v] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /a 
 
 ^> 
 
 
 /A 
 
 VV'# 
 
 y 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 HIM f^5 
 
 12.0 
 
 ■•25 ■ 1.4 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 Photogmphl 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corpordlion 
 
 h 
 
 // 
 
 
 /. 
 
 \ 
 
 
 ^Xl 
 
 K 
 ^ 
 
 V 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 4G^^ 
 
 \\ 
 
 
 
 6^ 
 
 k 
 
 -«^;1^ 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREIT 
 
 4VEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 ^ 
 
 "^ 
 
4^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microkiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 □ Covers damaged/ 
 C< 
 
 *ouverture endommagde 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 I I Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relid avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 film6es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires: 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la methods normale de filmage 
 sont indiquds ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages/ 
 
 D 
 D 
 Q 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damage* .' 
 Pages endommagtes 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaur6es et/ou pelliculdes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es. tachet6es ou piqu^es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages detachdes 
 
 I 7 Showthrough/ 
 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Qualiti indgale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materij 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuiliet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6x6 film6es 6 nouveau de fa^on 6 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 
 
 
 16X 
 
 
 
 
 20X 
 
 
 
 
 24X 
 
 
 
 
 28X 
 
 
 
 
 32X 
 
 
9 
 
 Stalls 
 s du 
 lodifier 
 r une 
 Image 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Libriry 
 Acadia University 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with tha 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover whe,i appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol --^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce it la 
 g6n6rositd de: 
 
 Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library 
 
 Acadia University 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6x6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de l'exemplaire filmd et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couvertur? en 
 papier est imprimde sont film6s en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'iilustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film6s en commengant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 emprointe. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ^> signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche A droive. 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suii/ants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 trrata 
 to 
 
 pelure, 
 n d 
 
 n 
 
 32X 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
tH- 
 
 
 --^ 
 
 .-^.^p«a— ■ 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ■\ 
 
 A M A I^ Y S I S 
 
 Ol' THE LATli 
 
 
 ESFOl 
 
 ^, 
 
 
 BETWEEN OUR ADMINISTRATION .p \. 
 
 
 AND 
 
 (IREAT BRITAIN & FRANCE. 
 
 t 
 
 WITH AN ATTEMPT TO SHEW 
 
 f V\CMAT ARE THE REAL CA USES 
 
 % 
 
 :i/. 
 
 OF THE 
 
 FAILURE OF THE NEGOCIA TION. 
 
 -'•i*«tt^!^^©^^?!«K«35«5i- 
 
 Jisera, dumcupif paccm, belli metu in belluin incidit.'' 
 
 rioBUS, 
 
 " Wretched admini^tratiun 1 \vhirh, desiring jjeace, from a dastardly dread (Jf 
 tear, plunged itself into the very war which it wished to avoid." 
 
 •* Cavciidum snltein est, nequid fiat, quod prodat majorcm fivvorem erga partem 
 imam qnam alteram, ne jitsta dctur parti uni de -neutrnlitate non exacta servata, 
 quw'ela/' noLFius. 
 
 |Ve should take care, that nothing he dime which should sliew more favour to one 
 t^n^ty than thw other, lest we sli(|}uld give Just cause of ooinplaiut that our neutraiitt/ 
 i'^nnt observed." 
 
 
 ■ ■ ♦- 
 
 l^.' 
 
 V*--*;©* 
 
 
 SC.ISf tfc 4NB CVTlKIf, PHIKTERS. 
 
 * ' 
 
 4V 
 
 ANi 
 

 :»*<' 
 
 ♦ * 
 
 4| 
 
 ► \ 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 displaj/, 
 
 respondent 
 France, zci 
 ject is deep 
 both of ur^ 
 llsh them 
 
 enlightenet 
 touted in dij 
 discussion, 
 inoiis conse 
 1 
 bi 
 1 
 
 /ress, and 
 sources of t 
 total annilh 
 causes. Ti 
 Bw/ the sec 
 to be sough 
 are not cure 
 sures zcill st 
 pi'csent suj) 
 cij — Our ru 
 hind the see 
 compel then 
 us which K 
 L policy. 
 
 l\ 
 
 wr mutual 
 T 
 
 Congress — i 
 
 ^store peoc 
 
 T 
 
 *dct, and 
 
 udison^s r< 
 
 Ifon's pre 
 
 plittionai 
 
 \cdJrom 
 
 4 
 
 ^ 
 
.!^ 
 
 
 -:i5»£-««t- 
 
 -~^', 
 
 I 
 
 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS, 
 
 fl 
 
 I 
 
 
 * 
 
 THE foUoicing pieces, centaining an Analysis of the late cor- 
 ^ respondencc behccen our Government and those of Great. Britain and 
 France, tccre first published in the Columbian Centinel, but as the sub- 
 ject is deepli) interesting, and from its nature requires a connected course, 
 both of argument and attention, it has been thought expedient to repub- 
 lish them in this form. 
 
 It is a matter of deep regret, that some of those superior and 
 enlightened statesmen, of v:hom zee have yet a fexo, zsho have been edu- 
 cated in diplomatic life, have not thought it their duty to enter into this- 
 discussion, and to point out the errors of our Administration, and the ru- 
 inous consequences ishich uill inevitably follow from them. 
 
 The zcriter of this Analysis has icaited anxiously for such a 
 display, but in vain. 
 
 The Publick mind, excited to the highest degree, by real dis- 
 tress, and more dreadful prospects, has sought in secondary causes, the 
 sources of the public calamities. The arrestation of our commerce, the 
 fatal annihilation of external as tcell as internal trade, are efl'ects not. 
 causes. They are the instruments employed to sccurge and afflict us. 
 But the secret and hidden causes of the infliction of this punishment are 
 to be sought elseu-here. Remove our commercial restraints, and our evils 
 are not cured — Our malady will only become the more inveterate. Mea- 
 sures xcill succeed^ so much more disa-ttrous, as to make us look back to our 
 present sufferings, and to hail them as blessings. This is not prophe- 
 cy — Our rulers have raised the curtain, and have invited us to look bc- 
 $ hind the scenes. They already threaten us, that if our clamours should 
 \ compel them to abandon their present system, they have evils in store for 
 \ us ichich icill make us repent our ungracious interference with tlieir 
 \ policy. 
 
 4 What then are these hidden causes zchich impel our rulers to 
 
 loi/r mutual ruin / 
 
 1 They icill be found in the secret journals of the revolutionary 
 
 XJongress — in motions to impeach or censure our ministers for daring to 
 
 ""estoi'e peace to their bleeding country zcithout the concurrence of France. 
 
 They icill be found in the private minutes of Genet, Fauchet^ 
 
 *dct, and Turrcau..in the clamours against neutrality in \793..in 
 
 'udison\s resolutions for a commercial zcar. .in the opposition to fVash- 
 
 \ton\<i proposed pacijick mission to Great.-liritain.. in the violent and 
 
 }olutionary attempt.^ to prevent the adoption -of the treaty zchich re-- 
 
 'icdfrom that juission. 
 
 
 i] 
 
 
 y/z/f?/ 
 
 .1 
 
 Jr:^ 
 
4 
 
 They Ktll lie founds in shor/, in the tcholo hi-toij/ of the di- 
 plumatirk intrrrouv-c of Mr. Jc{fcrson..in one unvarhd course of '•ub- 
 viis^ion tn France, and host ilify to Great-Britain.^ of ichich the dispatches 
 note ana/i/seil form no mean and undistinguished part. 
 
 I'hti/, icho read onlij to he amused., icho expa^t to find an orna- 
 Dicnted and poli hed sti/lc in the foUoKing Anahjsis, ziill be disappointed. 
 Per^piru/tt/ alone /u/y appeared to the zcviter to be indispen able, -uhen 
 emplni/ed in exposing the sophi'-lrij of men., xcho to covr their real dc- 
 Fign^. veil them in language, alicaj/s ambiguous, undjrequentlif impenetro- 
 hl^ obscure. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 Of the late Di'spaJchcs and Corrcsxumdencc bchcccn our Cab- 
 inet and tJwsc of France and Great- Britain. 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 AT last it would sot>m, <o tho eye of superficial observers, that the court 
 of Washington bail (leteriniiu'd to abandon that suspicious and insuttinf 
 system oisecrocv, whirh, wliileit contradicted all their former principles' 
 and professions, was calculated to ronse the jealousy, and excite the in- 
 f'ignation of every independent man. If this were true, little credit 
 ^ "ould be due to the govermnent, as i( is well known, and will be long re- 
 cillected, that this information was withheld until it could no longer bo 
 of use ; that it was suppressed until the United States were, against their 
 o\»n seii^e and wishes, plunged into a state little short of actual hoslilifv 
 with the two most powerful nations of Ruropc, into a desperate and for- 
 lorn situation, in which retrograde movements involve eternal disgrace, 
 and perseverance, or progressive steps, inevitable ruin. 
 
 Nor ought it to be overlooked, that even this scanty portion of light, 
 which gives us only a glance into our future dark and gloomy prospects, 
 was not vohmlarily bestowed, but wascxtorted by the patriotick exertions 
 of the opponents of our late destructive system. 
 
 But it will be seen in the course of this Analysis that even this affected 
 frankness of eomnuinication is an illusion. Kvery thing which may tend 
 to implicate the administration may have been and probably has been 
 withheld, and we are treated with detached fragments, and broken sen- 
 tences, fro. n the letters of our foreign ministers, which only ixcite the 
 strongest suspicions of the alarming nature of those which are suppressed. 
 
 Is this the language of disaffection only, and unreasonable jealousy ? 
 Can it be illiberal to doubt the sincerity W men, who. in earlier and 
 iappier times; before they had been, so skilled in jjolitical cunning, were 
 
;,:-j5* -*' 
 
 ,y 
 
 couri . 
 uitinf ^ 
 
 I 
 
 <l('ciarc(l by a friend who knew tliom well to liavc a •• liuii^uaire'confulon- 
 tial antl a lanijuagf (iiViciaP' ?— [,SVe GeneVs lcl/erst~\ — Is it un:?tMn.Mous 
 to suspect nun who have been educated irt the intrignins; politics of 
 Frince, to be capable of making foruial dispatches to «atisfv the publick, 
 and of (hwarling those di-spatches hy their confulentidl coniinunications ? 
 
 If, for exaniph', it should be necessary to satisfy the British cabinet, 
 and prevent an open rupture, that our administration should preserve, tlu; 
 appearance of resistance to the nn just and abominable measures of FranctJ, 
 is it not quite conceivable, that with the approbation of Mons. Cham- 
 pagny, an ofl'icial note may be delivered by our minister, making a formal 
 remonstrance to the decrees of France, in order to give fresh force to our 
 complaints against Great-firitain ? It may be supposed, and our cabinet 
 would have it believed, that France would not consent to such a system, 
 inasmnch as she wished to involve ns in an open war with England ; but I 
 am persuaded it will app ar that France is fully satisfied with the existing 
 state of things ; that it gives her all the benefits she could liope to derive 
 from our avowed alliance, without obliging her to any pecuniary sacrifi- 
 ces (o maintain our cause. 
 
 I'esides, this half way state befween absolute alliance and depiMidence, 
 and perfect independence, gives her the most favourable opportuni<y to 
 draw very consideraI)lr revenue from us in (he form of captures and 
 seizures, which would be vastly more diifuull in a state of avowed co;i- 
 necfion and amity. 
 
 This proposition I will veiit'.irc ♦o state without the dread of contra- 
 diction, that it will app -ar by a close and candid examination of these 
 dispatches, (although they arc arU'iiilv selected to intpose uron the p<'o. 
 pie) that (lie government of the Uniied States have a jjerfect prix-iitc iin- 
 tterstandin^ with France, and are deferniined to resist all the lionoura- 
 bleand amicable proposals of (Jreat Britain. 
 
 'J'he first document published by our government, is a letter from Mr. 
 Madison to Mr. Armstrong, dated May "J^d. 1807 : — and (he lirst in- 
 CMiiry which occurs to us upon it, is, why (his letter was no* inclnil "! in 
 the commniiications of the president in the winter of ISO:^. v. lien it was 
 lirelendcd that he communicated to ronyress all the ( nrrcsponien;',' of 
 any importance between us and foreign courts, and if he had not "-o de- 
 clared, it was his duty to have maile ])nblick such iiui)ortant pip.-rs, in 
 which no matter requiring secrecy existed. 
 
 2dly. It appears that our administration chose to conside*' t'le Bcr'in 
 decree as vague and nncortain as to its intentions, or as Mr. Ma.lison in 
 tlie cabinet jiirsron calls it, " inarticulate'''' and that thev chose to presMnie, 
 and did allect to presume, it was not intended to operate against ns, 
 though it is well known to every merchant's clerk, that we were the cn- 
 ly neutral nation at that time, and the onlv one of course' tipon whon 
 the decree could operate. Overlooking this notorious fact, as well nu- 
 derslood by the goveniiuent as In evrr\ bodv else. thecabii\:t go still 
 
 K\ 
 
 \ 
 
 '' 
 
 i 
 
 .. a p. '- — -i 
 
 i3i*S3B- 
 
 ::,^-m^mik 
 
(> 
 
 further, and aflVr t to foel a delight in the explanations of the minister of 
 marine, though every man offense perfectly iiiiderstood their duplicity : 
 though that minister expressly disclaimed all authority to decide for Mr. 
 Talleyrand, who was absent : though men of intelligence in our conn, 
 fry at the time predicted, indeed were certain of the purposed fallacy of 
 those explanations. The event has proved, not that our government was 
 mistaken, for they never believed the minister of marine sincere, but 
 that the French government adopted that irregular and ludicrous course 
 in order j)rohably to prevent an instant retaliation on the part of Great 
 Britain; but as soon as their policy required, they denied, as was pre- 
 dicted, the authority of the minister of marine, and declared that the de- 
 crees had no exception whatever. Indeed if they had no applicability to 
 us, they were jierfectly nugatory, ,is no other neutral nation then ex- 
 isted. This fact is an unanswerable one, and j)roves the falsliood and in- 
 sincerity of our fiibinet. 
 
 Mr. Madison goes on to presume that the French orders would ho fa- 
 zoiirabhj expounded. Which he declares to be the most probable event. 
 
 Why jiresumeit? I'lomthepast conduct of France towards us ? 
 When did she ever perform any stipulation in our favour either under 
 our old trea<y or the existing one ? Is there one solitary instance of her 
 good faith ? Is if to be foiind in the condemnation of the lirst captured 
 vessel, the ship Jay, in violation of tiK! stipulation that free ships should 
 make free gootis ? Shall we hnd it in the decree which declared all Bri- 
 tish manufactures on board o'lr ships lawful prize ? and which further 
 condemned the vessel and cargo for having any amount of them onboard ? 
 Is it to be perceived in the inhuman decree which sentenced to death all 
 meiilrals found on board enemies' shijts, though serving by force? Or 
 was this great confidence derived from the peculiar sense of justice and re- 
 iiAvd to neutral rights mauifested by the jjrescnt emperour ? Was the 
 violation of the I'russian territory, the seizure of the duke d'Knghein in 
 <he neutral statis of the elector of Baden, and the daily violation of the 
 right;, of all weaker states, sufficient pledges to our admiring and submis- 
 f-jve cabinet ? 
 
 al 
 
 isl 
 
 tl 
 
 cc 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 I'S spite of the constant experience of the infidelity of the French 
 Cabinet, which has in every period of its history made sport of all its en- 
 gagements with us, Mr. Madison tells Mr. Aumstuong, that it is ;jro- 
 imble that the French decree would be favourably expounded towards u; . 
 If this letter had been an othcial one, directed to the Cabinet of St. 
 C'A)(/(/, the principles of civility might have induced our goverument to 
 have adopted the language of insincerity : but in a private letter to our 
 
 
 «— -"^ ' 
 
of 
 
 
 own minister no apology can l>c made for this compliment to the upright 
 views of Fiance, and it must be admitted to have proceeded solely from a 
 devotion to tha» Court. 
 
 Jt was the more extraordinaiy, as it is apparent from the tenor of the 
 Dtrlin decree, that it could have no possible operation e\x.ept upon the 
 commerce of the United States. 
 
 We wore the only nation which then visited the ports of England :— 
 We were the only people on whom the blockade cuuld operate ; and to 
 admit an interpretation, which rendered the decree absurd and nugatory, 
 18 um^quivocal proof of a disposition to submit to the grossest deception 
 from the Cabinet of iS'/. Cloud. 
 
 This very letter of Mr. Madisov, contains the most perfect proof that 
 our government did not, and could not have believed the interprot.iiiou 
 given informally by Mr. Decres, sincere. — For ir. contains an admission 
 that the French cruisers in the Wc'^t-lndies had enforced the decree 
 against us, and that these depredations constituted just cl;iims of re- 
 dress. — Have any of these captured ships been restored ? If they have, 
 shew us the case and the decision. 
 
 This letter, it will be remarked, is dated May 22d, 1807, and is a full 
 and perfect refutation of an assertion in the report of the committee of 
 congress, just made, recommending a perseverance in our hostile mea- 
 sures, in that report u is stated, that the Horizon was the first case 
 which had occurred of the e.tension of the Berlin decree to us, and that 
 that decree did not take place ♦lill September, 1807. 
 
 If it be said, that the Wcst-^ndia cases were only the acts of inferior 
 courts, wc may ask whether tliey have been in any single instance re- 
 versed ? 
 
 We would also enquire why it is, that Mr. Armstrong's remonstrances 
 on this subject are suppressed ? And whether he has ever made any 
 complaint, or whether, as in another case, he thought the " application 
 would not only be useless, but injurious ?" 
 
 This recals to our recollection a former instance of subserviency to 
 France, in which one of our ministers told the cabinet of France, that wo 
 should not only bear the departure from our stipulated rights " with pa- 
 tience, but with pleasure." 
 
 We should not have recurred to this ancient proof of devotion to the 
 views of France, if it had not furnished a fair and natural occasion to 
 remark, that a set of men, who in 1795 could justify and defend the out- 
 rageous and ur^masked profligacy of France, in its conduct toward us, 
 could not be expected to discover any considerable degree of spirit^ 
 against her, now her power is so vastly increased. 
 
 The second letter is from Mr. Madison to Gen. Armstrong, and its 
 features are still more strongly marked with servility and devotion to 
 France. It acknowledges the receipt of the evidence of the violation, 
 not only cf our treatVj but of every principle of humanity, in the con. 
 
