September 1814.
rs Goulburn— I did not
however see her; but only her husband— Lord Gambier and Dr Adams, with Mr Baker, went yesterday
to Bruxelles, to return on Saturday. Mr
Goulburn told me that after having prepared their note in reply to ours,
from the great importance of the subject, they had thought best to
transmit it to their Government for approbation before they sent it in
to us— He said he expected their messenger this Evening, and
I enquired whether he expected to receive by him the answer to their
last reference— He said that would depend on the time which it took
their dispatch to arrive in England; but he thought it more probable
that the answer would come next Sunday. That their Messengers came
regularly twice a week; on Thursdays and Sundays— I told him I hoped his
Government would reconsider some parts of their former propositions,
before they sent their final instruction— He did not think it probable;
and I found the more I conversed with him, the more the violence and
bitterness of his Passion against the United States disclosed itself.
His great point in support of the Indian boundary, was its necessity for
the security of Canada.— He said that the United States had manifested
the intention and the determination of conquering Canada— That
“excepting us,” he believed it was the astonishment of the whole world,
that Canada had not been conquered at the very out-set of the War— That
nothing had saved it but the excellent dispositions and military
arrangements of the Governor,
who commanded there— That in order to guard against the same thing in
future it was necessary to make a barrier against our settlements, upon
which neither party should encroach. That the Indians were but a
secondary object; but that as being the allies of Great-Britain, she
must include them, as she made Peace with other Powers, including
Portugal, as her ally— That the proposition that we should stipulate not
to arm upon the Lakes, was made with the same purpose—the security of
Canada— He could not see that there was any thing humiliating in it—
That the United States could never be in any danger of invasion from
Canada— The disproportion of force was too great— But Canada must always
be in the most imminent danger of invasion from the United States,
unless she was guarded by some such stipulations as they now demanded—
That it could be nothing to the United States to agree not to arm upon
the Lakes; since they never had actually done it before the present War—
Why should they object to disarming there, where they had never before
had a gun floating? I answered that the Conquest of Canada had never
been an object of the War on the part of the United States. That Canada
had been invaded by us, in consequence of the War, as they themselves
had invaded many parts of the United-States. It was an effect, and not a
Cause of the War— That the American Government never had declared the
intention of conquering Canada— He referred to Hull’s Proclamation— I answered that
the Government was not answerable for that; any more than the British
Government was answerable for Admiral
Cochrane’s Proclamations which had been disavowed— He said
that the American Government had not disavowed Hull’s Proclamation; and
that no Proclamation of Admiral Cochrane’s had been disavowed by the
British Government.— I replied that the American Government had never
been called upon either to avow or disavow Hull’s Proclamation; but that
I had seen in a printed Statement of the debates in in the House of
Commons that Lord
Castlereagh had been called upon to say whether Admiral
Cochrane’s Proclamation had been authorized or not, and had answered
that it was not. He said that Lord Castlereagh had been asked whether a
Proclamation of Admiral Cochrane’s, encouraging the negroes to revolt;
had been authorized by the Government, and had answered in the negative;
that is that no proclamation, encouraging the negroes to revolt had been
authorized—but the Proclamation of Admiral Cochrane as referred to gave
no such encouragement; there was nothing about negroes in it— It merely
offered employment or a settlement in the British Colonies to such
persons as might be disposed to leave the United States— I referred him
to the term free, used in connection with that of settlements, and
observed that it was true the word negroes was not used in it, but that
no person in America could mistake its meaning— That it was
unquestionably intended to the apply to
the negroes, and that the practice of many of their naval commanders
corresponded with it— That it was known some of them under such
inducements had taken away blacks, who had afterwards been sold in the
West-India Islands— Upon this he manifested some apparent agitation, and
said that he could undertake to deny in the most unqualified terms— That
the character of British naval Officers was universally known; their
generosity and humanity could not be contested; and besides, that since
the Act of Parliament, of 1811. the act of selling any man for a Slave,
unless real Slaves from one British Island to another was felony without
benefit of clergy. I replied that without contesting the character of
any class of People generally, it was certain there would be in all
Classes, individuals, capable of committing actions, of which others
would be ashamed— That at a great distance from the eye and controul of
the Government, acts were often done, with impunity, which would be
severely punished nearer home— That the facts I had stated to him, were
among the objects which we were instructed to present for Consideration,
if the Negotiation should proceed, and he might in that case find it
more susceptible of proof then he was aware— He thought it impossible;
but that it was one of those charges against their officers, of which
there were many, originating only in the spirit of hostility and totally
destitute of foundation— With respect to 142the
Indian allies I remarked that there was no analogy between them and the
case of Portugal— That the stipulation which might be necessary for the
protection of Indians, situated within the boundaries of the United
States, who had taken the British side in the War, was rather in the
nature of an amnesty, than of a provision for allies— It resembled more
the case of Subjects who in cases of invasion, sometimes took part with
the enemy, as had sometimes occurred to G. Britain in Ireland— He
insisted that the Indians must be considered as Independent Nations, and
that we ourselves made Treaties with them;—and acknowledged boundaries
of their Territories— I said that wherever they would form settlements
and cultivated Lands their possessions were undoubtedly to be respected,
and always were respected by the United States. That some of them had
become civilized in a considerable degree, the Cherokees for example,
who had permanent habitations and a state of property like our own. But
the greater part of the Indians could never be prevailed upon to adopt
this mode of life—their habits, and attachments, and prejudices were so
averse to any settlement that could not reconcile themselves to any
