tion of the claims, either by Mr. Rothery or some other person, with the assistance of the additional evidence now furnished. As Mr. Hillard has removed his residence from London to Nottingham, the Undersigned has been obliged to employ another person to act in his place, and has given authority to that effect to Mr. Andrew Maris, of the mercantile house of Maclean, Maris, and Co., of this city; but it may be proper to observe, in order to prevent the recurrence of a misapprehension similar to that under which Mr. Rothery presented his reports on this subject to the Earl of Aberdeen, that Mr. Maris is not authorised to compromise the claims, by agreeing to accept less than the sum demanded, the Undersigned himself not having been empowered by his Government to accede to any such compromise. At the same time, the Undersigned has no doubt that his Government will be much influenced by any opinion as to the just amount of compensation due to the owners of the Tigris and Seamew, which may be expressed by Mr. Maris, on whose disposition to come. to a fair and impartial result the Undersigned confidently relies. The evidence from the coast of Africa is submitted to the Earl of Aberdeen, both in the original Portuguese and in a translation. No copy of the former having been reserved by the Undersigned, it is requested that it may be returned from the Foreign Office, when there is no further occasion for its use. The Earl of Aberdeen, K.T. The Undersigned, &c. EDWARD EVERETT. No. 77.—Mr. Everett to the Earl of Aberdeen. Grosvenor Place, October 15, 1844. THE Undersigned, &c. has had the honour to receive a note, of the 27th of August, from the Earl of Aberdeen, &c. together with a copy of a series of papers relating to the suppression of the Slave Trade, presented by Her Majesty's command to the 2 Houses of Parliament during the late session, and which Mr. Everett has lost no time in transmitting to Washington, for the information of his Government. On consulting letter D. of this series a day or two since, the Undersigned saw with regret, in the List of Papers at the commencement of that part of the work, that the subject of the 22nd No. of the series, being a note of Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Fox, of the 24th January, 1842, is described as being "Mis-statement in President's message relative to the right of visit." On turning to the note thus characterized, the Undersigned finds that it commences with the following sentence: "The statement relative to what is called the right of search is of serious import, because, to persons unacquainted with the facts, it would tend to convey the supposition, not only that the question of the right of search had been discussed by the Plenipotentiaries at Washington, but that Great Britain had made concessions on that point. The President must well know that the right of search never formed the subject of discussion during the late negotiations, and that neither was any concession required by The United States Government, nor made by Great Britain." Such being undoubtedly the fact, it is of course unnecessary for the Undersigned to add, that any supposition that a contrary statement was intended, which might be founded on the language of the Message by persons unacquainted with the facts, must be the result of misconception; and, it is hardly possible to use language in treating a complicated question in a short compass, which may not be misconceived by such persons. The Undersigned cannot but consider the use of the term in question on the present occasion as harsh and uncalled for. In making this remark, however, he has great pleasure in adding, that he has no belief that the List of Papers in which the objectionable term occurs was prepared under the Earl of Aberdeen, or that it has received his special sanction. He supposes that it may have been drawn up in the ordinary routine of clerical duty in the Foreign Office, and is not to be considered as an integral portion of the official document laid before Parliament by Her Majesty's command, and communicated to the Undersigned, for the information of his Government. But though the Undersigned is confident that the Earl of Aberdeen would not, in a document of that description, make use of such a term in reference to a Message of the President of The United States, he is quite aware that Lord Aberdeen took exception to the account given by the President in his Message to Congress of December 1842, on the principles on which the Treaty of Washington was concluded, and that this dissatisfaction was strongly intimated by his Lordship in the note to Mr. Fox above referred to. The Undersigned believes, however, that the Earl of Aberdeen mistook the purport and bearing of the President's language, and the object which he had in view in that part of his Message. The origin of this mistake appears to have been, in not sufficiently adverting to the fact, that in dwelling on his objections to the right of search for the purpose of ascertaining, the nationality of vessels in time of peace, as claimed by Great Britain and denied by The United States, the President referred, not to discussions between the negotiators of the Treaty of Washington, but to the diplomatic discussions which had taken place at London, and to his own Message of December, 1841. In reference to the views advanced in that Message, the President says, in the statement complained of by Lord Aberdeen, that the VIIIth Article of the Treaty was framed in close conformity with these views, and that the ground assumed in that Message had been fully maintained. The Undersigned presumes, that the President's object in presenting the subject in this aspect was to meet the objection which had been taken to the Treaty by some of those opposed to it, viz.: that in entering into an arrangement with Great Britain on this subject, without any concession on her part of the claim which she had set up, he had abandoned the ground assumed in his Message of 1841. The President denies the validity of this objection, and maintains that no concession of the ground assumed in his Message of 1841 is involved in the VIIIth Article of the Treaty. Such, the Undersigned conceives, is not only the correct, but the obvious and natural interpretation of the part of the President's Message referred to. The Undersigned believes that language of analogous import will be found, in the reported debates of the 2 Houses of Parliament, to be ascribed to Her Majesty's Ministers, to the effect that Great Britain in concluding the Treaty of Washington had made no concession to The United States on the subject of the right of search. From such expressions an inference might be as