To James Madison from James Monroe, 31 July 1816
From James Monroe
Loudoun July 31. 1816
Dear Sir
I wrote you a few lines the day I left Washington, to advise of it, and of the state in which the affairs then were, which had so long detaind me there.1
You have already, as I presume, recd., Mr Bagots letter to me respecting the armament on the lakes, the vague character of which, seems to leave little hope of a satisfactory result, at this time.2 I enclose you a project of an answer,3 the object of which is, to take advantage of any power he may possess, to make temporary regulations by instruction to the governors or otherwise, and to compell a reference of the subject for a more permanent arrangment to the British govt. with Mr Adams. That is perhaps the best course, as the commercial subject is in his hands; it is the course, the nature of Mr B’s powers, seems to make indispensible. I suspect the affair of the fisheries will take the same direction. I send you the only document, which I have yet receiv’d on that subject.
You will be so kind as to make such correction, as you may think proper, in the letter to Mr Bagot, & return it to Mr Graham.
Your letter to the French minister was forwarded to him, it appearing to be a very proper one.
What shall I say to Mr. Ten Cate respecting his project about a treaty,4 with which you were acquainted before you left Washington? with affectionate respect,
Jas Monroe
Mr Coles is with me. He returns to morrow & will proceed without delay to Boston, to embark for Russia.
RC (DLC: Rives Collection, Madison Papers).
2. See John Graham to JM, 29 July 1816, and n. 1.
3. The “project” has not been found, but Monroe evidently enclosed a draft of his 2 Aug. 1816 letter to Bagot conveying JM’s opinion that if Great Britain and the United States were to maintain large naval forces on the Great Lakes, it would be a “considerable and useless expense, while it would multiply the risks of collision between them.” Accordingly, Monroe proposed that the naval forces on the lakes be confined as follows: “on Lake Ontario, to one vessel not exceeding one hundred tons burden, and one eighteen-pound cannon; and on the upper lakes, two vessels of like burden and force; and on the waters of Lake Champlain, to one vessel not exceeding the like burden and force; and that all other armed vessels on those lakes shall be forthwith dismantled; and likewise, that neither party shall build or arm any other vessel on the shores of those lakes.” The duty of these forces was to be restricted “to the protection of its revenue laws,” and the agreement might be terminated by either party after giving an as yet undefined period of notice. Monroe added that he was ready to implement such an agreement “either by convention, the interchange of notes, or in any form which may be thought best adapted to the ends proposed.” If Bagot wished to consult with his government first, Monroe suggested that there might be an “ad interim” arrangement and that he was ready “to digest with you such provisional arrangement, and to carry it reciprocally into effect, for such time, and in such manner, as may be agreed on” (DNA: RG 59, Notes to Foreign Ministers and Consuls; printed in , Foreign Relations, 4:203).
4. Dutch chargé d’affaires Jan Willem Ten Cate had proposed negotiations for a commercial treaty between the United States and the Netherlands on 4 Apr., 28 May, and 2 and 24 July 1816 (DNA: RG 59, NFL, Netherlands).