other condition than that of wandering hunters. It was impossible for
such People ever to be said to have Possessions— Their only right upon
Land was a right to use it as hunting-grounds, and when those Lands
where they hunted, became necessary or convenient for the purposes of
settlement, the system adopted by the United States was by amicable
arrangement with them, to compensate them for renouncing the right of
hunting upon them, and for removing to remoter regions better suited to
their purposes and mode of life— This system of the United States was an
improvement upon the former practice of all European Nations, including
the British. The original settlers of New-England had set the first
example of this liberality towards the Indians, which was afterwards
followed by the founder of Pennsylvania. Between it, and taking the
Lands for nothing, or exterminating the Indians who had used them there
was no alternative— To condemn vast regions of territory, to perpetual
barrenness and Solitude, that a few hundred Savages might find wild
beasts to hunt upon it was a species of game-Law, that a Nation
descended from Britons would never endure— It was as incompatible with
the moral as with the physical nature of things— If Great-Britain meant
to preclude forever the People of the United States from settling and
cultivating those Territories she must not think of doing it by a
Treaty— She must formally undertake and accomplish their utter
extermination— If the Government of the United States should ever submit
to such a stipulation which I hoped they would not, all its force, and
all that of Britain combined with it, would not suffice to carry it long
into execution— It was opposing a feather to a torrent. The Population
of the United States in 1810. passed seven Millions— At this hour it
undoubtedly passed eight— As it continued to increase in such
proportions, was it in human experience or in human power to check its
progress by a bond of paper purporting to exclude posterity from the
natural means of subsistence which they would derive from the
cultivation of the soil? Such a Treaty instead of closing the old
sources of dissension would only open new ones. A War thus finished
would immediately be followed by another, and Great-Britain would
ultimately find that she must substitute the project of exterminating
the whole American People, to that of opposing against them her Barrier
of Savages.— What, said Mr Goulburn, is it
then in the inevitable nature of things that the United States must
conquer Canada?— “No”— “But what security then can Great-Britain have
for her Possession of it?” If Great-Britain does not think a liberal and
amicable course of policy towards America would be the best security, as
it certainly would, she must rely upon her general strength, upon the
superiority of her power in other parts of her relations with America;
upon the power which she has upon another element to indemnify herself,
by sudden impression upon American interests, more defenceless against
her superiority, and in their amount far more valuable than Canada ever
was or ever will be— He recurred again to our superior force, and to the
necessity of providing against it— He said that in Canada, they never
took any of the Indian Lands, and the Government (meaning the Provincial
Government) was prohibited even from granting them— That there were
among the Indians, very civilized People, and there was particularly one
whom he knew, Norton, who
commanded some of those engaged with them in this War, and who was a
very intelligent and well-informed man— That this removing of the
Indians from their Lands to others, was the very thing they complained
of— That it drove them over into their Provinces and made them encroach
upon the Indians in their Provinces— This was a new idea to me; I told
him I had never heard any complaint of this kind before; and I supposed
a remedy for it, would very easily be found— He made no reply, and
seemed as if in the pressure for an argument he had advanced more than
he was inclined to maintain— It was the same with regard 143to the proposal that we should keep no armed force on or
near the Lakes of Canada. He did not admit there was any thing
humiliating or unusual in it; but he evaded repeatedly answering the
question how he or the English Nation would feel if the proposition were
made to them of binding themselves by such a Stipulation— I finally said
that if he did not feel that there was any thing dishonourable to the
party, submitting to such terms, it was not a subject susceptible of
argument— I could assure him that we and our Nation would feel it to be
such— That such stipulations were indeed often extorted from the
weakness of a vanquished enemy; but they were always felt to be
dishonourable, and had certainly occasioned more Wars than they had ever
prevented— After changing the subject of the Conversation to the
pictures, which we and they had drawn at the Lottery, I took my leave
and returned home— In reflecting upon it I remark 1. The inflexible
determination to adhere to the Indian Boundary and Barrier. 2dly. The avowal of Cochrane’s proclamation
to the negroes, and the explanation of Lord Castlereagh’s disavowal. 3.
The bitterness, and rancour against the Americans, and the Jealousy at
their increasing strength and population. 4. The irritability at the
statement of facts, relative to the sale of the Blacks, enticed away;
and at the comparison between their employing our Indians against us,
and Irish Subjects, aiding a French invader— Goulburn is personally the
most inveterate of the three Plenipotentiaries, and the most in the
Confidence of his Government.— We had a large Company of Ladies and
Gentlemen to dinner— The Intendant
of the Department of the Scheldt,Count D’Hane de
Steenhuyse and his
Lady—Mr D’hane Dons his Son, and
Lady, Mr Van
Pottelsberghe, de la Poterie, and his Lady, the Intendant’s only
daughter, Captain Constant
D’Hane, another Son, Mr: and Madame de Meulemeester Van Aken, Mr and Madame Meulemeester,
Meulemeester. Mr: and Madame Greban and Mr: and Madame Van Aken—The
Comte de Lens, Mayor of the
City—Mr
Goesin Verhaeghe, his first adjoint, Mr:
Cornelissen, Mr Canar, Mr Charles Meulemeester,
and Messrs:
Shaler
Todd and Irving— We sat down at table, 30 persons— We had a band
of music in the room adjoining our dining-Hall; who performed at
intervals during the dinner time and all the Evening— Our Garden was
illuminated with variegated coloured lamps, and after dinner we walked
in it, half an hour with the Ladies— The Intendant left us about 8 in
the Evening to go and examine his dispatches. All the rest of the
Company remained and we spent the Evening at Cards. I played with the
Intendants Lady, Madame Meulemeester and Mr
Cornelissen— The party broke up about Midnight, and after they were
gone, Mr Clay won from me, at a game of all
fours the picture of an old woman that I had drawn as a prize in the
Lottery of Pictures, in which we had all taken tickets— He also won from
Mr Todd the bunch of flowers, which Mr Russell had drawn, and which Todd had won
from Mr Russell.