 1 \\\\ 
 
 .' I J ^ 1 
 
 Ti^^W^ 
 
 --««« ?^jg{^ 
 
 \ 
 
\ 
 
 8 
 
 the Frond. <^-'^^r^X^ .o..^n:n.u'^ ^'^^^"^^f -a. mcr ..ccasin, r.- 
 
 • ^f tl,.« llonit»i>, Willi" I". • r,.siKnt(«U uw «;..•....- " 
 
 ion that the ^^^'^^^'^^^^l^^.^^^'l -o cause o co^^- ^^^^^^^ 
 ,. a numkilvU -^^^;^^uUnnv>Utick concession lu t-.^^^ ^^^,^^^.. 
 
 ,amc ^l'''^^^''">>;"'Tconar.ss, wh<> '^'i^^^' ^^ 1 Utile con^Uleratiou. 
 the late conmuttcc of ConM ^^,^^^ .^ '^^-'''Jtr^f .overnme.it, for 
 ntisniram\ n'?-n I to «u , ^^^^ ^^^^.^ ^^^''^'"^orie.ri'cvec of Berlin. 
 This single ulea s V^^ J ,,Hho.,.t leiuon.tva.ice to - .^^^^j^.^ i,,t. 
 
 bavins tai.ely ^^^ » '^^^ :,a ,,,,„ no order or ^^^ ^ ; ^^ \,f p.-ance and her 
 Now ^"m'0^^\V';\t,a\ vessels cutenns the i^ ts ^^^^i-,^,. „f 
 
 -"^^^yJ^'^'^'tScd^'^^^-^^, <- I^^^Tl/'heXloii^es, shouUl be 
 allies, having ^' " ^',;,^, f^,,„rc of l''"S^:^f . *^' '';,,,, aw of nations, and 
 
 the growth ^"^ \"J Lis not this a ^'"'^ " "^'/^a us ? 
 
 seized and coiUscatca ■ ,„tucen 1; .• "ce a ^^^^^^ ^^ 
 
 a directbreach "^ ^ ^/^^ ^^.^ . ,f onr ''-''^^'"V hi perhaps it may, couUl 
 Does not the l'^^\,J'' '^ \„av b^ ^^«'»'^^^"V ?'", V the entry, but order 
 this privilege ?-ov, \f ^"^S-, „ot only i''^.^''-^^'^VH;u, ad entered her 
 Vrance, -UlH>vit F-"^^ '^"I^rstat s in ^lU contldence 
 
 tbc eonfiscation f l^'^^^^i^and even "^'"^ral states, ^^,^jy 
 
 ports, or those « ^^ ^'^^^ ,f „aticn.s, and of o uj tjU 
 llfprotectionnn erthcla ^^.^^^ ""^'"^"j J.^al friend? K ^^^c 
 
 on the groun^^ ^^'''^ uLi fde transferred to a "^"^r ^y^^ seizures 
 
 manufacture ^^^^^ -> -^^''"'^ '"t ^liS leg^i'-^e acts. On 
 lawfully "-'S»!t^";L a, •„, France, arc at «'y^'^ ^^^^.^dians, Mr. Mad- 
 ,t Leghorn ^^^,^,,A by one of --£^ fished, wUl forn. 
 this Srou.ul they . r 'l^ ,t,„, '"'^^'n!ec dented injuries. U 
 
 ison ; and this "J^' ^ '^ !,,a'niations far their ""F^/; the ports of 
 
 „ „(>rneiual bar toaiu i /' interdiction ot emiy ^hidisoirs 
 
 ofvvhtch i- ranee hash c, 
 
 T,io^t outrageous violaloi. 
 
V 
 
 tt IS in Ndi.ill points wo disrcrn the fonipcr and views of men ; .mil \\c. 
 mtrviii our ifiulcis to fxaiiiino caii' fully the bti\:»n of tlii'^ apology for 
 Frrncli outr;ige. 
 
 Towards (111- clo'io of this Ii'ttcr, Mr. M;i'lison clioosos to aniicipato 
 that France will romplain of untcoulciil violations, to thi> injury of 
 France, by thi'sjovi-rnnu-nt of (IriMt-liritain ; . .hi' t('"'S fu 'thiT. .ht- says, 
 ^'■//n'l'difrdiiiiof he ilcniid ;"' that is, in plain Kni^li^h, it is true that CI. 
 IJritain i'.as !)iH'n Ihf Wif^r/cvv**;-, and to tlu> injury of Fraicc, and adds, 
 " that the French decree may be i>ronounce(l a retaliation on the preccd- 
 int; conduct of {}reat.i}ritain.". .This we do most solemnly deny ; ami 
 as it forms the l)asis not only of this letter, but of the report of the com- 
 niltt.e in favor of non-interconrse. .of Mr John Q. Adams' letter to Mr. 
 Otis, and of all that has been or can be said, in extenuation of thu 
 attrocious conduct of France ; we sliall devote to it our next and more 
 particular attention. . .We shall, however, make in this place, this serious 
 remark, that even if it were true, it is a concession which it was exlreuie- 
 ly impolitic to niiike, and more so to jjiiblish, since it puts t(» an end for- 
 I'ver, all our claims on France for the eliects and depredations connnitteil 
 under the Berlin and Milan decre> 
 
 i 
 
 it I 
 
 •tt 
 
 . t 
 
 i 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 "The French Decree mi^ht on the same ground fie pxiinjanciHl a retaliation on 
 ihe preccilinjj conduct of (Jreat-Rritain." 
 
 Sec Madison's Ivttfv to (icn. ARM3rRo\n. 
 
 THE concession contained in the forct^oinsi; extract, is full as nunin, 
 and ought to excite as i^eneral indignation, as the same gentleman's declar- 
 alion to Mr. Randolph, '^ Fnuice wuntu nionnj, inul must have it." 
 
 The cflfcct of tlic ])uhlication of this concession will be, to bur forever 
 tdl our claims for redress for captures or injuries sustained under the 
 Berlin and Mdan decrees, and to furnish the French with not only pre- 
 texts but justitications for any future violations of our rights. It is not, 
 however, my present purpose to display the rashness and impolicy, if not 
 ruEACHEHY of this conduct ; — it is sufficient to say, that in any other 
 government it would cost the officer his character and employment, if 
 not his life. 
 
 It is at present proposed to prove, that this argument and concessioii 
 furnished to France is wholly unfounded ; and that France herself has 
 never set up any such pretensions, except through the medium of her 
 \merican servants. 
 
 Before we examine the tnith of this proposition, it may be useful to 
 • oiisider the force of the terms used bv Mr. Madition. 
 
 »^^ 
 
 11 I 
 
 .*»■ 
 
 -.ii**- 
 
10 
 
 The cvidont ohjcrt of our SpcrcUiry, as well in this IcUcr as in the latC 
 report ol ihc conuiuilcc, probably furnished by him, is to place the inju- 
 ries of I'vance and Great Uritain on an fijuul lootini"; ; or, even to give a 
 darker siiade to those of tlie latter. He had just been speaking of the 
 prim iple (jf retaliation urged by Great Britain in justification of her or- 
 ders of N-n-. 1 1, 1807, and then adds, that the " French decree might on 
 the name q-roioid he pronotniced a relaliatifin on the preceding conduct of 
 (ireat liritain." That is to say, that the I'renrh decrees might with equal 
 junficv not simply be /iret ended to be, but /ironounced, a retaliation on the 
 British conduct. In still simpler language, France can as justly defend 
 hei' Berlin decree on the groiuid of retaliation as Great Britain can justify 
 hers of Nov. 1 lih, on the same grotmd. 
 
 As it is always best to sinijilifv propositions as far as possible, before 
 we proceed to prove the total falsity of this position, we shall remark, that 
 even if ii had been true that the two decrees stood in this respect mfiari. 
 delictum (in e(|ual fault) still the circ\imstances tuulcr which they were re- 
 .spcctively issued, ought to have excited ten limes the indignation agauist 
 I'rance as against Great Britain, instciid of drawing forth labored apolo- 
 gies in favoiu" of the former. 
 
 Fimt. With France we had a commkrcfvi. tkk.vtv, purchased at an 
 immense price, the sacrifice of the claims of om- citizens to the amount 
 of at least rwKxrv Miia.ioxs of dollars. — This treaty cx/tre.suhi fohuidh 
 this precise form of injury which Bon.ipartc has adopted. This was the 
 firnt instance in which we had ever had any occasion to resort to the 
 stipulations in oiu' favour ; and hi this first instance are they shamelessly 
 and without apolo;j:y violated : — Xor does f ranee pretend a violation on 
 our part to justify the outrage. Let the government shew any formal 
 complaint on the part of France, prior to the Berlin decree ; and without 
 such comphint no sucli measure could legally have been resorted to, even 
 if in other respects justifiable. 
 
 With Great Britain we were not only united by no treaty, but we had 
 rejected under the most extraordinary circinnstanccs, a convention which 
 had been agreed to by our own ministers, and which would have placed 
 oiu" commerce and prosperity on the most secure footing. We had 
 moreover done every thing to force that govermuent into a declaration of 
 war, and oiu' existing state at the moment of issuing her orders was at 
 least on ovu" side, that of an enemv, or one disposed to be an enemy. We 
 had interdicted the entry of her public ships, while we admitted those of 
 her enemy ; and we htid gone as far as it was thought our people would 
 bear in the system of coercion, by >io)i iniliorhition of her manufactures. 
 So ftir then, we had no right to expect friendship from that Cabinet ; and 
 of coifrsc, much less reason to be irritated at any measures she might 
 adopt of an imfriendly nature. 
 
 Seconditj. France not only gave us no notice prior to the operation of 
 her Decrees, but by a ix)licy truly Gallicun, she allured us into her j)ortH, 
 
 »'« ■. •» 
 
I 
 
 •^ 
 
 111 
 
 })y prctcndiiiGj tluit llu-y should noi operate ap;iiinst \is ; but when sht- 
 lound she had a coinpcttMit (|uaiiiity of t^amc wuhin her reach she sprnit; 
 the trap, and seized our unwary and dehided fellow citizens. This seizure 
 and loss nuist he attrilnited to the inconceivable blindness, or wilful sul> 
 niisbion of ovu" Cabinet to the views of France. They aflected to con- 
 sider, or really belie\cd this hulf veiled and syren like declaration ol 
 France sincere ; they, by this conduct, assisted to decoy our unhappy citi- 
 zens ; and ashamed to avow their errors, they even at tiie presi-nt nio- 
 iTient choose to consider that France has changed her views, rather than 
 has intentionally deceived. 
 
 But Great J{ritain, far from imitatinc; the detestable perfidy of France, 
 frankly notified our ij;overnment the preceding year, that unless resisted, 
 she should be obliged to retaliate upon France those decrees, which 
 througii neutrals, were aimed at her existence. Siie not only did tiiis, 
 but after waiting in vain for the smallest movemcnl on our part, when 'die 
 actually issued her orders she gave the most ample lime and notice to all 
 neutrals, to avoid falling within their purview and ett'ects. 
 
 Thirdlu. The decrees of France were witliout limitation as to extent ; 
 they embraced every depeudericy and colony of Great Biitahi, through 
 out the world. 
 
 But tiiose of Great liritain left open to us the exteiisive colonies of her 
 enemies ; and hi short, every source of trade wiiich was essential to om 
 comfort and even prosperity. 
 
 It has been represented, for party purposes, that all this trade is upon 
 the condition of paying her a '* tribute," and even the late conunittee of 
 Congiess have given a colour to this assertion. It is, however, nonrue. — 
 The duties demanded by her, and which are falsely called a " tribute" arc 
 only demandable in case we voluntarily go to Great Britain, and request a 
 I'learanre for the conthiental ports of her enemies, which she blockades. 
 This is merely nominal — a mere point of honour between her and France; — 
 because if Great Britain permitted you to go, 1 ranee would not. Her decrees 
 confiscate your property for the single crime of having Ijeen in a British jiort. 
 The case,therefore,can never happen ; and she knew well that it never would 
 happen. Why then was it imposed ? As a point of honour between her 
 and her enemy. Her enemy said. No neutral shall ever enter the ports 
 ci England — 1 will captiu'e and condemn them. Great Britain, in reply, 
 says, No neutral who has submitted to this usvu'pation of France, shall go 
 thither without first entering my ports ; and I will tax the products bound 
 to my enemy, which will enhance the price, if he chooses to admit it. 
 And yet, strange to relate, this cpialilication or modification is represent- 
 vdygnanli/ n/irrsintc(l,hy our impartial government, as more op[)i'essive, 
 more insulting than if it had been an absolute prohibition ; — tlian the de- 
 crees of Irance, which are an absolute prohibition ! Hut 1 repeat it, this is 
 merely a nominal provision ; — for it can operate only in case France should 
 repeal her decrees, in which case the whole fa')ric is destroyed : — But it 
 
 \' 
 
 *i 
 
 fr 
 
 i- 
 
 Kl 
 
 w 
 
 V 
 
 , r<^ -*^ 
 
12 
 
 I 
 
 i% 
 
 does not apply to the vast commerce of Spain, Pomig^al, Sweden, the East 
 anil West Indies, iind all the neutral ports of the worJd. 
 
 Jujurt/ilif. I'rance disfmnchiars^ for ever, all American .s7;//;.v, which 
 at any time after the decree sivall have visited a British port. The 
 effect Of this would h<;, either that a distinct set of ships must have heen 
 kejn for the trade of each country, or if Great Briuin had not issued her 
 oiciers, in tlie course of four or five years cvcr>- .imerican kM/i woidd have- 
 been interdicted the trade of France. The men who are so alive to the 
 dei>;rud ition of a "trilnite," which never has been and never can be ex- 
 acted, are not only insensible to this insult and violation of our treaty, but 
 our minister^ openly, with the countenance of Mr. Madison, jusiify it, as 
 a mere nuir.icipal rej^ulation I What ? Are we not entitled by treaty t» 
 visit freely the ports of the cnemi(;s of France '■ And are wc not equally 
 secured in our direct conmierce with France c And can these two rit^lUs 
 be considered secure, while every one of our ships are interdicted an 
 entry — nay, are confiHcatcd,, if they dare to enter any French j)ort ; or ii 
 they siuill have visited any British port in a former Aoyage '. No notice is 
 however taken of this outras^eous part of the decree. 
 
 But Ciieat Britain has made no such arl)itrurydis<juaIincations: — If you 
 escape the vii^ilnnce of her frigat*. s, and entei- your own ports, the forfeitiu'c 
 is ivoided, and she does not assimie an imperial auihoriiy to disfriincliise, 
 by standintij and permanent laws, the whole of your marine. 
 
 I.ustlu. The French had no power to enforce their blockade ; — that the 
 measure had no colourable justitication under the law ol nations. It had 
 the character of impotency striving to outstrip malii;riity. They were 
 obliged to resort therefore to cunnint^ to draw us within tlieir fant^s, anrl 
 the unhapi'y victims, like the visitors of the lion, weic seen to enter but 
 never to return. 
 
 Clieat Britain, on the other hand, had the means of enforcing a strict 
 and rigorous blockade, and the very men who brand this blockade as ille- 
 gal because nominal, have the shameless inconsistency of deieiiding the 
 emixugo on the ground that not one of our ships \«ould have escaped cap- 
 ture by (Jreat Britain ; — that if the embargo had ne^er been imposed, so 
 wide and efi'ectual would be the operation of the Britbh orders, no portion 
 of safe commerce woulc' have been left to us. 
 
 Strange and inconsiderate politicians 1 Defending by their very conces- 
 sions the policy they condemn. For if such be the {xjwer of Great liritau) 
 to enforce lier orders, to coerce her enemy, to execute her blockade, tlu; 
 perfect justification of them may be ii,rounded on that power. For on 
 what, may it be asked, rests the acknowledged doctrine of legal blockade, 
 but on the power to coerce and distress an nitmy J "This power is de- 
 clared in the convention {>f the famous armed neutrality, formed to estab- 
 lish and impose by force, a new, liberal maritime code ; to be law fidly 
 exercii^ed whenever a ship cannot enter a blockaded j)ort without inuni 
 aent duntrer of being caplmed." And our politiciaub condenuj the British 
 
 deJ 
 
 OUfl 
 
 .i 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
r- ...lty B Lg*g l 
 
 1^ 
 
 \. "l 
 
 I 
 
 13 
 
 decncs, though mert iy retaliatory while they clfclarc, that fv.w or noneoi 
 our ships < uuld possibly tscapi- the vit^iiaiuc of the British cruisers. 
 
 'Ihus ihtii tVoni this shi/ri \ie\v, which iiiiirju be extended to a variety 
 nrotlK-rexaniplesorthc din'ereuce in pointof severity between the I'rencli 
 and British orders, it i, apparc-nl, that iiolhint;- i)ut the grossest and most 
 wilful partiality could indue*- Mr. Madison, our cabinet, our ioreit;n nunis- 
 ters, and the coinnnttee of Congress, to place the I'rench and Biitish gov- 
 ernmcnls on a fo<Jting of equality, or as ecjually meriting our resentment 
 and hostility. But we propose to pro\c, that there is not the smallest 
 pretence for the allegation that " 'J'/w French dccrt'VH cai; nii/i justice kr 
 fironounccd us refaliitiif^ii-i on the conduct 'f thf Britinh. 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 •'♦i 
 
 1^ 
 
 i 
 
 \V;is Frarife, as Mr. .M:.dis<m, and tlu- roinmittcc of Cohs^toss in imitation of 
 iiim, iloclart,-, aiitliorizcil Id make )-ctaliati(i:i ou <irtal Mi-itain, tlii-oiin'ii Mmtj-al 
 <'()iiini('rci', us iniult as drtal IJritain was aiithori/ccl to letaiialfj oa Trancij ? 
 
 THIS is a most interesting question : — It decides the correctness or hi - 
 conectness of tlie policy of our Cabinet, who allect to treat them bodi 
 alike ; — and prole.-sin;-,- to consider this subject deliberately, we invite the.- 
 I'Uention, of eveiy true friend of our country. We are bound to yield an 
 im])licil. obedience to tlieir derisions, we trust that there is yet suiucicut 
 sj)iiil and indepeiidence in i>\iv country to resist these arbitrary doctrines, 
 and good sense enough to disci iminate between a fair aiul laudable attempt 
 to exanvine impartially the conduct of the two great belligerent nuiions, 
 and a wish so often unjustly and illiberally charged upon us, to justify the 
 improper conduct of either of them. 
 
