These shocks were not all that the new British minister was obliged to meet at the threshold of his residence in Washington. At the moment when he was, as he thought, socially maltreated, and when he was told by Madison that America meant to insist on her neutral rights, he learned that the Government did not intend to ratify Rufus King’s boundary convention. The Senate held that the stipulations of its fifth article respecting the Mississippi might embarrass the new territory west of the river. King knew of the Louisiana cession when he signed the treaty; but the Senate had its own views on the subject, and under the lead of General Smith[280] preferred to follow them, as it had done in regard to the second article of the treaty with France, Sept. 30, 1800, and as it was about to do in regard to Pinckney’s claims convention, Aug. 11, 1802, with Spain. Merry was surprised to find that Madison, instead of explaining the grounds of the Senate’s hesitation, or entering into discussion of the precise geographical difficulty, contented himself with a bald statement of the fact. The British minister thought that this was not the most courteous way of dealing with a treaty negotiated after a full acquaintance with all the circumstances, and he wrote to his Government to be on its guard:[281]-- “Notwithstanding Mr. Madison’s assurances to the contrary, I have some reason to suspect that ideas of encroachment on his Majesty’s just rights are entertained by some persons who have a voice in deciding upon the question of the ratification of this convention, not to say that I have much occasion to observe, from circumstances in general, that there exists here a strong impression of the consequence which this country is supposed to have acquired by the recent additions to the territory of the United States, as well as by the actual situation of affairs in Europe.” In view of the Mobile Act, introduced into Congress by Randolph on behalf of the government a week before this letter was written, Merry’s suspicions could hardly be called unreasonable. A like stretch of authority applied to the northwest territory would have produced startling results.