[392] According to Schuyler, "Charles Sumner, then chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, who was engaged in a personal quarrel with the Administration, simply refused to report back the treaty to the Senate, and he was supported by a sufficient number of his Committee and of Senators to enable the matter to be left in this position. It required new negotiations to prolong the term of ratification and it was with great difficulty that in a subsequent session the treaty was finally brought before the Senate and rejected. As may be imagined, our friendly relations with Denmark were considerably impaired by this method of doing business." See Schuyler, "The St. Thomas Treaty." [393] _The Independent_, LXXXIV, 515. [394] _North American Review_, CLXXV, 501; and 55th Congress, 2d session, Senate Report No. 816. [395] 57th Session. First session. Doc. No. 284. [396] We have here relied to some extent on information obtained from the United States Consul C.H. Payne and Vice-Consul A.P. Zabriskie stationed at St. Thomas for a number of years. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE DANISH WEST INDIES It is possible to multiply here the documents bearing on the Danish West Indies but these are considered adequate to give the student of history an idea as to the colonial policy of the Danes, their treatment of the bondmen and the subsequent self-assertion which culminated in open resistance to established authority. We are concerned then with what the Danish were endeavoring to do, what they actually accomplished, and what the observer from afar thought of these achievements. To bring out more strikingly these phases of the situation these documents have been added. A SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE ISLANDS OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. CROIX, IN THE POSSESSION OF THE DANES, IN 1769