 If I'rance was, as Mr. Maddison declares, as well justified as Great 
 Britain in making letaliulion tl-.rough neutral commerce upon her enemy, 
 this right must result from some one of the grounds stated by the late 
 committee of Coni^icss, who appear to be too nmch attached to I'rance to 
 omit any of her reasonable pretension;-.. 
 
 These grounds are staled to be, 
 
 I'irst'ii. The attack on our riglils by Croat Rritain hi imprt'ssiiig' American 
 scaim-n. 
 
 Si'coiul'i'. 'I'he cxienbion of the rig-lit of blockadr. — And, 
 
 Tlurdh!- The doctrir.t- of cutting' ott'tlie culoaial li'ailc, more generally known 
 hy the name ot the rule of 1756. 
 
 With respect to the two first, the Committee cf Cc;igress, ashamed t».> 
 show a (hjwnright submission to I'l'ance, ha\c! given one answer — 
 that even if these were wrongs, they atVected principally ourselves, and 
 were not the subject of belligeient comjdaint. But ( veu ou iheijc points 
 
 / 
 
 /J 
 
$ 
 
 
 14 
 
 the partiality of the Committee was obvious, because they iicj^Iected to 
 give other answers which would have been still more conclusive. 
 
 As to the impressment of our seamen, they mitj;ht, and they oui;;ht to 
 have said, thatCircat Britain never claimed the rij^ht to take any other 
 than her own seamen ; — that this was a ri.^ht which not only every other 
 nation, but I'rance* in an especial manner, had not only claimed and exer- 
 cised, but which she would never yield ; — that if inconvenicnoies and in- 
 juries to ourselves had arisen from this claim, they were to be attributed 
 to very natural causes, the similarity of lanj^uage and manners, the difii- 
 cidty of discrimination, and the facility afforded by these circumstances to 
 the mariners of Great Britain to Hy her service, at a time when the law 
 of nature and nations required their assistatice, and authorized every rea- 
 sonable measure of compulsion to secure it. 
 
 As to the British orders of Ijlockadc, they mifi;lit have said, that the his- 
 tory of the present war had ottered a new state of things, in which the vast 
 preponderance of one belligerent on the ocean, the total incapacity of the 
 other to enter the lists on that field of contest, had really changed the an- 
 cient established rules ; or to speak tnorc correctly, had authorized the 
 application of those rules in a more extensive manner. The whole doc- 
 trine of blockade is founded upon the idea that a belligerent has the power 
 so to impede the trade of the blockaded port as to render it duvgcroun. — 
 This is the only limitation to this power set up by the famotis armed neu- 
 tn.iity ; and the records of our insurance-offices will shew, that the British 
 blockades have possessed these rccjuisites. — It has been almost impracti- 
 calile at any pi-emium to hisure a vessel bound to any port avov < dly 
 blockaded. 
 
 If these honoiutible gentlemen had referred to our former correspond- 
 ence with France, they would have fovuid, that vuulcr the administration of 
 Washington, both these matters were fully discussed ; and as France gave 
 no answer to them, biu afterwards made a treaty without any stipidation 
 it is fairly to be presumed that she was conscious they were untenable. 
 
 In the answer of oiu' government to Mr. Adet, on the subject of im- 
 firensmeutK^ our Secretary remarks, " This, Sir, was a subject which con- 
 cerned only our government. As an independent nation we were not 
 bovuul to render an account to any other of the measures we deemed 
 pioi)er to adopt for the protection of our own citizens." 
 
 An answer similar to that was given on the subject of blockade, to 
 wiiich it \\ as added, that so long as the British Cabinet on those points 
 adliered to the law of nations, there could be no just cause of complaint. 
 
 We coi le then to the doctrine of colonial trade, upon which all the ad- 
 vocates of the present administration appear to rely, as cause of justifica- 
 
 * Sec tlic Nouveau code dcs Prises "Decree of the Khig in Cotmcil, thited 
 Aii.u^iist 5th, 1676, I'cciiiiii^' that where liis Miijcsly luid Issued a proclamation 
 ordcrini'' all rrciiclimen in the cnijiluy ol' forciq-n nations to return, mulcr pain ot 
 de itli, it roniiniitis the punislinieiu to tliat of the .u;'aileys," It has Ijccn cnstoni- 
 arv for l-'raucc to issue sucli au order hi cverv war 
 
 tiol 
 crll 
 llJ 
 coll 
 wa| 
 
 of 
 
 thai 
 tlu( 
 in 
 real 
 
 ha J 
 
 hi- J 
 
 i 
 
io 
 
 1 
 
 
 f nc,u;lected to 
 isive. 
 
 tlicy oui^ht to 
 take any otiicr 
 ily every ot/ier 
 iiecl and excr- 
 ncics and in- 
 bc attributed 
 crs, the diffi- 
 [■unistanccs to 
 A'licn the law 
 f.c6 every rca- 
 
 I, that the his- 
 ivhirh the vast 
 apacity of the ' 
 mjjed the an- 
 iithorizcd the 
 ic whole doc- 
 las the power 
 davgcroiiti. — 
 i armed neii- 
 at the Britisli 
 lost inipi'acti- 
 ort avovedly 
 
 r corrcspond- 
 linistration of 
 
 I'rancc g-avc 
 »y stip\dation 
 ntenable. 
 bject of im- 
 
 which con- 
 kve were not 
 
 we deemed 
 
 )Iockade, to 
 hose points 
 oniplaint. 
 h all the ad- 
 of justilica- 
 
 iMicil, ilutecl 
 Ji'tjchmiation 
 tiller ])aiii of 
 ecu cu'-tnin- 
 
 non lor the French decrees. This doctrine has been usually, but improp- 
 erly, as we shall shew, envilled the rule of the war of 175fi : and it is this, 
 that neutrals have no rit;;lu to exercise or carry on a trafiic between tho 
 colonies (jf a b( lliyerent, and the parent country of such colonies, wliicU 
 was interdicted or unlawful prior to the war. 
 
 That this is a doctrine enforced by Great Britain, throu£!;hout the whole 
 of the present war, from 1793 to this day, we do not deny ; but, we say, 
 that Francf had no reason to complain -of it, and did not in fact make it 
 the ground of her decrees of Ikilinand Milan, we do solemnly contend, 
 in opjjosition to her apoloi^ist and advocate, Mr. Madison, for the foUowint;; 
 reasons : — 
 
 Fir.stlij. Because France was herself the author of that principle, and 
 has never contradicted it in any public act from the moment in which she 
 hist introduced it. 
 
 On tiie twenty-third day of July, 1704, as appears by the ordonnanccs of 
 Louis Xl\ . commenied on by Valin, it was declared l)y France, " That all 
 vessels which should have, or which should thereafter depart from the 
 ports of an enemy, laden in vjIioIv or in /lart witii any goods whatsoever, 
 bound to any other ports than those of the coinury to which such neutral 
 vessel belonyeil, should be declared good prize." " And it was further 
 declared, that vessels boiuul even from a neutral pert to an enemy's port, 
 on board (;f which shoidd be found any ai'ticles of the growth or manufac- 
 ture of an enemy, such articles should be lawful prize." 
 
 I forbear to (;nter into the other parts of that ordonnance, which vastly 
 exceeded, in severity, those now cited ; because these arc sufficiently 
 broad to support the ride of 1755 as against France. 
 
 The same rule was still further extended and enforced by France, in 
 1744. Thus it appears, that France first established this rule, and en- 
 forced it, more than 50 years before the British trilnmals iniitated their 
 example — and, therefore, as it relates to that nation, that rule could not 
 be the ground of just retaliation. 
 
 Secondly. This rule, if it can i)e disputed on fair and honorable grounds, 
 could not be the foundation of complaint on the part of France, because 
 the same answei" could be gi\en to it, as was given by our last and even 
 the present administration, to the complaints of France on the subject of 
 impressment, and thai is, that it concerns ourselves only and our govern- 
 ment, and is an attair in which France has no right to interfere — Because 
 it might be replied to 1' ranee, that she, by standing and perpetual laws, 
 interdicts all our trade with her colonies ; — that these laws are still unre- 
 pealed, and are only suspended by temporary orders ; — that as she does 
 not admit us to this trade in time of peace, but only in moments of neces- 
 sity, we are not bound to defend our rights to this licensed and limited 
 traffic, at the moment when her necessities should induce her to change 
 her narrow and restricted policy ; — duit if this hud been a trade wc had 
 enjoyed in peace, wc should be ready to contend for it ; but as it was prc- 
 
 *\\ 
 
 r 
 
 J 
 
iil 
 
 > 16 
 
 '^"^^^^l^^nc^T''''^'^^^^^^ ''^'- Pt^i'sonal interests u 
 
 ^"<i Gef.Pt V Amidst (lie vol,,,,,; ^'"'^'us chapo-es ,„, i . *' ^' '''»v<' 
 
 '•--'W ^k!:? ""'' "" ^-'^ar^J'^^^ ;-v"-' '-'i voices cc^^r-^^ ''^>'^ '^- 
 
 t li, o,"''^' ^''^'^ the ca n;ir'"^''^'^' -^-i'^^ sk '^jr^^ ^"^■-'•ces by er 
 
 Ao. 
 
 
 ^:>. 
 
 
 8S 
 
 •it 
 
>N.. 
 
 ='"csts,H-CM-erf 
 
 n. 
 
 'i 
 
 , ^^0 have 
 
 ''"."t'^ of Adcu 
 'H.plo. The' 
 p'-sejf, vvhich 
 
 "••CCS by ,,ej, 
 
 '^y i wc a„. 
 '"'■f-' during 
 
 '"'ce jicver 
 ^ J and yef 
 J" short, 
 <^''l)inet or- 
 ' ti-adc is 
 'CI- own 
 
 '■c-estab- 
 cl and CI,. 
 
 tlic little 
 
 f'octrine 
 s in tiii.s 
 ^ not tJio 
 
 set the 
 
 palliai- 
 
 of our 
 
 :nds 
 teni 
 
 or 
 
 of 
 
 17 
 
 comings his dccp-rootcd prejudices. In judging, therefore, of the late 
 offers to France and Gi-eat Britain, wo ought to require and receive a 
 veiy high degree of evidence, before we a(lniit, tliat Gi-eut llritain und 
 France luive been treuled witb a toleral)le share of eciuylity. 
 
 In analyzing these cUspatchcs, I hold niyself bound to prove, that there is 
 not only no evidence of any such inipartiulity, but that there is proof, not 
 to be resist«'d, that the oiVers were perfectly illusory to Great Britain, und 
 so artfully arranged and deceithdly ex])ressed as that while a rei'usal ot 
 thcni was inevitably foreseen on the part of tliat Court, they might pro- 
 duce a I)elief, in the people of this country, that every reasonable measure 
 had been adopted consistent with our honor. 
 
 The purport of the President's declaration to Congress, and also of the 
 late icport of the connviitt'e to that body, in relaiion to these offers, is, 
 tliat tjiere were siinultaneous i)ropositions nvadeto the Courts of St. Cloud 
 and St, James, equally fiir and honor.ible to both n. lions, and which either 
 of tliem might have .icci ptcd without any derogation to its honor. 
 
 \Vt imdertake to prove, that these ofiers were unequal, unjust ; and 
 were made nnder circumstances which rendered it impossible they could 
 be accepted In' o?Jr of iheni. The field upon which I am now entering is 
 ■ a vchif one ; it calls for great patience in llie investigation, huismuch as it 
 is no trilling task to trace t!ie doublings and windini^s of cunning poUti- 
 cians, who have devoted their whole lives to Machiavelian politics — But 
 the reward will be equal to the labor ; the magnitude and importvUice of 
 the subject not only justify but demand some sacrihccs of our ease. If 
 our rulers have honestly and sincerely attempted to rescue us from the 
 evils into which their former errors had plunged us, let them receive 
 the praise which they merit ; but if instead of attempting to procure us 
 relief, they have continued to pursue the same destructive and wayward 
 policy which has brought us to the verge of ruin, let them find their pun- 
 ishment in the contempt and indignation of an injured people. 
 
 The first remark I shall make upon the documents lately published in 
 relation to the offers made to France and Great Britan, for the rep(;al of 
 their respective edicts, is this, that while all the correspondence between 
 Mr. I'inckney and Mr. Canning, and between our minister in London and 
 Mr. Madison, is made known, nut one line of the correspondence, or re- 
 monstrances, or offers of Mr. Armstrong to the French Cabinet, on the 
 subject of their decrees, is given to tiie public, unless the letter of Gen. 
 Annstrong, so late as August Cih, 1808, to iMonsieur Champagny, be 
 considered as of this description. — But I do not consider that this lettei- 
 contains tlie offers transmitted to France, because there is no proposition 
 to rescind the dccrcen ; and because it docs not comport with the positive 
 instructions given to iNIr. Armstrong, which wei-e to offer to France a 
 declaration of war against Cireat Britain, as an equivalent for her removal 
 of the Flmbargo. — This letter of Gen. Armstrong is to be sure sufRcient- 
 1v disgrace fuh and is entitled to and will receive a most ample examina- 
 
 I* 
 
 w 
 
 ■ *~ 
 
 ,tj!-«.^» 
 
 :-/.,- 
 
n 
 
 L 
 
 18 
 
 t<Jiu!itions, so h-.n.iJ. 1 ^-'^ "''"It- to(;iv.., n,.:, V '-•""<-« to trance, 
 
 •iVroW/v. 'n, ; om ,. , . , ''' ''"^"'» « could 
 
 '^•'' should not 1- , ii" -T' ' ^•'•^•^'t Britain, in .so f ""/ "' o^'f'-^'eous 
 "^e extravaL^a ,a^ ; •'''"•^''•^'^^- J'^'<-.s.-,Sta t e n'.f r^n'^'^'^ "^"^'^^ 'at- 
 
 ;•- r;^''"''--- u^k-r^rr ' • '^''^ i-^^i.' ;." n,^^^' t^^- - 
 
 'enfold greatcT tlntn , n ""i^ •"''^"^'- to rm,- and ch, ' . T"^ '^"""^- 
 
 ^hci-c IS to be sure nf> .. ,. "'""' '"^' ^*"^t'' itself' ' ^''- 
 
 our offer-it co I ^'' '^'^''i<^d in ^,.or T f^^^^ "^"''' '»ake it 
 
 ••-enabled before an^M ^'""•^'^'^^ "^"^ i to 1 t^^.^'';^ '' ^'^^' ^''ould accem 
 
 .1 '•"• >W-s „or<l .< ™4„„„ „ ° ^""«' ^■•'tes and j,, 
 
 "''"' "^y "ic letter of M 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 ^t9»*.^ 
 
f 
 
 4 
 
 tilut Mi(j, 
 
 [■" ofthviv 
 Hf retv ; 
 
 ^t CO(|J(f 
 
 [make to 
 
 '<^ cniis 
 ''cnder- 
 »icd or 
 
 '•.?e in 
 ncc, it 
 '"iiuin. 
 rong, 
 
 ^nt to 
 
 •'' en- 
 • an j 
 i ad. 
 
 and 
 iie 
 as 
 
 n 
 y 
 
 \y 
 
 Champap;ny, sot only iifftod us to irar, in ex/nra.H terms, hut hud deil.ii 
 C(i lor our rahiiu't, and |K-()[)k., that \vc were at irur arUudly wiili (iif.u 
 Biit:tiii. — It was It) tins maiiifrttation ol" the desire of France, thai Mr. 
 M^idison und()ui)tcdly referred. 
 
 But in order tliai no doul)l n\iii;ht hani^ over the intentions of tiK; },'ov- 
 ernment, to oHer an idlianre ofl'ensive and defensive to France, as u con- 
 dition of the repeal of her decrees, Mr. Madison adds in the same letter, 
 
 " Oil tlic otlicr hand, should she (Franco) stt the example of rc\ oration, (iriM 
 nritaiii vciilil be obliniil, eitJKT by fiiliowin.tf it, to restore to France the f';r.l 
 benel't of milt ral trade, whic'li slie needs, or by pcrse\ering' in her oljnoxioiis 
 orders, at'ler tlie prcie.\i tor them had cea!>ed,to vendfv i-nllininiu with ilw L',u:rJ 
 States iiitvilafjU'."' 
 
 Novv as Mr. Arnistronir was dii-crted to lU'ge this art^ument iii>on 
 I'rance, and as we had a partial non-importation act in force ai>;ainst Gica' 
 Britain, and a still more hostile measure in the interdiction of her puhlic 
 ships, it was a direct otter tr) France of eni^a^insi; in th(^ war upon l!>e 
 condition therein expressed. Unless, therefore, it is avowed, that the 
 offer was innincrrr, Mr. Jett'erson must have pledged the peace of the 
 country, and placed it at ih.e disjxisal of France. If other proofs vere 
 wantins^' of the positive nature of thi:-> otVci', tluy < an he found in the fol- 
 lowinijf extract of Mi. MadisoiTs letter to Mr. Pint kncy, of April ;)0, 1808, 
 in which he has unwarily druppetl his ntetaphoiu al expressions : 
 
 "Should tlie French j^oveninieiit revoke .vo nj(,r// of its dervees :"> \iohite o'lv 
 neutral rig'hls, or .tfive txplt.iuni'jiis ami ussiirmicru 1ki\ Inj^ the like eHecl, atul ei'.- 
 titlinj^ it therefore to the removal of the embarg'o, as it applies to I'rance, it will 
 ()e IMPOSSIBLE to view a pirs.. verance ofCircat Hritaiii in lier retaliatory order-- 
 in any other light than tliat of \v.\ii." 
 
 Here, then, is a /irccious proof of ini]>artialily. To Great Britain Mr. 
 Jefferson says, 
 
 " Repeal all your orders — repeal them in totiihin vcvhi-, (and as we sIltII shew 
 by and hv) with the sterik, iia\ insultinic offer of sim|)l_\ placiiit;' lier on the foot- 
 ing' in whitii slie stoixl at the moment they were Issued, oil the simple condition 
 of withdrawing' our embarg'o, which l'ori?u'd /lo jiart of tlii motives for issuin.^ 
 ;hcm." 
 
 Btit to the Great Emperor of France, our good friend and ally, who 
 !)urns, sinks, seizes, confiscates, and destroys at his good pleasure, the 
 property of hoth friends and foes, he mildly says, 
 
 " IJepeal or rescind so much only of jour decrees as relates to us, or n'ive as- 
 nrnntfn and explamuiuns to the like eifect, ami wc will tleclare 11 cr acj-uiti.-it 
 your enemy." 
 
 What I when the fifrfidiou.s- vioktion of the cisfiiiraJices of Dcci es, as to 
 the French orders, was at that moMkt visible in the seizure of oin- ships 
 and cargoes at Antwerp, and throu^out tlie continent of Europe ; when 
 u solcuui treaty made by this Empefor him.;! If. ws hotirly and liahituaiiy 
 
 ^\\ 
 
 Vi 
 
I 
 
 } 
 
 ll 
 
 20 
 
 cJ 
 
 , '^ 't credible, tlr.f .. , , ''"'•• ''"x^ is toui " 
 
 li 
 
 .,-!;*-?c. 
 
 *^.-^is c" 
 

 ii/idutioi, 
 ii.ulc . 
 
 ' ''ioilf. 
 
 ''<• cnr- 
 "' that 
 
 •21 
 
 We have also assij};necl a prcat vaiiity of n-usons to show tlvat Ciicui 
 fliitiiii) dfsi'i'vcd «/ Ar/sY iis much faxour iil oui' h»>r.(ls, her onlcis luiviiij^ 
 been .-ii (0)1(1 in puini ol time, colouialjle ut least hi puuit of reiali iiion, less 
 extensive and iinprineiplcd in their terms, not ehaij;ed like the others 
 with a perfKlioiis hreuc h of ticaty, not issued, like those of hercntiny, 
 a}i;ainsl a suhniissive and eoniphini;- friend, but oiJeratiuL;; against one who 
 had assiiued a hostile attitude, and v. ho was thi( iteninj^ actual v.'ar. 
 
 So iar, how e\er, were Mr. JeiVerson's offers from beinj; imp.irti.l to the 
 two helii^eictits, that to CJreat Uiitain. in lieu of the suhstaiwial otVer of 
 TMV ai!;;anst her enemy, in case, she should repeal hrr orders, .iwA her ene- 
 my should lefiise to rescind liis, he simply offered to reiJcal our etnbaryo, 
 and intimated, in tcrnn. i'j<, /oosr tt) produce any confidence, that he might 
 leave the emhai^c; to operate against 1 ranee. 
 
 That he did not otter toCircatBrituin, as he did to Trance, a imr with its 
 enemy, would be apparent to every reflecting man, from two vunrlusive 
 considerations, indepeudeiit of the evidence I shall presently cite from the 
 dispatches. ^ 
 
 /ur,tf/i/. It is impossible that CJ»eat Britain should not ha\e accepted the 
 fiflcr. — A war on our side against !•' ranee would not only have perfidly 
 fulfilled the whole object of the British orders, but by renderuig the block- 
 ade of the I'reiu h ports totally unnecessary, it would have relieved Ctreat 
 Hritain from vast eNjjense, and have liberated her forces for other ob- 
 lects. — Our aid too, though small compared to her own vast power, would 
 have been extremely convenient to her, and tin: monopoly which such a 
 war would produce of all our commerce would lutve been of vast advan- 
 tage to her power. Besides, as no maritime nation but tJic United States 
 was 7icut.raU the orders themselves would have been virtually repealed by 
 our embarking in the war, since shethd not re(|uire those orders to enable 
 her to capture, all the ships of her enemies, .md her allies could fia\ e no 
 trade with France. 
 
 ticcondly. The letter of Mr. Canning to Mr. Pinckney, of September 
 23d, 1808, proves that Great Britidn understood both Mr. Piiickney's 
 verbal and written offers, in this light; for he evidently answers these 
 oflers on the ground that they extended t^'jlrlu to the removal of our em- 
 bargo, which, if intended as a measure of iinpaitial hostility, he remarks 
 was w;7;7/.v^ as Trance was the aggressor, and (iieat Britain would not 
 consent to buy off our unjust hostility, by withdrawing a measure aimed 
 not at us, but at her enemy, Prance. 
 
 Thirdly. That our government understood their own of^er in this light, 
 is evident from the following unanswercibh; clause in the letter of Mr. 
 Madison, of July IS, 1808, to Mr. Pinckney :-- 
 
 " It will be difti'iih therefore to conceive any motive in Great Hntain to rejccf 
 the offer you will lune made, other than the iiope of iiuhiciii:;-, on tlie \y.\\\ of 
 France, a'pcrsevertinre in her irritt.tinq- policy tow arda the Luiltd Slatcy, iuid O" 
 the part ot'tlie laltcrj ho'stik raatiments iigiuiist it.'' 
 
 ;*i 
 
 \ 
 
 ^,:^ 
 
/ 
 
 
 «> ruse tl.,. I'.':; "• ;"'"/>' -/. I,„ ,''"" "'=" s/,c iKul n , ' ^^ ^V' ^""''i" 
 
 
 '^'»' "" the SUM '•'."-'^'^"'■K tin,; " "-^^*=^"'-ATiov tZ ;r ,. '"'^Jccl 
 
 ;incf 
 \- 
 
 so/- 
 ■sucJi 
 
 .3 ! 
 
 •^ ■^- -iK — 
 
 ■'"\_., 
 
 ^3"— ~- 
 
i 
 
 f 
 
 '■^ " fondi. 
 ""••rid, i„ 
 
 "'"■'"//i or 
 "isli to 
 
 'cav( 
 
 piool's d' our (liipli( it) , and n\ir desire lo avoid a I'l londly scttlomoiit, if 
 she distrusted the \ery viii^iu; and ridiculously loose ex[)rcssi(jiis of the 
 lorei^oiiij^ inslru( liuiis. 
 
 Nor is this all. — The dispatch of Mr. Madison, of April .loth, niust he 
 considered as huviniijheeM (pialihed and restrained hy the ii;enerai and posi 
 li\e ternisot that niinisit r's letter f)t the Ith olApril, in the same year, in 
 which he tells Mr. Pinkiuy, that ir(ireal-Hritain should w'nhout (■jndi/ion, 
 revoke her orders, still w hile the aHair of the ('//ca7///((/Xc remained lai- 
 rifiiuiril,, he was not lo "pledge our j^overmnent to consider the repeal 
 *' (d'the orders as a i^round on \\lii( h a removal hf thr rjis'iiii-- rcstricli'jns 
 " on the commerce ot ihc United Slates with (Ireat-Hiiudn wcndd he 
 " justly expt cted." 
 
 It" then this li tier, written only iwenty-four days hi lore, he considci-ed 
 as a pari of the instructions, and it was never counleiniandid, it nmst he 
 so considered, thai even ihe illusory and irilVmi;- oHir made toOreat- 
 llritain, was accompanied with a condition which it was known woidd 
 never be, and indeed could ntvrr be accepted. 
 
 The removal of om' restrictions, of which the l'".mbart;;o was one, was 
 to depend on (ireal IJrilain's makint^ a due eypiation to Mr. JelVerson for 
 the attack, the ;<;;aulh(jrised attack, f)n the C7i< sd/inikc. — This covild 
 never be done, and Mr. Jett'erson knew it, and therefore knew that his 
 ofl'er could never be accepted. — He( ause no terms which (Ireat Hritaiii 
 could otter, would e\er be accei)lal)lc lo the President of the United 
 ijtates, so lonp; as they would not be acceptable to I'rance. 
 
 Our government, by violating the law and thai (lecorinri hitherto prf- 
 scrved among nations, in taking its own revenge into its own hands, had 
 renderctl il impossible ihatClreal liriUiin coidd ever give us satisfaction, 
 iinlil those measures of self-satisfaction and revenge wen; repealed. 
 On the other hand, by absolutely refusing to repeal those measmx's, and 
 thus to receive the oflers of rejjaration, tendered by a solemn embassy, 
 it had rendered the settlement of the attair of the C/ifsu/icukc impossible, 
 until Great liritain should be actually conquered iiy (nir arms or restric- 
 tive energies, an event improbable so long as lionapavte is inadequate 
 to that object. 
 
 Mr. Jett'erson, knowing all these facts, was assuied that he might safe- 
 ly make any otter to Cireat Britain, so long as he coupled it with his in- 
 admissible pretensions, and bis diplomatic quibbles in the attair of tho 
 C/icna/tcakc. 
 
 The subject of the otters to Great Britain might be rested on this 
 simple, but, we think, unanswerable view. Still, however, as it is all- 
 important to shew the false and insidious policy of our cabinet — a policy 
 which is the sole cause of uU o\u' troubles, I shidl devote, ta it one 
 other number. 
 
 *\\ 
 
 \ 
 
 f: 
 
i-H 
 
 i i' 
 
 it 
 
f 
 
 25 
 
 m 
 
 ■■'t liri 
 
 t.ii'n 
 
 '"^' CO,,. 
 
 r"'-em- 
 
 "Id 
 fees 
 
 fier 
 
 »Cf/ 
 
 '« 
 
 ^ V/,, 
 
 ail] ; 
 
 honour. It uas then ini]n'acticable, impossible for her to accept our 
 offer ; and, ol necessity, afirontive on our pait to ask it, upon such con- 
 ditions. 
 
 Sfcovdhj. Thi: offer to Great Britain was ajfrontive^ as well as dc^stitute 
 of reciprocity. It was not only asking; her to humble herself before her 
 haiii;;hty rival ; and, in that view we acted as allies on the side of I'rance ; 
 it was not only dcmaiuUns; of her to concede somethins^ to us, but infinite-^ 
 ly more to her enemy — but it is not to be disij;uised, and I sec no reason 
 for keeping the scciet, the otter was intended to humble Great Britain 
 before u^. Tiiere is no man in the United States, however weak may be 
 his vinderstandinj:^-, who does not coniprehend the real policy of the em- 
 bargo, which tin- transparent veil thrown over it in debate and diplomatic 
 prorcedin:j,s does not hide, but only exat^gerates. The language of the 
 adiiiinistratiijn, their well known character, the prohii)ition of exportation 
 by land, tlie declaration of uisurrection against the inhabitants of Ver- 
 mont, the hostility avowed by all tiie friends of our government to Great 
 Britain, the constant apologies and indulgcncics to France ; all speak a 
 lariguage too intelligible to be mistaken — a language as well ii;?derstood 
 in thf cabinet of St. James, as in the conclave composed of Mr. Jehbrson, 
 Mr. Madison, and the rc])resentative of his Imperial Majesty ; — w lan- 
 guage which Ml-. Canning chooses \>, let us know he fully understands 
 iuid feels, though with the smooth politeness of diplomatic forms it is de- 
 corously disguised. I say, that the otter was aflVontive to Great Britain, 
 because there is not a man ui the United States who does not feel, that 
 liad she yirldrd to our claims, it would have l)een pronounced, and exull- 
 ingly eclujcd, even in the hall of Congress, as a viciorij over an ciicunj — . 
 a victory, which would liavc given as sincere pleasure at St. Cloud as al: 
 Waslungton. 
 
 Tldrdlij. Tlu' two last ideas naturally lead us to consider our otter as 
 mean, inconsistent and hypociltical. It was //»■«;/, because Mr. Madison, 
 in his letter of December 2od, 1807, directly contrary to what every man 
 knew to be the fact, directs Mr. Pinckncy to assure the British govern- 
 ment, that the enil)argo was a measure '' neither hostile in its character, 
 *' nor- justifying, uniting or leaduig to hostility with any nation whatever." 
 It was however at that moment reconnnended in a newspaper paragr.iph, 
 supposed to be written by the President himself or Mr. Madison, as a 
 Htroiiii;^ iijcrcivr measure. It was inconisifitent^ because the very otter 
 made to Great Britain in itself implied, that the embargo was a /'.'j.stilc 
 measiue, operating severely upon her, and to remove which she would 
 be induced to abandon her whole course of measures against her enemy, 
 to admit that she was coiupiered, and that too by the " j'cstrictlva enei'- 
 gies " of .\merica. How cnnj nihiister could pen such a proposal, alter 
 the first solenui declaration, I cannot conceive ; and it will be still more 
 astonishing if every honest and virtuous American does not 'ulush for the 
 protli^rate lueaitcss of such public agents. 
 
 i 
 
 / 
 
 // 
 
 < 
 
 . 'J 
 
i<. 
 
 2b 
 
 _P>in.sl,„,e„, oAhTj;'^,^!'™"!'' perish. ArH^^Tfo,"?.''"""'' ''We 
 
 J:.^ <^uj"se and 
 
 ,^ 
 
 -^- cabinet of 6V. y«;,,7 1, r"''"''^''^^^^^"'h^dI.ove r .7/'"^^^ 
 ^"-•e considerable at conSn'^ "^ "^ -P^-atiin^^'S-^i^^" J^^e condt a 
 
 ra .net. ^'> 'eiataon to ti.e Proi^^ ^^/^--^r ;^ 
 
 ^^ ^ '»;'y periiaps be asked . • '^'^ ^''^^ent 
 
 \ 
 

 V 
 
 Pt lo prove, 
 
 c upon the 
 ur upwards 
 , t^e head 
 'V'?softhe 
 
 3"id hide 
 ="''se and 
 the sect- 
 SJit, and 
 
 ^*»& and 
 "in four 
 
 enemy, 
 snt, be. 
 
 he told 
 o keep 
 treated 
 iciJsof 
 n used 
 ^justi- 
 rcsist- 
 e sub- 
 '■ation 
 ^ the 
 iduct 
 Here 
 nisJi 
 y an 
 ints, 
 ibJe 
 
 'eat 
 
 ide 
 
 ■so 
 
 nd 
 
 nt 
 
 3r 
 
 
 27 
 
 To Ihb H-^^^^^:;:! ' bi^ados, we were n. e^ .^ . 
 that not ^vuhstunamy^u ^^^^^ ^^^ f ^'^Vit uoth "^ ^^^^ ^"'^^■^>' '°" f, to 
 
 restiictlon., and '"^^^^^ ,t,etly iUusory ^''\^ ^^^^^^^ '^^^^^ apparently solcn n 
 
 HoNV then, u may be -U^; ^^.jji^ercnts ^---^^ c ^ .^^^^^^ enlis^^tened 
 and serious oflers to the t^^ i^^^iou ot that -t\''" • ^^.e Senate, upuu 
 
 ed to '^d^P^ '^'Vr'^n^ b -.s late esccllcnt specd^t ^^^^^^ j^, 
 
 nati-k)t,CobnelPKkcrvni^, » ^^^ ^^^^ cndiarp- ^^f,'^"\vavxvavd policy 
 
 time existed ;-not»°J^ i,, the face o^ ^^^^ ^^^ reasons on ^vhlch 
 not known, ^^^t as ^^^^^^^^^^^ „f ^he argument oio^ ^ fo,,^ed any part 
 
 V' i80r, to Mr- P"^^*'"Vv.,Hro were explained m tn ^ -^^ inered- 
 
 £uhe reason, to. 0;ce-^;>i°;,,,, 7^-;;; - ^ hToun *= -tive^ 
 
 convictions. N> c ^'^ 
 
1 
 
 28 
 
 i<hd u'c arc at lil 
 
 "'\'7^-'?fPe,-„m it. ''^""'^ "« ioager b. ;„ ij!*;, '"".'P^'-t of that 
 ^ he letter of M,. civ.,.. ^ '''"'^^' " "uld 
 
 . ^^ liat then was to hi ,i ''' "' '""• «"vei'„niem of this 
 
 her orders. To 1., ''""^ '-I^ither to resist r, 
 
 rirn^ j^^^ ^vc do not ?','^ '"^ J^''«'^^t^ ^'''Peror the f.i',e«t 
 
 '^"fl guides the aZ.-rr ""' ''^'"^ficen Pr ? i . "^"'^'>'-^ '-^'n^ain undc 
 2,»^.i overturns the cuef '"'"' "'^^ ^''■^^'PpoVus ?'• ''^'^ batches o^; 
 
 ^,^i."t the proofs of Se If ' •' ''"'f"^' i^'"of of niTf w ' '^ '"' ^'^^''^'^d 
 ministration, are on vnl 7''^^^'''^ t'ian and exer. ■ l.i "'•' ""'^ Pi'otcction 
 
 , ^^"-ucL^,! >^?';-Vs more justf wHl^ te'S^n^^i'""' ^""^^'"--t 
 be asked, how uc accoi m ""i!^""' ""^' P'^'^cy of M."' «• "' '"'''^""'Pense. 
 
 ' ■'"c ^'«wc wiuchin/Iuenccp. 
 
 IV 
 
 ht 
 ly 
 is 
 fl( 
 h; 
 
 Si 
 
 li 
 
 f 
 
 i 
 

 >l' 
 
 il'^tcd, as 
 f'' "as i-e- 
 h or (hat 
 fee HouJcl 
 
 l/'/y n-ifj, 
 'I stride; 
 
 iiun act- 
 
 " open 
 
 "'• cm. 
 ^t'ctetl 
 "ictori- 
 niei-ce 
 tended 
 i^y, or 
 • I^er- 
 cii-est 
 
 ' t/iat 
 ostii- 
 
 ludc- 
 
 OVQV 
 
 dug, 
 I'eitt 
 
 •'P 
 fed 
 >n, 
 ri- 
 ll t 
 
 y 
 > 
 
 29 
 
 Iloiiapnite to dccUire himself the friend of the freedom of the seas, when 
 he violates that freedom at every hreatii : — The same Avhich induces that 
 tyrant to propose peace, when he knows tiiat war is necessary to his ex- 
 istence, and that a real state of peace would be his destr^iction. — It is to 
 deceive and silence the clamours of f/ir /ica///f. Knowinpj that the em- 
 burL'o was a most dreadful scourge, and would be resisted, it was neces- 
 sary to M;et up a son of theatrical larcc, which would make the people be- 
 lieve, he was really desirous of relieviiit? them. But we liope that the 
 cataN/ro/i/ic will be subversive of his ambitious \iews and dcsis^ns. 
 
 No. 8, 
 
 The indecent parfialt'/j/ of r.VNGiAriE used toicards flu: Bdli>^crcnls ; and 
 some rcjlcctions on (he iiigji ?i:.Nsr. or honor so much boasted of by 
 our Administration, 
 
 A CANDID review of tlie styh^, temper, and lanrruage adopted 
 towards France and Great- Urituin, will readily convince every impar- 
 <ial and virtuous man, that we owe all o\ir evils to the prejudices of our 
 cal)iiu<t in favor of France, and their malignant antipathy to Emrlund ; 
 that if the negotiation with th(> latter had l)een as sincere as with the for- 
 mer ; if as strong a desire had been shewn to preserve peace with Great- 
 Briiain as with France, we slioiild have been at this moment enjoying 
 that uninterrupted prosperity, of which Mr. JiFFr.uso.v speaks in his 
 late address, and to which his etiorts have been at eviry period hostile. 
 
 A thorough analysis of the late di>;pa(ches will prove, that Mr. Jef- 
 FF.HSON and Mr Madisov, areas devoted to the policy of France, as 
 they were when they opposed Wamiington's proclamation of neutrali- 
 ty ; when they had the confidential ear of Cknet and Falchet ; when 
 they privately countenanced an opposition (o the measures of our rulers, 
 in one of the most eventful pt riods of our history. 
 
 We shall contrast, in t!ie present display, some few,, but striking in- 
 stances of the ditferouce in the tone and temper of our cabinet, towards 
 Great-lirifain ami France. 
 
 Wo shall begin with the remonstrances on their several blockading or- 
 ders. It must be again remembered, that in this warfare France set the 
 example. Grcat-liritain gave formal notice of her determination to re- 
 taliate, unless we should shew sonu'. signs of resistance. — France was 
 bound to us by treaty^ : Greut-liritaiii by none. — Towards the former, 
 then, our complaints ought to have been most loud, and most severe. 
 
 lloic isjhe'ivs^i ? 
 
 \i 
 
t 
 
 \ 
 
 i * 
 
 •io 
 
 ^''e French iI(3creos u- • 
 
 J807, /.ec/iooses to nr ^^finrsov <o Mr a 
 
 *oexecufe (heir Ir "'"'' ''''-^t <'.e Fr,„ l ^"wstuoxg of /If 
 
 O'^-positiOM (o LHvc thp/ .^'"''^^^''or hinisHf T^ * '^'*'' to hear nf 
 
 C".n.<„„ r:r;ei:„': „"" ■»°--'. «.;"=" t;""'"- -,, :;:;■;«" 
 
 It i.n, • "'"'"gaiid insidi 
 
 of the Freripf. ir 'P^"'sh order. : • . *^"^" d<'crces • anr? r . "^ 
 
 ^f «, more tharfrr^r.^'"".^ ^''^' '^mpor ^^7 '"" ^''-^ ^^ Gen 
 ^'>^^» our „,|„i,t^.^ ""^ ^^» month, after the ckto r ..""«"' ""til /Vd s' 
 '^ff"'^tion, thatdcc rco "' ""''^ "''"^'^^ing tha ' ^ ""^ '''.'^ ®^^^>^ decree ' 
 Postu/ationsas toirr ^'""'"^'■^^fio.f anh^'^^^^^^^ «« a n,unici;;i 
 
 *^''ed as a iieutril «».• \ "'^""•»' ''•^'its ?" r? '"' '"•^^arded as an mfr-.nT 
 
 «e ha, sent them «„dor 
 
t 
 
 31 
 
 7^ "OJicX- 
 
 \thc 
 th 
 
 } 'II ore 
 
 ^omon. 
 
 /. ^%, 
 
 ^Ae e.Y. 
 hear of 
 
 Vch t/e_ 
 
 ['"ring 
 
 oiir 
 
 '1 of 
 
 'once 
 
 the faifh of the law of nations, as solemn and saciod as that of (he poor, 
 and oppressed, and insulted country, whose territory is violated? 
 
 (n Leghorn and JIamhti/g, (it is known to Mr. Madison) the sei- 
 zures were not the acts of the immediate governments of those places, 
 but the direct military execution of French decrees in places in which, 
 by the laws of nations, they were forbidden to execute them. — In place, 
 therefore, of the snivelling, and almost treacherous language " of fiiend. 
 ly expostulations as to //ifo/' and v«(/</eH«c,s>v," we ought to have made 
 the Imperial palace ring with our remonstrances of violation of our own 
 rights, through the most unparalleled attacks on the territorial sove- 
 reignty of other independent states. Not content with this base deser- 
 tion of our honorable claims, Mr. Madison, in this letter of Februan/y 
 1808, appeals to the policy of France, and endeavours to show her that 
 it is against her interest to attack vur I'ights, because her enemy, being 
 stronger on the ocean, will beat her at this warfare. 
 
 If we had not seen an example of this humiliation in our minister to 
 Franu:^ in 1793, we should have questioned the evidence of our senses. 
 
 The last remark on the language of our cabinet as to these detestable 
 decrees, is this, thatafter giving both to Mr. Aumstiiong and Mr. Pinck- 
 NEY, an apology which Mr. Madison j'rames bcfurehand for France^ 
 and which he puts into the mouths of their ministers before they adopted 
 it themselves, that J''y«««; could and would justify her decrees on the 
 grounds of retaliation, which he pronounces she can justtjj do ; this 
 glorious and independent minister of state, is so afraid that his mild re- 
 monstrances, justifying in (he outset the French decrees as viunicipul re. 
 gidattuns, proceeding afterwards simply to shew their impolicy, and (i. 
 nally concluding with declaring their absolute justice as retaliatory mea- 
 sures, would be esteemed by France too harsh and severe, that he cau- 
 tions Mr. Armstrong in these words, " In every view it is evidently 
 " proper as far as respect to the national honor will allow, to avoid a 
 " style of procedure which might cooperate with the policy of the Bri- 
 *' tish government hy stivnilating the passions of the French." In oth- 
 er words, " wounded, insulted, and abused as we are by the perfidious 
 "• breach of treaty, as well as the shameless violation of National Law, 
 " be careful lest in (he manner of your stating our wrongs, you offend 
 " the haughty pride of our insolent oppressor." — Language is inadequate 
 io convey an idea of this baseness. We shall only remark here, that 
 there is no correspondent caution to avoid oft'ending Greut-Jirituin :., 
 Her resentment is to be sought rather than deprecated. 
 
 Let us now examine the language of our pretcndedly impartial cabinet 
 towards Grcnt-Britain, on (he subject of her orders — orders purporting 
 to be simply retaliatory — orders issued after due and honorable notice — 
 orders which did not subject the innocent and unoffending to penalties, 
 until he was duly informed of their cxistcnct-*-orders which were sup- 
 
w^ 
 
 '\ 
 
 k ' 
 

 'V;j,,/ 
 Iitit 
 
 H. 
 
 J. 
 at 
 
 » 
 
 r 
 
 y3 
 
 Erjmne, of March 25, ISOS, speaking of fhc relaxations of Ibe Hritish 
 oiders, iIiom> relaxations which attorikd lis some advanlagi-s not pcrn.it- 
 tctl by llu- Frcncli tlecree>, our minister, now raised to a ii:(tr pitch, ob- 
 serves, " I forbear, sir, to express all the emotions with which such a 
 '■ langiKigc ix calculated to inspire a nation, which cannot for a nionunt 
 " be llU(•(>^^^ir)us otifs rights, nor mistake for an alleviation of its wrongs, 
 *' regulations, to admit the validity of which would be to assume badgts 
 " of humilialion, never worn by an independent power." — 'I'his is truly 
 the language of wounded pride ; and of a cabinet possessing high ideas 
 of national honor. If the occasion required it, it was just — if it is the 
 same course which they have adopted towards all nations, and on oc 
 casions still moreaflrontive, it is impartial. We shall shew that it merits 
 neither one nor the other praise : — 
 
 The relaxatitjns of the British orders did not merit this philippic. — An 
 attempt has been made lo consider their relaxations as insulting. Let us 
 Lxaniinc it. 
 
 France order"; the blockade of all British ports — and the confiscation 
 of all neutral prupert\ , if coming from such ports, or the growth or 
 maniifa(ture of h.-r enemy. 
 
 \i Grcat-lh itahi was authorised to retaliate, which upon this part of 
 the argument we must take for granted, she had a right to retaliate co- 
 extensively with the decrees of her enemy : She had a right to prohibit 
 all trade with France, and her dependencies, and to confiscate all pro. 
 perty the produce of her colonies. Had she done this in the same v:ord< 
 which BonApaute had u-id, theonly question would have been, whether 
 the lex fa/ioius was applicable to the case. But w illing to lessen the hor- 
 rible evils of sucli a wai fare upon neutrals, she relaxed its rigour. She 
 authorised the whole colonial trade with her enemy, so far as was ne- 
 cessary to the supply of neutrals ; and she even permitted the trade with 
 the continental possessions of her enemy, upon the condition that the 
 goods \*ere carried to her ports, and there subjected to a duty. A per- 
 fect option still remained to the neutral, whether he tcuulil or kohIU mtt, 
 avail himself of this indulgence ; but it is difficult to conceive how this 
 qualified prohibition was cither more affroutive or more injurious than a 
 direct prohibition, like that of France. 
 
 That this was a mere popular trick, invented by our government to 
 excite a clamour against C/Vf/Z-BriVrt/w, is obvious from the following 
 facts contained in the dispatches : — 
 
 Mr. Madison, in his letter of March 25, 1808, to Mr. Fkskine, com- 
 plained of this duty as adding insult to injury, more especially as applied 
 to one of our own staples, cotton. 
 
 Mr. Canning, as socui as he was acquainted with this objection, ap- 
 plied repeatedly, and finally addressed a formal note to Mr. Pinkney, 
 assuring him that in makuigsuch a provision. Great. Britain, so far from 
 
 // 
 
 \ 
 
34 
 
 wishing so givooltn.ro <o(J,cUi,i(od «:<'.<... *i w , 
 
 P';;A'.- it ;« al.soln.o ,,roi.ibi»ion " ich h d'.-r ""^^ 'V^^'''^* *''*'^ ^'^-'^ 
 
 W'^^r as it s,.,...| „. ,h. .lonoos ^lio^'^^r" " '^" P'^^'-'bition a*. 
 
 i had iiuondal frj nodrp -iMmT, 
 noss and pa.-,iali,y of ..u';. :;\::rj,'f " '"■^^-ccs of .he moan, 
 anuletrnvd. from tho exfonf ^ M J**"'*'^'' '^''^*' f«o nations ;_but J 
 boon obIi«..d ,o ^iveroHCl 7h:r^;;''T'"'"^' «''-h Ih!.^ 
 ever, briolly notice one or h. o LI n't Vv ! '^ "'*'"!^'' ^ ^^all how. 
 g«ve some idea, fhonph a faint one nf,h . ^'""P'*^^^' "J^'ch will serve to 
 cabinet to the liews If /C.l ' ""^ '^'^"*'''^ P^'-^'^^'-'y "four present 
 
 Mr. Al.vnisoN's letter of «h.. c»,i r if 
 note of AlonsieurtHAMpl ?;!:',; ^;<'t '««f' "«<-^s the insolent 
 
 retain o„r property, arr..tedro;.nl\l\':;:f^^ of /.„„,, ,„, 
 
 tide whether we will takean actjv" Tre i' ,1 '"'"""' ""'*' ^ve de. 
 
 on this letter of Mr. JMadison, ''" ''"'■• '^ '^ ^o be observed 
 
 rirstlij. That he sends in W a 
 country, to shew what was the spIdM^.Thuli'' !''' "^'^^P^pers of this 
 
 or : On which it must occur to e'very 'fe^''?" "^^'^^'^ ^y ^^at let- 
 
 the same impressions of its audacity amS. "'' g^^^'-nmcnt had 
 
 If .s extraordinary that nei^he A / T - " ;?• ' Z '' ""^ '''^'"v^''^. 
 nor the democratic members ofCongns 2,h" '^" ""'"'^ '"^-^^^S^^ 
 
 pf ^.. a;Li^ Mr^ 3/lo:lt'^™ 1^;:^ t^r-'^ht incen^:the cabinet 
 
 in h.s manner he does not oilend^i'is Ma^stvTrr '" '^^^ '"''-^"^ ^''^^ 
 
 The last case which I shall s.Irr/. > • .-^ I'^niperor. 
 
 seniency of our Cabinet to that ot 7W iT'^/r" ^i"' "''' "'^^" ^"''- 
 ie!.r.,,u (o^u' burning of our .bins bvhr . / ^'^"''^on's letter in 
 the IVct.Ind/c. ^ ^^'P" ^^ *^^ ^' ••^■«ch frigates returning from 
 
 Ti 
 
 havel 
 
 \\ 
 
 i<- ml 
 co«i 
 
 a t| 
 
 all 
 (I 
 
 \, 
 
 

 35 
 
 attribute all the e>f» 
 
>•' 
 
 00 
 
 No. 9. 
 
 F.MaMINa riov f)f tlic famous Uwcr fP Mr. Mnilison to Mr.I'rskiiu', ot March 
 25ili, IHOH, on llio siihjec.l oi' tlic onU-rs olflieat lirit;iin ; wliirli lias bron pro- 
 Ijounci'il hy Ills friends to lie tlic most luininon^ ili^pla} dfour ii|;lits aiui iiijuiics. 
 
 Morro. — " TIi"" pi'ojios'.ilon of .NFr. Ahuli'inn, oi* liis pri'j.it tor ;■. na' ';.',i(ion 
 "act, (of wliicli Mr. .lufRrson \v.\'< i!iO avillui.-) s.ipnfd tlic llr' i.^'i ii\i; i-fst." 
 
 J-'iinr/it/\i in'cr'fy >•;,',/ ,'filrr, (i.\ ',1, !;''.M 
 
 fOMMEXT.VUY. 
 
 MR. FAUCTirT appcofs to li.ivc known most (h',rijni^hhj ilu- rli.u.ic- 
 tcr ol" our jacobin lenders: — Willi Mr. J(.Jtci;>oii and Mr. M.uii.soii lie 
 declares he was on the most intiiiiatf luoiiii;.^-; he speaks of them vith 
 the alVeciioii of real friendship. The authority of litis letter i;» noi dr nicd — 
 it was owned l)y I'aiichel, and confessed l)y U indol])ii himscif. U appears 
 then according to the explanation made of ii by his Irietuls, JetVer;-,on and 
 Madison, at the tii'u- Uiai the fainoit^. i)toi>ohaI of comineicial warl.irc 
 ■m<.de by Madison in 17 J I, was in principle the saimc as the oar now pro- 
 posed, and was intended xo mji the /hi L/i inicvc^x. — In oUkm- words, it. 
 v*\.>. iS Mr. Ames then declared, u measure hostile to Great liiitain, an«l 
 subservient to I'rance. 
 
 It is impossible to ccnsutc the conduct of our admi]\isiratioi\ toward*- 
 Grc-it Britain, without appearin;j, in .sow de^-ree to defctul tin latter wliile. 
 you critnitiate the former; — -uul of all the pernicious errors to which the 
 times in which we have unhapiHy fallen have given birth, the opinion 
 recently broached, tliat it is a breacli of patriotism to pro\ c our own !^r,v- 
 ermnent wront^ in its unjust claims apjainsl a foreis^n nation, is the myst 
 dan^;crous. If this absurd opinion, so fatiil to freedom and public peace, 
 bad been confin»>d to the tools of the men in power, its cff"c( ts would be 
 unimportaiu ; but some./('7(' A'.v.v itiformccl but honcut mm of opposite opin- 
 ions have doubted the proi)ricty of putting arguments (as they are pleased 
 to term it) in the mouths of our enemy. 
 
 If this doctrine were adhered to, the ruin of the nation ctv.ild nc\'er he 
 averted. The forms and checks of our constitution ; the rights of the 
 press and of private opinion, would be of no avail. 
 
 If a case could be supposed, of a faction arising in a free state, who at 
 the commencement of a war like that of 1793, should oppose the neutral- 
 it ij declaied by its government — should enter into a private league Avith 
 the public agents of one of the belligerents — should encourage illegal 
 acts of hostility aguiitst the other — should so'icit money from the public 
 ministers of one belligeaent to stir up a rebellion — should in fact excite 
 u civil war — should justify even the hostilitiss of their favourite nation, 
 pnd by dint of slander ixwi corruption, should succeed to the supreme 
 
 I 
 
 ^ 
 
37 
 
 I" ffio- 
 
 ji'iiits. 
 
 f '* 
 
 I lie 
 
 V iih 
 
 C(|— 
 
 Kurs 
 ' iiad 
 uc 
 pio- 
 
 S if: 
 
 power ; would it no; he a nio>l extraordinary exercise of r.inflo\ir to sup- * 
 |)')sc that surh ci set of men slioiild siulrlouly iibaiidoii all llicir pivjudicc^, 
 and behave in n nniinei' pcrlVciIy impartial towards botli the luUii^en tits.' 
 Yet this monstrous and absurd opinion we are called upon to adopt. 
 AVI'.at I li.iVf slated as hyj)othcsis we all know to l)e /// / >"7/. If men 
 c.nnot throw ofl' their pas^i )ns and deep rooted partialities like their 
 coats, then we are fully justiiied in doubtinij; the sinecrity of their mcas- 
 ues wl'.en they i)rel(i)d rcsentivicnt against their politic d sup;»orters and 
 allies, and imp-.riiality towards those wIkmu they have unifoiinly hati-cl. 
 
 This is the oidy free country in whicli such a monstrous doctrine would 
 b'^ listened to for a monu nt, ;tnd the very men who maiul tin i'. are loud 
 in their pr.ii<es of the patriotism of Roscoe, and Harinij;, and Brouij;ham, 
 and the Ediiihit'-g Rcvi'ivrr.s, who even in the midst of </ war boldly ar- 
 r;ii:^n the policy and justice of their ( wn t!;overnment, and defend tliat of 
 the ualion.i opposed to it. Where can be found a line wiiieh denies the 
 riiifht of these authors, or which attempts to silence them by calumny or 
 thicats ? 
 
 !My short rcasonint^ on this topic, independent of the i^eiieral rii^hts of 
 the press, is this : — 
 
 Tlie lirst priiu iple of a free gjovermnent is, that the hl'i.i.ks i-rc not 
 inldlible : — 'I'hey have passions, and they may err like other men ; — ihey 
 are also as corrii/iiibl< — lleucc the doctrines of fretjuent elections. 
 
 If your rulers nu::/ err, they mav eir in their conduct towards f'ircii^-ii 
 nations ; — they may be too su|)[)li.int to one, and too insolent or unjust 
 to another, as either interest, passion, or early prejudices may dictate. 
 To admit, therefore, that they are always riijjht, in tlieir (]uarrelsor con- 
 tests with foreii^n powers, is absurd, atid the most i uinous doctrine which 
 could be set up by the boldest advocate for unlimited despotism. I shall 
 undertake to discuss Mr. Madison's letter to Mr. Erskine, \vhich the 
 British ciljinet have not deemed %\o;t!iy of reply, and shall shew, I believe 
 to general satisfaction, (cxcludhii^ vioUini partizans,) tiu'.t it is in every 
 material part, unfounded ; and as tliis letter is the ^-reut support of all the 
 present measures — of the President's message— and oi Mr, Cumpbell's 
 famous report, its impodauce deserves and demands a serious investiga- 
 tion. I retard, thai, far from having discussed this su!)ject freely in the 
 lower house of Conj^ress, there appears to have been a reluctance to enter 
 itito a topic so oU'ensive to the majority ; and from this cause there has 
 appeared a disposition to make coi\cc ;sioi\s which hereafter may provi; 
 detrin\ental to the public interest. 1 have no sui h flars, and the ouly 
 regret I feel is, the conscious inalillity of rcnderin;,;; the subject as inter- 
 citing A'6 I cuu certainly make it clear and unansw.M'abie. 
 
 Mr. Madison's letter of March 25, 1803, to Mr. Erskiae, is confined 
 to the topic of the British orders. I'hese famous orders, thouL^di they 
 formed in eflVct no part of the considerations which induced the ruinous 
 policy under wiiieh we arc now suileriajj — i.houii;h tlv.;t jvi'icy was fully 
 
 Ml 
 
 
38 
 
 resolved 
 
 ^^^";:r":„:r,^jST ^'--" 
 
 proved, in consc 
 
 only the chi;.fnt^;;tKe7-- ar^uc as il^^d S"!]""'^' ^'^-^d- 
 «d i 1 tlie o»i.nnn r '^" ""^^'' "''"<•'> I)roves f ' . /, ^ V '^^^^'^ '"^^"'^ .V^e 
 
 ification of t'.o o o l. "''''"l'^' " '^^^-ne nc^"ess^'Jr "'^''''"""'^^'■^»- 
 A.-e the BriU^h S "^rV'^^'^ JU^tificutir "' ^'^'^ ^"'^"•^^^'"^ ad- 
 
 assent to tlK". ^' ^'^'^-^ '-^-e that such^r/c't wo^lTh' '^ "'''' ^'- 
 , Our situation, both with f • n • '^'""'^^ ^"» 
 
 ^guinst....,,^jr^'"-on,uestof,^.,,i,;L^ " ':^:' '^'^^^ 
 
 Bonaparte, cJated with 1^' '"^" "^'^"^ t'lc 2]st of^;^, 
 '^S^^n,inrufraItnXthu^^^^^^^ issue 1 hi. " ' ^^"^^'^ 
 
 It I.IIVro • 1 •. 
 
 and .v,'«. It is „;;";, •"^" •»« enemies, or in thrin"^ 'V ""^«"'* flecrce 
 amble deserves tl T^'T^ ^° '"^^^^ Hiis decree . m" '"' '^"^'^ ^Y '^"d 
 
 * ■'W'- Ma.lison shows 1,1, • ^ ^'Y I'le lute committee of 
 
 Src;;.;:/^^:'-"'^' to'^,K;^'-,;-^,stro„.,i^,„ .henhesavs that 
 
 o* nations is a«-ai„st U em 'rf ""' '^^^^' "'' «-W>pose tlu r 5 "^^' '^ ^''"'»^h do 
 ^"'1 It 1. even uddul hi H. 1'"^ '"'"'^^'^ '""1 >een c ,„ n ' t , ^' "''^^ ''''^ ''^^^ 
 
 . 
 
39 
 
 'f' li;ive 
 
 'j' t/)C 
 f 'u; ad- 
 
 |lOl| r/, 
 
 ■n 'he 
 klopt- 
 
 Congress ; — they have theielbre volunteered in fincUntj new excuses, 
 which did not occur to tiie prolific mind of 'i'allcyrund. 
 
 Urco/uUtj. 'J'liat Bonaparte declares, he will not desist from this system, 
 until Great Britain " gives up all maritime captures of private property — 
 " (until the lion will consent to draw his claws) — until the laws of war 
 •' u])on )he .vm, shall, like those upon the h/ucl., protect private property.'' 
 — The impudence of this language, from a man then loaded with the 
 spoils of n.illions of now houseless and innocent individuah — a man who 
 had just been carving up the patrimonies of twenty German noblenien, 
 to gi\e titles and estates lo his new -Hedged Princes, is beyond description . 
 ■ — It will, ho^\e^er, be important to remember this part of the preamble, 
 when we come to remark how this decree wa;; enforced in JKiitrd/iuKlfree 
 States. — The most important articles of the decree, were, that the 
 " British lalutidn were in a sta';e of blockade." — As they were Ulundxy it is 
 not easy to conceive how they could be blockaded but by -sea., nor how our 
 government could believe, that they were not intendi^d to operate against 
 the only neutral ships that then traversed that element. — This simple de- 
 claration subjected to condenmation all property found going in or coming 
 out of British ports ; and we shall soon see that such has been the con- 
 .struction applied to it by Bonajxirte aiul his tril)unals, and that no other 
 construction was ever given to it, either b) liini, or any legalized ofhccr 
 under his authority. 
 
 The other article of thi j de> rce, interesting in the present uuiuiry, is 
 the one which subjected to seizure and condeimiuiion all goods, iv/icrc- 
 soevcr fomid^ of English growth and manufacture. 
 
 That this decree is a violation of the Law of Nathans will not be denied, 
 and is admitted l)y Mr. Madison himself. 
 
 Nor is it t]uestioned, that the doctrine set up by Great Britain, as to the 
 right of rctuuaii'jii. i.i v.cll founded, provided the facts will liear them out 
 in the application of this law. — Mr. Madison, indeed, oblicjuely admits 
 this principle, in his letter to Mr. Erskine, of March 'JO, 1807. "The 
 " rcs/iecf, (he observes,) which the United States owe to their neutral. 
 "' rig/itfi, will a'ways be sufficient pledges, that no cul/uiblc act/uiescence 
 " on their part will render them accrKnary to the proceedings of one belli- 
 " gerent nation, through their ri;;hts of neulraliiy, against the commerce 
 " of its ad\ersary." This admits that an ac.juiescence by a neutral na- 
 tion, in th'; edicts of one party, which should be aimed at its adversary, 
 through neutral commerce, may be culpable., and render them acces- 
 f.arien. 
 
 The elaborate letter of Mr. Madison, which we are now about to ex- 
 amine, admits also the right of retutnitiun, though it couples it with a con- 
 dition or quaiiiicalion not to be found in the law of nations, " that the re- 
 *' taliation must be measured exactly by the injury :" — That the injured 
 p.4rty Uiust keep an exact accouui and return precisely as many and as 
 heavy blows, and no mwre, tliau he has received. This we deny to bo the 
 
•10 
 
 ) 
 
 ^l 
 
 law of iKiUii'c or ol' nations. If a neutral sufierb \(>]\\n.ivn\yhhvruf)'al 
 riii;ht!- to be \ iolatcd, to llu- injury of a beil't/en.nt, it is in ilic option of 
 that belligerent cither to consider him as a p-ny to the war, or to reV..li..te 
 upon his enemy tluou^h the «ri//r«/ to the i;tniosl of his power. — U, for 
 example, a neutral prince sufTers his territory to be violated by one party, 
 by niarching 10,000 men over it to attack his enemy, that enemy is not 
 bound to limit his retaliation to marchint,' prtcLsc-'y the same iiumbcr across 
 the .latiir territory. — Tliis dcjctrine woald be too abs.in d. 'I'liat I am war- 
 ranted in saving-, that (Jrcat H'.itain, if the ^/f/^ sh;.ll hereaiter bet'r her 
 out in it, would Iravc been jusiiPed in conr-idciirig the ucfjuicsccnce of our 
 government in the lirr/in tlecrccas a renunr i^-tion of all our luun-alrii^lits., 
 is proved from the following; sliorc citation fiorn tJ»c vork entitled, " h^nti- 
 " tutioit an droit MaraliDu ^'^ bv Monsieur lM<ucLer, Professor of Com- 
 TTiercial and Maritime Law in the Academv oi Leyislatiun at Paris : — 
 
 "Nations mny cease to be nciitr.i) in two particulars : — Secoiidti'. AViier, tlu-y 
 siifl'tr tlic-ir tint;- to be Acvrd h\ iiy.t- of" trie belLgtrents, w'.eii tliey lui\elli<' 
 jncans of niakinj;- it resjKctcd, or if oik iietifiiil ii'at'i-.r v. In. ii earn iiii^ to anotlivr 
 neutral country ai-tirlcs wiiicli it is iinlav.firi ir> cirrj' to a bciliu-cixnt, hiiilt'r.-> 
 tluin to be taken from lic-r by one pint}", v.itliout demaiidirLT reparation ihv ; lu- 
 aftront, slio tacitly reiioiinrrn neulnJiiu, b} t^^ing^ a paitsive part in favor of ti:'*- 
 nation who ii.is done tlie injury." 
 
 The decree of Berlin bcinj^ acknowledged a violaticn of public la'.\. "lul 
 the right of retaliation havhig- been proved, fc.nci uidet-d admitted, (. us , " 
 how Mr. Madison n-pels the right to apply it in this case, or ratii 1 1,1.^1 ■ 
 cates our -idministratioit from the charge of culpable neglect : — 
 
 Firatlit. lie contends, that the French decre*' vs.» v> explained by Monsieur 
 Decres, Minister oCtlie Miu-lnoj tiiat v.e had no T\£Ut to jyfesume that it wou'Id 
 be exerci.sed nt^ainst us. 
 
 Sevondlii- 'J'hat in fact it was never enj'r.rrf.il, isnt!! October 16<h, 1807, and 
 therefore tlierc was no etilp;>ble acpiiescence on the part, of tiie I ni^ed .States 
 
 'riiiiiUii. That tl'.o i)revi(,us violations cf tho 'av. of nations I dreat Britain 
 rendered her tlie ajj;'tiresHor, piaced France in the positiuii of a retaliating- natmn 
 and took aw ay the rij^lit ot retal- lion to which Great Britain mig-lit otherwise 
 have been entitled. 
 
 As to the first point, the explanation of Monsieur Decres, it did not 
 change the situation of the parties, nor diminish our obiigaiion to resist, 
 for the following reasons : 
 
 Firstly. Because that answer did not declare- thit tJ.e ..ecrees should 
 not derogate from our neutral and conventional rij^hts. The first article 
 was explicit, subjecting every vessel that went in or came out of British 
 ports to sei7Aire and conde nutation. Monsieur Decies does not say that 
 •jve are excepted, but simply "that that decree docs not change the pre- 
 sent French laws as to maritime capttu-ti." In this he was right. The 
 laws of nations and of France pretiousiy declared, tliat all trade with ports 
 blockaded, is forbidden under pain of forfeiture. Bonaparte onlv applied 
 that law to the British islands, which he could not blockade, bu .iatle no 
 change in the general principles of maritime cai itire. 
 
41 
 
 Js vrufral 
 oi'tion of 
 'VT:.Ji,,te 
 ^— n; for 
 ''(-• pcuty, 
 "y is not 
 f-'i' across 
 'till war- 
 be,.]- Jicr 
 ofonr 
 
 Iit.sti. 
 ^ Com- 
 
 "n tlic-y 
 
 Slu'Ifls 
 of til.? 
 
 Sfcondlu. Monsieur Decvcs, in a note on tlio same day, addressccl lo 
 Gen. Annstronij;. vvirncd him that lie was not the i-c^riular oru;un to whom 
 application should he ni.idc, and that " he had much Ass- fiosi/ivf iiifhrma- 
 tion than the Prince of Benevento, as to he nieanin}^ of the decrees." 
 Z,r.9s information is a conipar^.tive expression, and necessarily ni<;ins 
 somet'iini!: short of ttcrfrct. Mons. Hecres then declared, candidly, to 
 our minister, " Sir, I have no authori' v to decide : — My '.fiiiuon is .luc/i^ 
 but my infjrrnati'jn of the Emperor's iuten'.ions is imperfect." 
 
 Thi'-dlu. Our ijovcmment (c nd Mr. Madison, pi rlicularly) so under- 
 stood this explanation ; for they wrote to General Armstrong;, in May, 
 1807, that they were anxious to have the I'niiicyor'.< ',:r>i r.i/'Jinia'ijn; 
 a measure which would luive been uflVonlive and unprecedented, if Mon- 
 sieur Dccres had been authorised, or had been explicit ; — and they put in 
 thiit letter the hypothesis. " Should the I'rcnch t^ovcrumcnt not tivc tiie 
 " fv vor.bic expUn.itions," you will Jo fwhat it appears was never done 
 until Xove-nber, 1807.) r<'?Ho?z.si'ra/(» aguinst tlie decree. 
 
 F'iurthh. Bonaparte never avowed the corrcctiu ..s of the explan.'ion 
 of Decres ; but has since decidefl, that Ids decree was cAcr ./;»/ //^i^//;///- 
 f^uouH^ and was to be enforced accordini^ to its letter. 
 
 rif'hlq. An explanation of a d(;cree or order diivctlycontriUT to und in- 
 consistent with its most explicit terms, should huve l)eeri reciived wiili 
 great caution ; and a direct and explicit answer ought to have been in- 
 sisted upon, in such a case, without the unreasonable delay of eleven 
 ■nK)nths. 
 
 Hixthlu. The construction put upon the decree by French officers, 
 throutchout the world, as jjroved by Madison's own letter, of .May 2 2. is 
 a proof that the French eovernment never intended lo except us tron» its 
 provisions ; and it was incumbent on Mr. Armstiong to have seen that 
 directions ronforniable to the explanations wete transmitted to tiieir olli- 
 cers ui foreign countries. 
 
 Hnen'hi . The government wcri guilty of gross neglect in not procur- 
 ing these explanations to be confirmed. I find Armstrong's letter cover- 
 ing Decres's note, wus comnuinicated to ('ongress, February 19, 1807.— 
 jMudis^in avows in his letter of M.iy 22, 18()7, tiiat they were not contented 
 with Decree' cxpLiiuitions. — Why then wait ninety d lys before they in- 
 structed their minister ; and how hap[)ens it that \\e hear of no demand, 
 on his part, uritil tiie fall of the year, 1807 ? Great Brit..in waited for these 
 explanations, but she Wi.ite<' ' ^ vain. 
 
 If the note and explanations of Monsieur Dec: will not justify the 
 aubnussion of our govcriuiient to the Jieiiiii decree, much less will the 
 aec'jud pretence, that it was /irx' r riij'orci'd, 
 
 Fir-sHiu Beccusc from the moment it was issued it was enforced hi tho 
 EuroiJCaU and Western seas, as far as the state of the French marine 
 ■Would admit. That captures did take pK^ce in pursuance of its li'eral and 
 pxtendcd mcaniriy;, cannut bt; denied ; and we liold it incumbent f.n our 
 
 6 
 
 ^^. 
 
42 
 
 .j| -' 
 
 governmcTit, it" it would avail itself of defence on this point, to prove that 
 the vessels so taken were liberated by the hij^hest judicial aulhoriiy of 
 
 France Instead of which, the ground taken is, that no decisions, no 
 
 o\'ert acts of inferior officei's, or tribunals, are chargeable to the I'rench 
 n:.tion, until confirmed by the highest authority ; and in pursuance of this 
 idea, Mr. Madison, with more boldness than truth, asserts, that the first 
 case which occurred was tha. of the Horizon, an unfortunately stranded 
 ship, and which was not condemned by the highest tiibunals until Octo- 
 ber 1 6, 1 807. — This is mere sophistry, directly opposed to the conduct 
 of all nations, and of our own under meru adniim.sira/ion, especially the 
 PRI'LSENT. Did we not contend that we had a right to complain of the 
 courts of V. Admiralty in Martinique, in 1 79:1 ? Did we not found some 
 of our heaviest complaints against Great Britain upon the conduct of Gen- 
 era i Grey and Admiral Sir John Jervis, though unauthorised by their o^vn 
 government ? — And, in later times, have we not seen an act of exeni- 
 pl.iry self-redress, an act of serious and alarming import, the prohibition 
 of the entry of British public ships, not mcrctu laid as a precautionary 
 measure, on account of the act of an inferior ofllicer, but adhered to, most 
 pcrthiaciously adhered to, though it was perceived that it was an eternal 
 bar to ami Ve adjustment. 
 
 Yet, my ' citizens, this same inconsistent administration has 
 
 the audacity iv, are to the world, that France never in one umtancc 
 enforced her ii< In decree before the case of the Horizon, on the meta- 
 physical distinction, that that was the first instance in which her /lig/usC 
 authority sanctioned it. thougii Mr. Madison declares in a former letter, 
 that the I'rench IVest- Itidia crulzcrs, were "indulging their licentious 
 " cupidity, and were enforcing the Berlin decree in a manner that w ould 
 constitute just claims of redress." 
 
 Secondly. Mr. Madison asserts, positively, that the case of the Horizon 
 WIS the first that occured of the positive extensi'^n of the Berlin decree 
 to our trade ; and that as that took place only on the 16th of October, 1807, 
 it could not have been known in England on the 1 1th of November, the date 
 of their orders ; but it appears that the Emperor, on the 23d Sept. 1807, 
 in answer to certain queries addressed to him from Bordeaux, replied, 
 that -iS the decree of November 21, contamed no exceptions, there should 
 be none in the application. Monsier Cretet, minister of the interior, 
 uiuler the date of September 18, 1807, refers to the resolution of the 
 Emperor to enforce the decree of Jierlin according to its letter. It will 
 not be pretended, that when the mail reaches the Br; cabinet often in 
 four days, they had not notice of this resolution in two months after. 
 
 Thirdlij. But the last, and conclusive answer to this excuse for the 
 lethargy and submissive meanness of our administration, is, that the Ber- 
 li'. decree was executed first in Hamburg, and afterwards in Tuscany, 
 iwo 'ii'ufrul and indcfu-ndnit States, against American property. This is 
 •admitted in Mr. Madison's Icttw of February 8, 1808,iu which he at that 
 
 ^ 
 
„ 
 
 reru Into day tells ouf Tninister, at Paris, to inquire into the cases, and 
 make such a kin.l of i-eprcsciUation as the c.ises mi.i^ht require. The 
 enforceinciit of the Berlin decree was by French arms, not by the consent 
 of the local so\ercit^ns. Bouricnne, French minister at Hamburg, in one 
 case ordered the seizure, and Miollis, a French general at Leghorn, in 
 th(.' other. In the Uiltci' case it will be recollected that Tuscany was not 
 a conquered country, but by solemn treaties recognized as independent. 
 The forced and fraudulent treaty of Fontainbleau had not surrendered that 
 kingdom at the date of the decrees and seizures of which I speak ; and 
 it is well known that the government of Etruria, so far from lending its 
 aid to these perfidious .icts, remonstrated against their operation, but in 
 vain. Shall we l)e told that this i)ro])erty, after much vexation, was re- 
 stored, on condition of paying a tril)ute to the l*'reebooter ? — This alters 
 not the principle. — The decree was enforced in neutral territory, always 
 deemed more Siicred than neutral hips, and the tendency of it was to 
 check, nay, destroy all neutral commerce in the goods of the growth or 
 manufacture of Great Britain. 
 
 This enforcement then alone was a full justification of the British de- 
 cree ; and our government, in place of remonstance, against this enforce- 
 ment have opcidy justified i*^ by their dijilomatic apologies. 
 
 The last defence of Mi-. M alison, of the shameful supineness of the ad- 
 ministration, is predicated on the assertion, rather becoming a French 
 pensionary than a minister of a sovert ii;i\ State, that France was author- 
 ized to consider the previous interpolation upon national law, niade by 
 Great Britain, as justifiable causes of retaliation. 
 
 These are confined to the cases of blockade, and to the question of the 
 colonial trade. As to the former, if the commanders of small squadrons 
 have occasionally overleaped the strict rules of the law of nations, their 
 Admiralty Courts have been always prompt to give redress ; and I de- 
 fy the honourable Secretary to point a case on the subject of blockade, de- 
 cided by the highest Courts in England, where the doctrine extends be- 
 yond the principles of the armed neutrality on this point. 
 
 As to the question of the colonial trade, I had prepared myself to enter 
 largely into it ; and shall probably do it on some future occasion — but I 
 shall limit myself at present to the few following remarks :— 
 
 The conduct of Great Britain, on this point, is stated by Mr. Madison 
 as entirely modern. — We says that" it was never asserted till the wai of 
 1736 ; and that Great Britam is the only nation which ever acted upon it 
 Of i^ave it otherwise i sanctioq." 
 
 This rash and unfounded assertion has been most fully refuted in the 
 late argumentative speech of Col. Pickering ; and he has shewn that half 
 a century before it was advanced in British Courts, it was solenmly de- 
 creed by the French King. Whether our minister of State was igt\or, rit 
 of the ("rench ordinances, or pm'posely suppiesaed them, he has the Irce 
 option to decide— liut perhaps he will say, vUat iike llic decree of Jiaiiny 
 
 -.■< 
 
 .!■ ' 
 
 :y 
 
 fjp' 
 
f/ 
 
 !»-, ^.ujna*"**" 
 
 > 
 
 44 
 
 '^ 
 
 '/ 
 
 li 
 
 wlucli he so nbly clcFcnils, they were never enforced — tliey were "TO.r n 
 a /ii-ffcrea /li/iii'" — Hcio I an luippy to lie ubie to sui)]M)rt the artrun.ent 
 of the venerable and inllexil)le patriot, Colonel Pickerinp;, by shewhii^, 
 from aviiliority wlnrli wid not be disputed, that ihe French decrees of 
 1704 and 1744, cuttini>; off the colonial trade were actually enforced. 
 
 In the treatise entitled '■'■La Xovi-au CodcN dc P:i.vii" written imder 
 the orders and auspices of the I'rcnch p:overnnient< by one of their own 
 ofliccrs, in a note under the ordonnance of 1704, it is said, " This was 
 " cc,ii.<iu>itlij foltonvid durint!, the war of 1756, and until the war of 1778." 
 The decrees of 1704 and 1744 made all i!,oodsof the tjrowth or produce 
 of the enemy, found in any daee txciit li.vccn tie leiuiil cf.ii;try 
 unci the country which jModuced them, lawlul prize; and this writer de- 
 riuies they were uniformly enforced until the war of 1778 — Then indeed 
 the pcilicy was iijm/ihi//t/ chant>;ed. — The le>iii;ue, of which I'rance per- 
 su '.ded the LLmi)ress of Russia to be the head, attempted to force upon 
 Great liilt.in a n.'w maritime code intVin;;inL^ the old law of nations. — 
 The coalition ett'ectcd nolhinij; ; and not one of the then contracting; par- 
 lies has adhered lo the same i)rincipics. 
 
 Hussi.> iierself, the iiead of that famous coalition, has in subscfpicnt 
 conventions, .ibiuuloned all its piinciples, .nd particularly in a pretty re- 
 cent treaty with England has acceded, in fi'j.sitive terms, to the correct- 
 ness of the rule of l.ouis XIV. of 1704, so far as to embrace ixplidthj the 
 rule of 17j6. 
 
 Thus we see, that neither of the defences set up by our administration, 
 vi'l cover the deformity of their i)eha\iour towards the two belligerents : — 
 That they have accepted a futile and ridiculous explanation in the sincer- 
 ity of which they did not believe : — That they are mistaken in pretending 
 the Irench decree was not enforced, and equally so, in selling up lor 
 France, an excuse thai her decree was only retaliulory. 
 
 Kote 1. 
 
 Ufiop the violations of Keutral territory by France. 
 
 We li.ivc s:iid in the text, that the Rcrlin decree was instantly enforced in the 
 neutral and independent state of Hamburg-, and afterwards in that of Tuscany, 
 but as this i)oint is the most important we have urged, and entirely destroys the 
 feeble fabric raiseil by oiu" apologizing secretary, we shall insert the following 
 proofs in su])port of our assertion : — 
 
 Firstit/. " On the 24th day of November, 1806, three days only after the date 
 "of tlie Berlin decree, Bourienne, minister ot France at llamburg, notified the 
 " Senate of that free city, the only legitimate authority, ' that all Englisli nii r- 
 " chandi/.e in the harbour or territory, iw mnitcr to ivhom helongiiiq-, sliotild be 
 '• coniiscatcd.' Similar notices were issued to the free cities of Lubeck and 
 " ^^rcmen." 
 
 
 t 
 
 ,, 
 
 % 
 
45 
 
 lo.r rt 
 Miv.ent 
 
 I'ecs of 
 i. 
 
 juiuler 
 If own 
 lis was 
 778." 
 kIiicc 
 |i inry 
 
 >? t 
 
 .Thetsp farts were known in the Unit'.<l States to o»ir trovernmept in February. 
 
 .18')7. 
 
 lUil w t ro nol nir.icfil l>\ tlii'ni till l\'bri 
 
 Biiii^h rctali;it<ir\ ui-ilcis, and twche months alic 
 
 lH>)f!. ill 
 r ilic injiines. 
 
 nioniiis ;;fi'f tlie 
 
 Secundhj. Ca|)iain Milli.iril arrivt'd at New-London from Lisbon, in r-'chniary, 
 
 J8!J7, and static! tiiat the t-flcrt of the Hcilin (U-crcc was so ^reat in iliat r 
 
 ity 
 
 tliat man\ )ie'^/('f// slii])s hidcn in that /((//^ivi/ country for Enj^hnid liad Ijolii oMi^-- 
 rd to nnladc tluir cari^ots — Sucli were the ap])reheiisions of its cH'eets ninety 
 da\ s after ilsdate, and so sfiioim \V( i\- its exils lo diiat IJrilain. 
 
 TiiirtUu. His .Majestv Louis Kins;- of Holland in a sineeli lo his lepshitnrr of 
 the 5tli IJeei mher, 18ij6, uidy (ifteen d;.ys after the date of the ILmperor his 
 
 broth 
 
 er s <leerei', 
 
 spe 
 
 ik 
 
 of it. 
 
 " That the sii/K'n-fsiion of iM'rv neutral 
 
 \ftusr, and i)ai'ticnlarly the tfintrnd l)h)rkade (this was before the Riitish block- 
 
 ' ade of Kiiro|)ean jjorts) lia\e annihilated the last resources of ronunerre, but 
 
 that these temporary evils nuist be endured, as they are intended to produce 
 
 " eventual 
 
 g-c 
 
 'I'lius then while Madison and Jefferson are upoloR-izinjj for the rJerlin decree. 
 
 the Kintj of 111: 
 
 d, till- brother of the t\rant, and his tool, declares that it 
 
 IS uioi, (leeu'res 
 
 amounts to the total *^ siiJifircKxioii i/f evryii neutral fii.^, i\.ud thi: ctnii/ii/iitioii of 
 " cominerre." Since our jf'overnnient have extended this decree to us by the 
 emba-iTd we perceivi' that this descri[)tion is but loo we'l founded. 
 
 Fonrthlij. Honajjarte, under the Herlin decree, on the I'Jth Au.fnst mnrched 
 30(J0 men, undt-r ficm-ral M'.oUis into Li-.chorn, seized all the . hiirriciiii <iiul nl!ii;r 
 «(';(/»•(// property w liicli had bei'n of nritisii urowili. 'Hk- journal of tlie litUe 
 cit\ of Auicsiiiir.i^', iti (Wi-many, oaued to eharacteri/.e thi-. sei.'.iire us an uv. of 
 violence " coniniitted in ilie i n-dei'en uen' r stale of Tuscany," thus confirmint^ 
 our remarks in the text. 
 
 Mr. L>rael Williams of Salem, who left Leiihorn October 1st, ICu", confirms 
 our declaration, that the Q een of K.truria was opjjosed to ihis seiztire, and of 
 course that it was a forciliie breach of the neutr.ility of .".n iii<U|.endent so^c- 
 rei.arn. 
 
 'I'hese sei/.ures were known and noticed in the Englisli journals sixty days 
 before the date of their ri'taliating- orders. 
 
 Fiftlih/. The tyrant of Kuro|ie inforced his decrees in the Pajuil tfvritorii, 
 atiotlier neutral sovereig'n, on the lyUi Si ptiinber. This fact v. as also known 
 and stated in the Hritish jjapers jn-ior to their orders of Xovember 11th. — Hut 
 
 Si.rt/ili/. The most iin])ortant fact shew int.;' the conlidenee which the Hritish 
 g'overntnent re|)osed, but erroneously rr/josi'il in tin' /innoitr of our cal)inci, is 
 tierived from a sjnech of the Advocate (.eniral in I'arlianient. on the 4lli Feb- 
 ruar\ , 1807, more than nine montlis ])rior to their ordi'rs. He says, "That on 
 '• the 19th ,lanuar\, 1798, a tU cree \\ as passed by I' ranee makini;- all vessels 
 " freig-hted in whole or in part v. ith I'ritisli eoinmodities lawful prize. To shew, 
 says he " what vv-as the inili;j^nation of neutral nations at this decree, the Presi- 
 "dent of the L'nited States, thu Hon. John .hliiin::, stated to Cong-ress, 'that as 
 " that Frencli decree had not been re|)ealed, notwithstandin:'; our attempts to 
 "pet it repealed, he considered it as an uinqiiivncal act nfwtir, and to be rcaistrd 
 " as such,' " and the Loril .Vdvocate adiled, " there could be no doubt but .Vmeri- 
 " ca coidd .ict with ecjual spirit on the pi'esent occasion." — Mas I I he little under- 
 f^tood the cliuractcr of our present rulers, or our miserubk deterioration. 
 
45 
 
 Xofe 2. 
 
 French Regard for JVeutralai ! .' 
 
 In order to jiistify the oiitrap^cniis conduct of France in issninpthe Berlin de- 
 cree, Mr. M.idis.iin, ;iiul mluM- piil)l'u- men, liave pretended thai (ireat Britain was 
 the Hjir.ifresb(ir, and ha\e < vc n i;:()nc back to the war of 1756, to prove it. Al- 
 thuii','-h we protest against litis extraordinary course of going beyond treaties of 
 peace and commerce, to tinil apolof^ies for recent vexations, yet we believe that 
 Great Britain would ijain by the comparison, and tliat France would appear to 
 have been always the tirst to violate netitral rights. To prove this, wc make the 
 following' abstract from the 
 
 Code des Prizes fiar I.e/ieiiu rhnnrS des details dii Bureau des Tjoin du JMinintre de 
 la Marine et des Colonies. Printed at he Public Aational Prest. 
 154.3. Art. 42. F.dict (hclaring eivmies' goods in the .ship.s of a frit-nd, or even 
 ally, lawful pri/.e, and the goods of a friend in the ships of er^mies equally so, 
 and confiscating the shij) in the former case. 
 
 15S4. Article 65, reciting the imjiossibility of discerning a friend from an enemy 
 by si.j;lit only, authorizes the pursuit, capture, and search of neutrals or allies, 
 andiiic««e of resistance by such neutral, ordt;rs for that catise, condi^mnation. 
 
 Article 69, confirms the article of tlie ordonnancesof 1543, as to condemnation 
 of enemies' goods in neutral bottoms, and neutral goods in enemies' vessels, and 
 declares that neutral persons on board enemies' ships shall be lawful prisoners, 
 as well as enemy persons generally in neutral vessels. 
 
 1073. Dec. 19. Ordonn.iiu-e confirms the principle that enemies' goods shall be 
 good prize in neutral vessels, except where treaties with neutrals forbid. 
 
 AiigtiSL 5, 1676. Decree declaring that as his Majesty had issued a proclama- 
 tion, ordering :dl Frenchmen in the service of ani/ foreiq-n state to return under 
 pain of death — rtrders the punishment to be commuted for the gallies. — August, 
 1681, dec!cc, Art 7th, confirms the law that enemies' goods in friendly ships 
 shall be good prize, and also confiscates the ship— and friends' powls in an en- 
 emy ship, equally fo. — confirmed by decree of Council 25th Oct. 1692, in a par- 
 ticular case ; the satne principles are confirmed by Art. 5th, of the Ordonnance 
 of 23d July, 17u4, and further confirmed by Art. 5tli of the Ordonnance of Oc- 
 tnl)er 21st, 1744, except so fa* as relates to the neutral ship itself, inis last 
 Oidoimance contlnueil to be enforced till 1778. So late also as the 29th June, 
 177y, the coinicil of jjrizes condemned the property of certain «e«/m/ merchants 
 of Tuscany, under the above Ordonnance, for having been found on board an 
 English ship, the fJrand l)i/rhess of Tuscany. 
 
 By a decree of Deciinber 6tli, 1779, of the council of prizes, present the King, 
 a D.'<.nish ship, the ,'hwu, was condemned, together with all her cargo, because 
 gome part of that ergo belonged to British subjects. 
 
 Aniele 1 2'h, of the Ordonnance of 1681, authorizes force against anv vessel 
 which refusei search, and condemns for resistance only. 
 
 Decree, 1692, Oct. 26, of the King in Council, declaring that the vessel and 
 cargo St. John, being a neutral ship, should be condemned, because a »/na//part 
 t)f her cargo belonged to an enemy. 
 
 Feb. 17, 1694 — Oi-ders the condemnation of all ?;p(//rn/ vessels, if originally of 
 enemy's fabric, or once owned by an enemy, unless the bill of sale and powere of 
 attornev are found or, board, 
 
 U 
 
47 
 
 ? 
 
 ^- 
 
 Ordonnance of 25th July, 1704, recites in the preamble his Arajostv's flisposi- 
 tiou rather to tnlurpe than abridj^c the riplitsof nculrals, (IccImis (as Hoii.ipai-tc 
 docs in all his pnnnibles) that his Majcsts i« in favour of /jec conpniirco, and 
 especially '* to •)rfser\e the sume extent and t lie same lihirty of commerce to 
 ♦• neiitruh, which they had been accnstonicd to enjoti (hiring tiie peace." He pois 
 on m the usual French cant to charg'e his <-neniies tlie Enpj^lish ami Dutch, \y\\h 
 causing" still j!;Teater restraints »!])(m the comiTicrce of iieutnds, an«l says tl>at 
 " he could with /M.v/»ce' liave followed their example," thus setting up in the 
 broadest terms the law of retaliation throui;h iwvtriiln. 
 
 Tiie five first articles of this Ordonnance contain the limitation of ihc Neutral 
 trade as follows ; 
 
 1st. Neutrals may carrj- their ow/» ?iaf/ve /»ro(/«cf, except contraband, even to 
 an enemy. 
 
 2d. Neutrals may carry even from any enemy's country lUrect to thfir o-iii, any 
 goods of which they shall be the owners. 
 
 31. Neutrals are forbid«kn to carry from one neutral country, pootls of the fa- 
 brick or prowtli of an enemy of his majesty, t-veii tu another ucutrul country, on 
 pain of confiscation of the pjotls. 
 
 4th. Neutrals arc forbidden to transport any _c^oods of tiie j^rowth or fabrick 
 of an enemy, fiom the port of any neutral to any enemy's port, on pain of Ibr- 
 fcitinjj the ivhnle carg'o, f)f which ami part is of enemy's g'ronth. 
 
 5th. All neutral vessels having on board g-oods, tlie property of an enemy, 
 shall, together with their cargoes, be lavKful prize. 
 
 By another Ordonnance of October 21, 1744, all the fiiregoing articles were 
 confirnted, except the last, which sidjjected the ship of a n',iilr:«l as well as the 
 cargo to forfeiture, which was relaxed so far only as respects the ship. 
 
 Monsieur Le Beau, in this na'ional work, printed in 1800, says, that "tbe#« 
 decrees were constantly pursued during t/te -.uar rtf 1756, but that in tlie war of 
 1778, there were some changes." See Le nouvcau codes des prises, page 284, in 
 a note of the Editor. 
 
 The cause of the changes made in ^778, is well known to those wlio have at- 
 tended to the intrigues and objects of tl." armed neutrality. 
 
 There are three other extraordinary articles in the Orflonnance of 1744, re- 
 pugnant to the law of nations, and all of which Monsie ur Le Beau observes, were 
 re-enacted in the Ordonnance of 1778, and were acted upon. 
 
 1st. Condemns neutral vessels ai\d cargoes solely for the cause of havin,^ 
 thrown overboard any papers, tliough enough remain on board to prove the neu- 
 trality of the property. 
 
 2d. Condemns netitral vessels if they shall have contravened the passports of 
 their own sovereign. 
 
 3d. Condemns all itcutral vessels which shall have undertaken any7i*'TO vovage 
 other than the one stated in her clearance ; and declares that no passj)orts shall 
 ke valid imless the ship was at the moment of issuing in her own country. 
 
 11th Article of the same Ordonnance, declares null all pass[)orts granted to 
 »wners or musters of neutral vessels, if such owner's or masu rs were subjects of 
 an enemy, imless such persons had been tuituralized before the war. 
 
 Tlie public will perceive in tlie foregoing article, the inju.slice of tiie clamours 
 which have been urged against Great Britain, on the subjecL of her refusing to 
 respect our Naturali/.ation law, as to her own subjects. These Euii-lishmen, so 
 naturalized, are by the pr-seni law* of Frunce, liable to be seized -.i^ prisoners of 
 ■war, and the ships they own or Gummaiie', are pvize, and yjt au Finghsh sove- 
 reign cannot touch them 
 
k ^„ 
 
 48 
 
 h 
 
 / 
 
 In tlic Orclonnancc apainst marine di-scrtcrs, passed hy the Frenrh Kinp in Oct. 
 oliLT, 17H4, it is (l( fl.iiid, lliat a// rrriich clii.isrtl i^nimen, wlictlu r ilrsrvfi'in or 
 not, who fvfii in liim- of /)fr/rc shall he found on hnard forficru ships without 
 leave, shall he im|)risoned (ifleen days, ^c^ — and if arrested m tinu; of tvur on 
 board FoitKic.v ships .shall he sent to the (.Cidlevs. 
 
 Thai sueh is the inie construction of this article, will be evident to every per- 
 son accpiaitited with the French lang'tiap^-e and marine laws, and that " seront 
 wrf/^.? cur des na\ ires etranj,''ers, ou passant en pays <-tranfT'er," are very different 
 terms from " f/rins\w des \ aisseati\ enneinls," and tliat the former means simply, 
 arrestatlim in neutrnl wrrcluiat ii/ii/).i. — If any independent Neutral nation had 
 spoken wholly the I'rencii langMia[je, wc should have seen this decree rig'idlv and 
 fie()'ienll eni'irei d. 
 
 lien- then is cU dared what wc have lontj soiig'ht to establish as the French law, 
 the ri_u;ht to seize in lime of war, their own seaman not deserters, not in enemy^s 
 ships but an\' fovciirn fi/iifis-. 
 
 Ordonnance, May 9lli, 1793, orders all vessels helon'^inti;' to neutrals, which 
 shall bi' ladin in whole or in /'^/r^ uith provisions boiuul to an enemy, or with 
 enemies' |)ro))erty, to be detained and Ijrouj^ht in ; tlie merchandize of enemies 
 forfeited, and the other paid for at fair \alne. 
 
 It will ])e rememliered that this was the very first order of either bellipi'erent 
 ai^-uinst neutral trade in the late war, beini;- dated thirty da\ s before the ijritish 
 provision order of .liine 8th, 1793 — it was also a violation of the treaty of 1778. 
 On the 2.Sili May. 1793, they declared that th'' ^ nited States were not compriz- 
 ed in that order, but ordered that our property which had been seized should 
 remain .ser/iii'.iWrri/. On the 1st of ,lidy, thev rejK'aled it wholly as to the United 
 Stales — Hut on the 27th of the same month, they repeal the repealinif act, and 
 declure that the confiseatin);' decree shall be executed accordini^- to its letter. 
 
 The resendilance tin re is between this conduct, and tiiat in rejjard to the. 
 Berlin decree, is very remarkable, 
 
 No. 10. 
 
 Recapitulations of the Points established; — and IJefi.ections upon them 
 
 THE cxamiin.tion in detail of the diplomatic intercourse of our ad- 
 Tniiustriition, rccjuircs no ordiniiry share of patience and attention ; and 
 it vvonid be in vi.in that we should expect of our readers hi general, the 
 sacrifices of their ease necessary to such an investigation. But if the 
 situation of our country is really as perilous as the language of the Presi- 
 dent, of the members of Congress, and the complaints and anxiety of the 
 people would prove, surely it is not too much to expect of the patriotism 
 of our fellow-citizens, that they will examine and weigh with < andour and 
 seriousness, the results' of the labotu's of those, who from ^aiy motives 
 have been induced to look more profoundly and more patiently into the 
 causes of oiu" disasters. 
 
 1 shall therefore undertake to state briefly the inferences which are 
 necessarily drawn from the examination of the very ex raordinary diplo- 
 
 ^1 
 
 • rl 
 
h 
 
 r/ 
 
 '^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 49 
 
 matic conduct of our administration, and I invite thosr who may doubt 
 the correctness of these ir.t'ertuces, to cxun.inc tlic prrt (•(lii.'^ numhcis 
 of the " Ar., lysis," upon which ihese inrcitiices are lo'iiuicl. 
 
 It has appcurcd in the course of our invcstiKwlion, that our adiDii.istra- 
 tion,so fur from nuiinUiining an impartial and di^nified (oiirse of conduct 
 towards the belli^;erent nations, has sought for apoloij,ies lor thi ati ui ious 
 violations of our ri^:hts on tie part of I' ranee, and has been disposed not 
 only to put the most unfavourai)le ctmstructions upon the conduct ol the 
 Briiish cabinet, but to compel that nauon to an open declaration of war, 
 or hi failure of that plan, to louse the passions of the American people in 
 such a manner as to idlIvc them desiie, and demand a declaration ol war 
 on our part a>i;ainst Great Britain. 
 
 This partiality, and this project, have been evident from the following 
 facts established by this analysis : — 
 
 Firstly. That early in 1807, thfe j^overnrnent of the United States chose 
 to put a favourable interpretation on the French Berlin decree — an inter- 
 pretation directly ojm osed to its poMlive and explicit terms ; — that it ac- 
 cepted, as an explanation of that decree, an informal, unauthoriiicd, and 
 inexplicit declaration of a subordinate officer, in which it appears by 
 iubstqutnt papers, the government in truth placed no serious reliance, 
 but considered that a positive confirmation on the part of the Emperor 
 was absolutely necessaiy. 
 
 Secondly. That such a favourable explanation of the Berlin decree has 
 never been obtained, but on the contrary, the only opinions expressed hy 
 proper authority in France have been hi favour of its literal execution. 
 
 Tldrdlij. That although no evidence existed as proved by the forego- 
 ing positions, that France had determined to relax the rigour of her de- 
 eree as to us, but by the confession of our own government ii was from 
 its date enforced in the West Indies, in all the tributary states, and more 
 particularly in neutral and sovereign countries, by Freitch arms ; yet no 
 formal remonstrance was ever made by our submissive rulers, until Gen- 
 •ral Armstrong's letter of November 12lh 1807, one day after the date 
 •f the British orders, retaliaung those ot Berlin. 
 
 Fourthly. The government of the United States, so far from remonstrate 
 ing against the French decree, have a/iologized for it on two grounds :— 
 
 Firntly. That it was merehj municipal, and therefore la-MfuL This we h&"e dis- 
 proved by shewing' that it was enforced in ventral and imlependent couiitilf s, 
 where, though the French arins were predominant, yei the local sovereignty was 
 •till aclciwtuledged, and therttbre l^'rance was precluded fromconsidcring them aS 
 oonquercd countries : \\ c allude to Hamburg und Tuscany. 
 
 Secondly. -Mr. Aiadison has apologized for the French decrees on the ground 
 •f their being retaliatory on Bi itish former usurpations. To this objection, or 
 apoloiij'y, it has been replied : 1.^/. That Britain has set up no doctrines not 
 recognized either by the law of nations or tlie example of France, in which latter 
 •ase. it was contended that France could find no fault. 2dly. That had such 
 •uses of British usurpation existed, (which is denied,) they must have been such 
 as existed prior to our treaty with France, aiid that treaty merged or destroyed 
 ftU pre-existing causes of complaint. It is not competent now for France to urge 
 as a ground of her venffeunce against us, anv principles or facta which existed 
 prior t» that treaty, in which we gave up to her twenty ntiUions of just chiinte. 
 
 l^> 
 
 ■•.;•« 
 
50 
 
 .V 
 
 Th^ fifth f^ehCrftl inference from these dispatches is that the lanf^tuip;e, 
 the tone and temper, luloj-.tid towards (ircat liritiiin and l-"raiitc, demon- 
 8tr te the most humble siiljinission to the latter and a fixed determination 
 to uflVont and c|uurrei villi the foiMner. Wc refer our readers to No. 8 
 of tl.is analysis for the pioofs of his assertion. 
 
 SUthly. While there is a pretended inip.irti .lity in the offers to Great 
 Bt itLJn and 1 rancc, it appears tlu.t to the latter the positive ofler was that 
 of an alliance in the war aK a condition of the repeal of her decrees ; i)utto 
 Great liritain, the ii.sidlinj!; and b«rren ofler of a repeal of the Kmbarj^o 
 Was the only proffered inducement ;-un ofler which we proved to be des- 
 titute of reciprocity, artVontive, mean, inconsistent and hypocritical. 
 
 Sivcnf/ily. We have shewn tiiat neither of the oflcrs was in fact sin- 
 cere, tlioiigh that to France was made with the perfect approbation of the 
 Emperor. 
 
 The offer of war to IVance was absiu'd, because it was on the condition 
 of the non-repe:d of the British ordrri, when it was perfectly certahi that 
 Great Britain woidd repeal those orders as soon as the decrees of I'rance 
 shoidd be removerl. 
 
 i'i.e offer to Great Biitain was equally insincere, because it was moral- 
 ly ( citain that she could never repeal her orders until the French decrees 
 were rcinoved. 
 
 Because her orders were avowedly j^roimded on the French decrees, 
 and it would blast her reputation for sincerity should she withdraw them 
 without tlie repeal of the avowed causes. ^v 
 
 IJecause it would huinl)le her before her enemy. 
 
 Because it would degrade her before us, and would he an admission 
 that we could at any moment starve her into any concession of her just 
 rights. 
 
 Because, in fine, our offer was coupled with conditions affrontive to her 
 cabinet, and while wc continued our interdiction of her public ships, whi'" 
 was ct itself a barrier to all negotiation. 
 
 Such are the proofs (^f insincerity evinced by the dispatches which we 
 have exan\incd. Wc have offered a solution of the causes of these ex- 
 traordinaiy proposals. 
 
 To France, who not only understood our game, but who had directed it, 
 no apology was necessary. 
 
 To Great-britt.in, mean and false apologies were offered ; our govern- 
 ment even condescended to declare that our measures were purely muni- 
 ciiil ;*nd in no degree hostile, though Giles, and Campbell, and Gallatin, 
 and all our piiv.ite democratic champions avow that they were intended 
 to corrce Gie .t-Britain. But our Machiai els did not deceive the -British 
 Cabinet, and if the honest and indignant language of Mr. Canning, though 
 couched in the decorum of diplomatic forms, did not reach the consciences 
 of our rulers and excite a blush of shame, we can only regret the degener- 
 acy of the age and of our country in having such rulers. 
 
 The only iriotive in making these insidious ofters, insincere towards 
 both, in concert with one) and understood perfectly by the other, was to 
 
 /' 
 
 
51 
 
 luapjc, 
 Inion* 
 Jiution 
 |No. 8 
 
 CJrcat 
 
 that 
 
 l)utto 
 
 (leb« 
 
 t sin- 
 if the 
 
 
 ^,.^ 
 
 ^K 
 
 ilifle the clamours, and impose upon the blind crcduli'y of the Americtui 
 people. 
 
 Never did there exist a people on whom the most barefaced and shame- 
 less hypocriMy couid be so successfully pr«cli>.ecl ; — if I may judt^c fix)m 
 the app .rent success of this project. From one end of tl>e continent to 
 the other, these dispatches, wiih the exception of the Evenin:^-Post at N. 
 York, and a few independent papers in other places, appear to be received 
 •very where with indirt(;rence, with forbearance — or even acrjuiesceiice. 
 The general silence seems to be an implied admission th..t tl c govern- 
 ment have suddenly dcpcirted fi«jni their crooked policy and Ikvc adopted 
 something like a fair course towards the twobellif^erents. This proceeds 
 solely fmm that indolence wliich will not examine, or that spirit of sub- 
 mission which shrinks i.t the bold effort of stemming popular prejudices. 
 
 I have undertaken, thoiigh conscious of my inferiority to resist this cur- 
 vent, to call men Ijack to reason and ihcmselvcs. 
 
 I^lhc administration h id until this moment beCn pure and unspotted ;— 
 if it had evinced the most honest imparli.ilily, I think the present dispatches 
 would prove that they have submitted themselves to the domination of 
 France, and are fatally bent upon producing an open collision with Great 
 Britain. 
 
 It is impossii)Ie for a man, however charitable, to peruse these dispatch- 
 es and connect tiiem with the most extraordinaiy measures of our cabi- 
 net hitherto adopted and now proposed, without coming to this result, 
 that an alliance either express or implied exists between the cabinet of 
 Washington and that of St. Cloud. 
 
 The present rufers of the United States have at all periods of their pub- 
 lic life, united their fortvmes with those o*" France. The politics and in- 
 terest of their own country seem to have been always subservient iii their 
 minds to those of their foreign friends. I will not m^ike the charge of 
 corruption ; — it matters not to the private ciiizen whether the ruinous and 
 destructive conduct of public men proceeds iVom --'eeprooted partialities, 
 and antipathies, from corruption, or the hopes of future reward ; t.^e alarm- 
 ing fact is e(|ually to be regarded from whatever source it may proceed. 
 
 In reviewing the histoiy of the United States, I find that in 17^0 .i.d 
 1782 Mr. Jeflerson and Mr. Madison, and the \'irgini\n oligarchy, were 
 too much devoted to France. I Hud Mr. Samuel Adams and c\\ the New 
 England delegation, when no British party could be pretended to exist, 
 equally hostile to this 1- rench faction. 
 
 In examining further I perceive Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison taking 
 the side of France in 17 J3, opposing our NEUTRALITY ; of the good 
 effects of which they h.ive the unparalleled audacity to boast at the present 
 day. I find them charging Washington with base ingratitude for not join- 
 ing France against Great Britain. I find them intimate with and praishig 
 Genet, and Fauchet, and Adet and equally praised and esteemed and con- 
 fided hi by these foreign nunisters. I find them for fifteen ye irs radical- 
 ly and unn^o.eAbly hostile to England. I find that by stirring up and cul» 
 Uvaiing the prejudices of the n«tion against Great Britam they have iic- 
 r|Uired and retained their power. Sh«U I then presume a mracle wrought^ 
 
 i\ 
 
 .(/ 
 

 ■'I 
 
 &2 
 
 !n the hearts of these rulen, and that in a moment they have renounced 
 all their partialities and antipatliies, and endeavored Kbnestly to promote a 
 feir and equal, correct and impartiui understanding with botli ? 
 
 This would be a stretch of charity too great for human powers. 
 
 Let us then view them as they are, fallible^ imperfect men ; of passions 
 like unto others, devoted to France, and deeply hostile lo Great Britain. 
 
 Has their conduct coiifdded vvith this state of things ? aiid if it has, is it 
 the rea/sojiVcf- of all* Qur evils ? 
 
 In February 1807» a treaty was made with Great Britidn by two men not 
 suspected of partiiUity to that nation — they were satisfied it would be a- 
 greeable to the United States ; and so Mr. Jefferson assured Congress ia 
 a formal* message. 
 
 In the interim the Berlin decree arrived ; this ought to have strength- 
 ened the motives to amicable adjustment with England. 
 
 But this treaty so made, and indeed excellent in its provisions, was re- 
 jected without the ordinary respect and deliberation given to t <?s made 
 wi"h Indian tribes. Great Britain though she felt the affront, ^^ she hud 
 made unexpected concessions in that treaty) dissembled her ser-^ations, 
 and professed her disposition to retain her good tu\de;'staiiding with us. 
 
 In the mv-an while an unauthorized briilsh olficer accidentally favours 
 the views of our cabinet. Provoked, too much provoked by a imeful 
 encouragement of British draertcrs^ 'a pi'lnciple which in these 'dispatches 
 our government concedes to be wrongs this officer causes ai> uvtack on. 
 ©ne of our rtational sr ids. 
 
 Without waiting for tl.'^ usual remedy, without confiding in the justice 
 of the aoven-igii, ignorant and of course innocent *. t'the offence, our gov- 
 ernment assumed the reparation, and by ixnact of uvo^-Mcd hoaiiUty compel 
 Great Briu.in either to make -war or refuse redress. 
 
 Overlookiui^ this "urposed insult, ui:d taking counsel from magnani- 
 mity rather than an^, / pride,, she sends js a special envoy to p»arnte our 
 i'cs*. ntment. But adheriiig to our designed punctilios wx reject him. 
 
 Pending this affair Bonaparte fdrbids oui- trade with Great Britain—* 
 writes a note declaring us at v/ar, and threatening confiiication, and his re- 
 ijentmeui in case we refuse. He orders a suspension of all commerce on the 
 Dirt of all those nations whose artm \\\ aciiv war would be of no avail. 
 «^., We came within this description, and obedient to his rescrijit in four 
 days after receipt of his orders (a time which Colonel Pickeruig observes 
 was sufficiently short for auch a hlati) we issue an edict waging war with 
 all the commerce of the U . States, and all the rights of the commercial States. 
 
 This was first avowed to be merely municipal ;— but it is now acknow- 
 ledged by Mr. G'ies and Mr.G illatin to have been /josf//f to Great Britain. 
 So Bonaparte unue'^tands it, and in two public official French declara- 
 ^ons, it is praised as being a ,'ixx)Fof our hostility to Great Biitahi, or iij 
 Other words our subserviency to France. Still something remained tc be done 
 to pla."e us on as favoured a footing with Bonaparte as Holland or Italy. 
 
 Mr. Campbell's Non- Intercourse resolution eflects this, and as Mr. Gal- 
 
 declaration of war 
 
 I termination. 
 \ 
 
 \ \ latin observes, there is no distinction betweeu this and a decla^ 
 W^ ''^r««it JiiitMin-^tt<hhiisb««neur policy— auch its fatiU 
 
 ^ 
 
 r»**i— * 
 
 \J. 
 
 A 
 
 111 
 
 i'^) 1/ 
 
 ■a«s<;,^.