Talk:Jay–Gardoqui Treaty

NPOV
"Instead, Jay signed an agreement that ignored the problem of the Mississippi in exchange for commercial advantages benefiting the Northeast"

The Fact is that Jay got New Orleans and the Spanish Carribean opened to US Trade, which is what he was sent to do, though there has been much bias against the treaty since (Mostly by US Southerners) User: 24.195.140.10 20:24, October 11, 2006


 * With regard to the comment above, the commenter has confused the Jay-Gardoqui negotiations and unratified treaty of the 1780s with the Pinckney-Gardoqui treaty of 1795. That the lower-Mississippi and New Orleans remained closed to American shipping until then wqs one of the important causes of the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794. Prof. Todd Carney / Southern Oregon University 18:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcarney57 (talk • contribs)

POV tag
This article is clearly written from an American perspective, listing U.S. complaints, but ignoring any issues that may have concerned Britain or Spain. Please balance it out if you have more information. Honbicot 02:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It is really only remembered for being an American (i.e. U.S.) Treaty. So other perspectives are somewhat lacking. I wish you luck in researching it though. Na uf ana ² :  (talk)  19:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)