for these, in their full extent, I can hardly be wrong in referring to your previous correspondence, since the last communication which I have received from you on this subject, though it describes the impressions of the American government as remaining unaltered, does not exhibit any argument in support of their opinion.

In answer to that class of objections which relate to the mixed commissions established by treaty, between his Majesty and the courts of Lisbon, Brussels, and Madrid, it may suffice to remind you of the intimation conveyed through Mr. Rush, in the early part of last year, which I had subsequently the honour of confirming at the Department of State. It might be expected, that any arrangement for the adjudication of vessels engaged in the slave trade, independent of those tribunals, would either leave the detained vessels to be disposed of in the ordinary way, by the sentence of a court of admiralty in the country of the captor, or place them under the jurisdiction of a similar court in the country to which they belonged. On the former supposition, it is not to be anticipated, that the United States could hesitate to admit the jurisdiction of a foreign court of admiralty, when sanctioned by mutual agreement, over the persons and property of citizens, abandoned to a pursuit, so flagrantly iniquitous, as to be classed by the legislature of their country with crimes of the most heinous description, and which the American government has declared its willingness to treat as piracy, under the law of nations. Great Britain, for her part, desires no other than that any of her subjects, who so far defy the laws, and dishonour the character of their country, as to engage in a trade of blood, proscribed not more by the acts of the legislature, than by the national feeling, should be detected and brought to justice, even by foreign hands, and from under the protection of her flag. In either of the supposed cases, it is clear that all impediments connected with the forms of proceeding, and peculiar construction of the mixed commissions, would be completely avoided; and, with respect to any embarrassment attending the disposal of condemned vessels, and liberated slaves, it has already been suggested by a committee of the House of Representatives, that the provisions of the act of Congress, passed the 3rd of March, 1819, might be applied to them without difficulty or inconvenience.

The question being thus relieved from all connection with the mixed commissions, every constitutional objection, arising out of their alleged incompatibility with the institutions of the United States, is at once removed from consideration.The remaining obstacles may be reduced under the following heads: the unpopularity of the right of search in this country; its tendency, if mutually employed, to produce an unfriendly collision between the two nations; and a certain supposed inequality, which would attend its exercise.

With respect to any doubt of its utility, created by a persuasion that very few vessels, under American colours, have been discovered, for some time past, on the Coast of Africa, it requires but little reflection to prove, that no conclusive inference can be drawn from that circumstance. Not to dwell upon the extent and nature of the slave coast, peculiarly favourable to the concealment of trading vessels, it must be remembered, that the United States have maintained, at no time, a greater number of cruizers than two, rarely more than one, and latterly, during several months together, no ship of war, whatever, on the African station. As late as the 14th of January, 1822, it was stated, officially, by the Governor of Sierra Leone, "that the fine rivers Nunez and Pongas, were entirely under the control of renegado European and American slave traders."

But, if it were even manifest, that the active and judicious exertions of your naval officers in that quarter, had really effected a total disuse of the American flag in slave trading, the right of search would still be most highly desirable, in order to secure and extend so important an advantage. As an example, indeed, to other powers, particularly to France, whose subjects, encouraged by the loose and equivocal measures of their Government, are convicted, by a mass of evidence too strong to be resisted, of being concerned, to a deplorable degree, in this atrocious commerce, the concurrence of the United States in a system of which, the very ry first result is to augment considerably the means of bringing offenders to justice, can hardly be rated at too high a value. The example which they are called upon to give, is not merely due to the claims of humanity; Great Britain and the United States, are not only pledged to put down the slave trade, within the limits of their immediate jurisdiction; they are also bound, by solemn obligations, to employ their utmost endeavours for its complete and universal extermination. They have both succeed