Gazette Of The United States And Daily Evening Advertiser

The following article is copied from the Morning Chronicle a London paper of Sept. 11, brought by the ship Manchester.

Mr. Editor,

In your paper of yesterday, a writer under the Signature of "A Traveller," asserts that "Detroit and the river Miami are out of the jurisdiction of Canada, and also out of the jurisdiction of the thirteen United States of America." In order to prove this, he says that the Indians never sold the land to the English, French or any other Christian people; that therefore Great Britain having no right to the territory herself, could not transfer it to the Americans. Now, Mr. Editor, is not this strange language for an Englishman? Did not this nation declare that all that tract of country which lies within certain boundaries, should be considered by us as under the jurisdiction of the United States? And if so, ought not we, at least, to abide by our own declaration? But supposing the assertion to be true. By what right, or colour of right, do the British forces now occupy that post, which Mr. "Traveller" declares himself to be without the jurisdiction of Canada? Indeed the only reason given by our government for this measure is, that the Americans have broken some articles of the treaty, and that we refuse to evacuate the posts by way of retaliation. But is it not a new method of retaliation, to keep possession of a territory which does not belong to the offending party, but to the friendly and innocent Aborigines?

And Mr. Editor, if this matter is so clear, how happens it, that Mr. Hammond has not, at least, noticed it in his letters to Mr. Randolph. On the contrary, the Traveller will find, that he has expressly acknowledged that those places were within the limits of the United States.

The Traveller too has said, that the United States had as much right to Nootka Sound as they had to Kentucky, one of the Members of their Union. Now, I would ask him, what title we have to Nootka Sound—If we have any, it must be that of Discovery, and have not the Americans the same to Kentucky and Detroit? For these places were either discovered by them or by us. If by them, the cases are exactly parallel, if by us, then our right has been transferred to them by the treaty. In either case, then, it follows, that they have as much right to Kentucky and Detroit, as we have to Nootka.

But, Mr. Editor, I have hitherto proceeded upon the supposition that the assertion of the Traveller "that the Indians had not ceded that territory" was true. But unluckily for him the right of the Americans to Kentucky has been more than once acknowledged in their solemn treaties. And. Mr. Editor, I would ask the Traveller another question. If the Indians had never ceded the territory in dispute to any body, how comes it about that when we took Detroit from the French, we did not restore it to its lawful proprietors, but have kept possession of it ourselves, ever since, for near fifty years?

I am not one, Mr. Editor, who approves of every thing done by the American states, but I think as that country is rapidly increasing in population, science and wealth, its alliance would be useful and beneficial and that a war with it would at the least be unprofitable and expensive: and exclusive of these considerations I am of opinion that the truest policy of a nation is, to fulfil with punctuality and honor all its treaties and engagements and that contrary conduct will forever brand it with infamy and disgrace.

I am, &c.

A.Z.

August 26, 1794.