readily drawn by those unacquainted with the facts, that concessions had been made by The United States, as the opposite inference from the language of the President's Message under consideration. An explanation of the course pursued by the Government of The United States in reference to this question, and in conformity with the view here presented, was given to the House of Representatives by the President on the 28th February, 1843, and more at length by Mr. Webster in a note to the Undersigned of 28th March, 1843. In both these documents, and especially the latter, while it is denied, on what the Undersigned regards as the most substantial grounds, that any such general right is known to the law of nations as that of search or visit for the purpose of ascertaining the nationality of vessels in time of peace, the imputation of concessions on the part of Great Britain as to any principles advanced by her on this subject was distinctly disclaimed. The conciliatory temper in which the subject was treated by the President and Mr. Webster in the papers alluded to, was, the Undersigned is happy to state, responded to by Lord Aberdeen in the same strain, both privately to the Undersigned, and publicly in his place in the House of Lords, on more than one occasion. It was accordingly with equal surprise and pain, that so long after the friendly close of discussions at once so important and delicate, on a question appealing more directly than any other to the sensibility of the people of The United States, the Undersigned perceived the gratuitous application to the President's Message of a term so harsh as that in question, in a document submitted to Parliament by command of Her Majesty, and communicated by Lord Aberdeen to the Undersigned for the information of his Government. The Earl of Aberdeen, K.T. The Undersigned, &c. EDWARD EVERETT. No. 78.-The Earl of Aberdeen to Mr. Everett. Foreign Office, October 21, 1844. The Undersigned, &c. has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the note addressed to him on the 1st instant by Mr. Everett, &c. inclosing further documents in support of certain items of the claims made by the owners of The United States vessels Tigris and Seamew, and requesting that directions may be given for the further examination of those claims, either by Mr. Rothery, or some other person, in conjunction with Mr. Andrew Maris, with the assistance of the additional evidence contained in those documents. The Undersigned has the honour to acquaint Mr. Everett, that a communication having been made by his direction to the proper Department of Her Majesty's Government on this subject, Mr. Rothery has been directed to put himself into communication, without delay, with Mr. Maris, with the view of coming, if possible, to an understanding with that gentleman as to the amount of compensation, in all particulars, which they may jointly recommend to Her Majesty's Government to pay, on the one hand, and to The United States Government to accept, on the other. And Mr. Rothery has been further instructed, in the event of there being any items of these claims on which he and Mr .Maris are unable to agree, to report, 1st, the several points on which he and Mr. Maris may have agreed; and, 2ndly, those on which they have been unable to do so; and to add his reasons for differing in opinion with Mr. Maris on such points. The Undersigned, &c. E Everett, Esq. ABERDEEN. No. 79.-Mr. Everett to the Earl of Aberdeen.-(Rec. October 26.) Grosvenor Place, October 26, 1844. THE Undersigned, &c. has had the honour to receive a note of the 21st instant from the Earl of Aberdeen, &c. acquainting him that Mr. Rothery has been directed to put himself in communication, without delay, with Mr. Maris, with the view of coming, if possible, to an understanding with that gentleman as to the amount of compensation, in all particulars, which they may jointly recommend to Her Majesty's Government to pay, on the one hand, and to The United States Government to accept, on the other, as an indemnification to the owners of the Tigris and Seamew; and that Mr. Rothery has been further instructed, in the event of there being any items of these claims on which he and Mr. Maris are unable to agree, to report, 1st, the several points on which he and Mr. Maris may have agreed; and, 2ndly, those on which they have been unable to do so; and to add his reasons for differing in opinion with Mr. Maris on such points. The Undersigned has directed Mr. Maris to engage assiduously in the examination of the claims in conjunction with Mr. Rothery, and to make a report on the result, corresponding with that which is to be made by Mr. Rothery. And the Undersigned would propose, in case the 2 gentlemen should be unable to agree as to any items of the claims, that their respective reports should be communicated to each other by the Earl of Aberdeen and the Undersigned, to the end that the 2 Governments may be acquainted with the grounds of the difference. The Undersigned, &c. The Earl of Aberdeen, K.T. EDWARD EVERETT. No. 80.-Mr. Everett to the Earl of Aberdeen.-(Rec. November 5.) THE Undersigned, &c. has been instructed to acquaint the Earl of Aberdeen, &c. that the attention of the President has been called to the provisions of an Act of Parliament, purporting to be the 98th chapter of the Statutes of the 6th and 7th years of Her Majesty's reign, and entitled "An Act for the more effectual suppression of the Slave Trade." Although the Government of The United States has no official knowledge of the existence of the Act in question, the Undersigned supposes that its authenticity, as contained in the printed copy accompanying the present note, may be taken for granted. On this supposition, he has been directed to apply to the Earl of Aberdeen for those explanations of its objects, and the means of carrying them into effect, as far as The United States are concerned, which are rendered desirable by the apparent character of its provisions. The Act in question seems to be designed to extend the criminal jurisdiction of Great Britain, in all cases embraced within its provisions, to British subjects in foreign countries. It is well known that there are, in almost every part of The United States, many natives of Great Britain, some of them temporarily resident, and others permanently established as naturalized citizens. As the provisions of the Act referred to are without qualification, they would seem, of course, to extend to British subjects in The United States. This supposition is confirmed by some facts of public notoriety. It is stated, in a letter of Mr. Ogilby, the British Consul at Charleston, dated October 23, 1843, and found in the volume con |