Diplomatic proceedings in Paris. motives of state policy operating respectively upon the interests of each country. In the beginning of the year, in order to leave no pretext for England, the American minister at Paris pressed the French government to issue an official or authentic Act; and at length, on the 10th of May, 1812, he received, as we have seen, a copy of a decree dated 28th April, 1811, by which the Berlin and Milan Decrees were repealed, so that the knowledge of this decree was withheld from the United States for more than a year,[1] and was only brought to light and publicly avowed when Napoleon had so far wrought upon the Americans as to commit them to the unfortunate war with Great Britain.
Convention with Great Britain. Peace was happily concluded on the 24th of Dec., 1814, and in 1815 a convention was signed in London between the United States and Great Britain to regulate the commerce and navigation between their respective countries.[2] It was framed upon the model of the English reciprocity treaties, which*
- ↑ 'Diplomacy of the United States,' p. 133.
- ↑ The convention was signed on the 3rd of July, 1815 (vide 'Hertslet's Treaties,' vol. ii. p. 386); but so far as regards the great questions on which differences had arisen it settled nothing. It professed, indeed, to adjust the question of the north-east boundary; but this point was not arranged until many years afterwards, the two countries having been previously on the point of rupture. The north-west boundary, afterwards known as the Oregon dispute, was left in statu quo. Neither party cared to agitate the impressment question, although the Americans had at one period made this the chief ground for going to war. Both parties made a barren declaration, that they were desirous of continuing their efforts to promote the entire abolition of the slave-trade. The vapourings about neutral rights, with which the world had been nauseated for a number of years, were buried in silence, to be resuscitated whenever a national cry of agitation might be necessary for electioneering purposes. The question about blockade was set aside just in the like manner. The American claims relating to the impressment of seamen fell to the ground; and, with the exception of the
