Abstract
The tendencies of American policy have been sufficiently discussed to explain the course pursued in this particular case. By the Act of Reciprocity the United States aimed at a reciprocal regulation with other powers of an equalization of tonnage duties and of import and export duties on cargoes of national produce, for the vessels of any party. The inclusion of the colonies of the other powers in this regulation had been their avowed purpose. Although the first treaty concluded with Great Britain upon these principles had proved an obvious failure in the latter respect, the Secretary of State had stated several times to the American minister in the Netherlands that it was the intention of the President to adhere as much as possible to their first settled policy1).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
P. 234.
Cf. footnote No. 4, p. 254.
D. o. S. Instructions vol. 8; L. o. C. Eustis Papers vol. 3.
Oct. 18 1816, Eustis to Monroe (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.).
Jan. 17 1817, idem (ibid.).
Ralston Hayden, The Senate and treaties, 1789–1817 (New York 1920), p. 209.
April 22 1817, R. Rush to Gallatin and Eustis (D. o. S. Instructions vol. 8).
Neither Van Nagell nor Goldberg mention his representations in their respective documents.
About him, the biography by Henry Adams, The life of Albert Gallatin (Philadelphia 1879). Also: The National Cyclopedia of American biography, III p. 9; Dictionary of American biography, VII.
He was a well-known partisan of free trade. From 1831–1839 he was President of the National Bank of New York. He died in 1849.
Cf. the author’s article in Tijdschr. v. Gesch. 49, p. 45, 52, 54. — It was a natural antagonism, arising from the lack of knowledge of each of the mentality of the other, and from a misunderstanding of the reactions caused thereby: the American judging Europeans immoral and being himself narrow-minded in their eyes.
C. K. Webster in the Cambridge history of British foreign policy, 1783–1815, I p. 531. See also p. 533, 539.
June 24 1817, Gallatin to Eustis (L. o. C. Eustis Papers). He travelled with Mrs. Gallatin, “our three children & some servants” (July 11, to Eustis, Ibid.), and went by way of Ghent — for the purpose of reviving his recollections of this town—,where he arrived on the 21st of July (July 23, to Eustis, Ibid.).
July 28 1817, Van Nagell to Eustis (Ibid.; R. A. B. Z. U.S. 1817 No. 2429).
De Amsterdamsche Courant, Aug. 4 1817.
After Everett had left (Aug. 23 1817, Eustis to Adams, D. o. S. Desp. Neth.). J. J. Appleton was from Cambridge, Mass. His name is not in the Dictionary of American biography.
From his hand a diary: A great peacemaker, 1813–1827 (New-York 1916), in which he describes most of Albert Gallatin’s doings during these years. P. Ill deals with their stay at The Hague, but does not treat the subject of the negotiations themselves.
It became the custom that Delprat draught the protocol after each session, send it to Goldberg for his approval or amendments, and then submit it to the Americans for their approval (Sept. 2 1817, Delprat to Goldberg, R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 210). In this way no time would have to be spent at the next session with discussions on its editing. Later the American secretaries made a copy and signed it. Consequently we find in the D. o. S. a protocol signed by J. Gallatin and J. Appleton, and in the archives at The Hague one with Delprat’s signature, the texts of both copies being completely identical.
Aug. 27 1817, Delprat to Goldberg (R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 209).
In the first session it was decided that the protocol should be draughted in French, but that the text of the treaty concluded should be in English and Dutch.
Cf. Oct. 9 1817, Gallatin to Eustis (L. o. C. Eustis Papers): “What was said on the occasion, being in French, must be more within my recollection than yours”.
Oct. 8 1817, Gallatin to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. France, Vol. 18).
Aug. 4 1817, Eustis to Van Nagell (R. A. B. Z. I. S. 1817 No. 3401); Aug. 4 1817, Van Nagell to Eustis (Ibid. U. S. 1817 No. 2513).
Aug. 6 1817, Van Nagell to Goldberg (Ibid. Dossier 724).
See p. 254, 255.
Malloy II p. 1742.
Aug. 6 1817, Eustis to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. Neth. vol. 5).
In the report accompanying his despatch of July 9 1817 (Ibid.).
Sept. 27 1817, Eustis to Adams (Ibid. vol. 6).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1935 Martinus Nyhoff, the Hague, Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Westermann, J.C. (1935). The American Preparations for the Negotiations. In: The Netherlands and the United States. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0999-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0999-2_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-015-0397-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-0999-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive