^
^^^.
IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)
■:■•■;)
^
'i
'i
1.0
I.I
2.0
IK
14.0
Ui&
^^^^s II ^^^S
lllll^^^
^
6" -
►
■
r
V
W
V
y
Photographic
Sdences
Corporation
23 V>«RST A/IAIN STRIET
wii[»iyr.«i,N.Y. Mseo
(rtiM 872-4503
^^^1^
4^V
""^
•J
^ ■
■^ '
j
!
i^
CIHM/ICMH
Microfiche
Series.
CIHM/ICIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.
Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian da microraproductions historiquas
Technical and Bibliographic Nctas/Notas tachniquat at bibliographiquas
Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat
original copy available for filming. Faaturaa of thia
copy which may ba bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of tha imagea in tha
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.
D
Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur
I I Covers damaged/
D
Couverture endommagie
Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurAe et/ou pellinulAe
I I Cover title missing/
Le titre de couverture manque
□ Coloured maps/
Cartes giographiquas en couleur
D
Coloured init (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)
□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur
□
D
D
Bound with other material/
Reli4 avec d'autres documents
Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/
La re liura serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intArieure
Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certainea pages blanches ajoutiea
lors d'une restauration apparaiasant dans le texte.
mais, lorsqua cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmias.
Additional commanta:/
Commentairas supplAmantairas;
L'Institut a microfilm^ le meMleur nxemplaire
qu'il lui a At* possible de se procurer. Les details
d9 cet exemplaira qui sont peut-Atra uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la mAthode normala de filmage
sont indiquAs ci-dessous
I I Coloured pages/
v/
D
This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/
Ce document est film* au taux da reduction indiqu* ci-dessous.
Pagea de couleur
Pages damaged/
Pages endominagias
Pages restored and/oi
Pages restaurias et/ou pellicul6es
Pages discoloured, stained or foxec
Pages d6color6es, tachet^es ou piquAes
r — I Pages damaged/
nn Pages restored and/or laminated/
r~~} Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
□ Pages detached/
Pages ditachies
Showthrough/
Transparence
I I Quality of print varies/
Quality inigala de I'impression
Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du material supplimentaire
Only edition available/
S^ule 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 feuillev d'errata. une pelure,
etc., ont M filmAes A nouveau de fa^on A
obtenir la meillaure image possible.
10X
14X
18X
22X
26X
""
30X
7
12X
16X
20X
24X
28X
32X
The copy ffilmad h«ra hat been reproduced thank*
to the ovneroeity of:
Library of the Public
Archives of Canada
L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grice i la
O^nAroaitA de:
La bibliothAque des Archives
publiques du Canada
The *.r.iiages appearing here are the best quality
pot.tible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in Iceeping with the
filming contract specifications.
Original copies in printed paper covera are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impree-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page wHh 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.
Las images suivantes ont At* reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at
de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film*, at en
conformiti avec lea conditions du contrat de
filmage.
Lea exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimAe sent filmte en commen^ant
par le premier plat at an terminant soit par la
darniire page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration. soit par le second
plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exempleires
originaux sont fiimAs en commen9ant par la
premiAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration at en terminant par
la derniAre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.
Un des symboles suivante apparattra sur la
darniAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
ces: le symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", le
symbols ▼ signifie "FIN".
Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
diffarrnt 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, planchea. tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre
f ilmAa A des taux de ? Aduction diff Arents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un seul clichA, 11 est filmA A partir
de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammas suivants
illustrent la mAthode.
1
2
3
1 2 3
4 S 6
..'.j^vi^.'
American Question.
PRICE Is. 6d.
A LETTER,
*V' FROM A CALM OBSERVER,
"i'
. r'"'?"' •^-■' ■.■;!'. ''P A
5;is.! .<■ '•-, '"'1 .: ,v';
.;wr hi]
^oble Xorti,
::'< ^Af^fMUi hvmy ON THE SUBJECT 'i » .•■■■-':•■; ,*;,,: : ■; ^
il^S OF THE LATE DECLARATION li':-.^-,-.
.i--<','
RELATIVE TO THE
:*'if ••:■■■
ORDERS IN COUNCIL.
^*'»#'v;' ■• ■■•■ ■
.....
* 1.'.' ■; ! •>»;•* J"
PKINTED BY A. J. VAIPY, TOOKe's COV&T,
t. ; CHANCERY LANE;
HOLD BY GALE AND Cl>]lTI8, PATE&NOSTEa ROW;
JAMBS RICHARDSON, OPFOSITB THB ROYAL
EXCHANGE; AND ALL OTHER
BOOK8ELLKRS.
,■> ^.
1812.
PREFACE.
I n those vlio tloiilit, and to tlioso wlio believing, still regret, thr
ii«((ssity, ill foiiits of Jiistire,of tl.t ()1<1 BaiU-y-pracliir ot'examin-
in;; \vitiussrs ir mn^t de |iiiintiil to olivorvc a nmidc so little di&;nificd
ailniiitcd at llif liiir ut'oiie of thr jii-fiit roiiiicils nfthe nation; t'spcci-
jilly uhiic ;;icli »nrtics iiulicate but too jilaiiily the chicane that ni*j
bf (wpcru d »o IV! u\v.
Siiir< liif Iclter lu'ie jirosented to the public was written, it ha*
iip|Kar>(i Imt tdo pinirily that u discrimination is intended to be
advaii<'<'il I'i'lwocii the Onicis m Conncil, iiiid tin- nrtifieation ofblork-
■dde of tlip Irili of iMay, 1!)()6 ; and in ordtr to trip the advocates for
peace and I'l^r cnniniiM-cial intercourse wilii Ihe United States, the
importance of ni^iiiitiiining our niaiitinie rii lits will be piostitnled in
an iinrinlitPons ( oniest, in which the false pretence of a desire to
invade or diminish them on the part of tltat geveinmcnt will be as
nsniil nnhliii-hiiiply a.'jserted.
Uut vvlii'ther this notification is to be considered as an Order in
C'ouiii'il, to which it is itiiiivalent, or as mcrijed in the siib^^eiiuent
Ord>.r of January, 1H07 ; as Mr. I'inkney supposed it, there isnodniibt
thai its existence in the shape of a mere proelan ation blockade is
incompatible with the conditions upon which alone the 1'rP«ident is
authorised to restore the intercourse between tlie two countries,
jiince it is an edii:l that violates the neutral commerce of the United
States : not so a real blockade. This subject is particular^' treated
in the litters in a late pamphlet from a Cosmopolite to a Cleigynian.
'J'liere is another biancli of this question, that sliouid not pass unno-
ticed. In a late publication of the exports for seven year?, an average
is made up of the four tirst, and of the three last y«ars Fallacies are
easily piacticfd in these accounts; but the object lure is too ^'laring,
it can be otily by showing a veisily e(iual iraJe on th( urernne of each
<if the two periods to keep the actual state out of view. Averages for
years hai;k are very t.ood data for forming an estimati' where tlie course
of thini;s is the same; but is th're any thing in the three la.st yiars,
taken collectively, that i-an turnisli a perspective avera};e? Can the
year 1810 for example, when exportations to America were tree,
joined to that part oCi*.t1, in which a few goods were exported, form
an anticipatory uveiagc for li;12, when we uie exporting noue at all ?
Uow ridiculous ! I
Just Publkhed, hy (he iame Author,
A SERIES OF LETTERS FROM A COSMOPOLITE TO A
CLEIUJYMAN; eoniainin<ja temperate Inquiiy into the Snbjecis of
Dispute between Ckfat liniTAiN and America: with remaiks on
the erroi.eoMS opiiiion entertained in this country, relative to the
partiality of Amkiucv towards France; including authentic docii-
oients to prove the contrary.
11 rceret, thr
\(:c ot'fxumin-
littlc dignifii'd
ill ion; »'spcci-
:anc that m*j
i'rittcD, it has
tended to be
ition of l>lork-
advofates for
ed States, tlic
piostitiilcd in
of a ilt'.sire to
ent will be as
s an Order in
he siibsc(|iirnt
CR' is no donbt
in blorkade h
,e l'.p«id»nt is
wo countries,
of the L'nited
Mslar^' treated
a Clei jiynian.
not pas.s unno-
iirp, an average
Fallaeies are
is too ^'taring,
reratie of each
Averages for
lere tlie course
irec la^f ytars,
af;e? Can the
ica were free,
jxporttd, form
ng none at all ?
)LITE TO A
the Snbjccts of
ith remarks on
relative to the
uthentic docu.
A LETTER,
&C.
MY LORD, '
1 HE declaration published in the Times
of yesterday having led to the following reflections, I ply
your Lordshtp to receive then, as the dictate of that cor'
d.al desire for harmonious intercourse between Great
Bnta.n and the United States of America, which is „,o,t
natural to a man having „o special bias to mislead
h m. And when I assure your Lordship that I have no
other motive, I am confident you will excuse the freedom
M^ith which, to be better understood, I shall not hesitate
to treat the subject.
My chief object is to show the distinction, which ought
to be made between French pretensions and JmeriL
acqmescence,^iy^o objects which I am convinced have
been most unwarrantably blended; and which, with all
due deference, have been, and, in the document before
us are continued to be so blended, without excuse on the
part of his Majesty's ministers, and with a view to exten-
uate measures, which, with the knowledge they ought to
possess of the facts, cannot be excused.
The obligation of liis Majesty's ministers, to distinguish
in this case between French declarations and American
acquiescence, might be very leadily shown : but I shall
not grudge the trouble to take up the subject in the order
in which it presents itsdf; and hope your Lordship will
not find it tedious, though collateral considerations should
necessarily be mixed in the narrative.
I'he revocation of the decrees of Berlin and Milan, as
announced in the letter of Champagny to General Arm-
strong of the .5th of August, 1810, (the usual mode of
such conimunicalioiis, as well in England, as in France,)
is in the following words : " Dans ce nouvel ^tat de
choses, Je suis autorise k vous declarer, Monsieur, que
les decrets de Berlin et Milan sont revoques, et qu'au
1 Novembre, ils cesseront d'etre en force, bien entendu
qu'en consequence de cctte declaration les Anglois revo-
queront leurs Ordres di Conseil, et renonceront au nou-
veau principe de blocus qu' ils ont tente d' etablir ; ou
que les Etats Unis, conformement a /' ade que vous venez
tie communiqner, fevont respecter leurs droits • par . les
Anglois."
Ou the form and manner of thi.s declaration I am aware.
there are different constructions. On the part of France
it is contended, that as the United States were .the only
neutral power, it was to them alone that the renunciation,
and the <;onditions of it, could be properly addressed. In
England there are those that cousidcr, that the instrument
of revocation should be of a more general tenor. How-
ever this question may be settled in respect to any other
party, it is clear that the mode, as respected the United
States, w as unexceptionable. In what light it ought to
have been viewed by his Majesty's ministers, will be best
seen by a short analysis of the words of the act.
The Berlin and Mil m decrees are declared to be r«-
voked, and a dav is appointed, on which they shall ccasr
to be in force, under certain conditions, with which his
Majesty's government had previously bound itself in that
case to comply ; or an alternative condition, with which
the United States had bound themselves to comply. — The
conditions required of England were, that she should revoke
her Orders in Council, and renounce her new principle of
blockade. — The principle of blockade here referred to i«
evidently that blockade, which is no blockade, to wit, a
blockade by proclamation, wanting all the essentials to
constitute its legality, according to the construction of the
law of nations, of the British courts of Admiralty, and of
the government itself, as declared in numerous instances,
and as particularly communicated to the United States
through Mr. Merry, in his letters to Mr. Madison of the
12th of April, 1S04; and of which no justification has
ever been pretended, save on the principle of retaliation,
to which the revocation in question would put an end. —
The pretence of the doctrine of blockade now set up by
France, cannot, with any propriety, be made retrospec-
tive, in aid of the construction .of the letter of Chanipagny
above quoted. — ITie new principle therein referred to, —
one and indivisible, as your Lordship will observe,— not new
principles, — could only be that of blockade by proclama-
tion, then lately set up. — Moreover, it will be seen in the
sequel, that the pretensions now set up by the French
government were, previously to that date, not only not
avowed, but absolutely disavowed, by the government of
the United States, in documents that could not fail to be
known, as well by llie French, as by his Majesty's govern-
nient.' Had the abandonment of the Orders in Council
been the consequence of this revocation, or had any judicial
99tk April, 1812.
' In the uprrrh of Mr. Rose of lut evenin;; on tlie pttitions agaimt
the Orders in Council, referrini; to the Berlin decree, he asserts that
the French niinistir explained the exclusion of ships from places not
fully blockaded, to mean from places not besieged by land, as well aa
by sea ; but there is not a word of land in the caie. In the exordium
to the Berlin decree he compluinst, that England declared blockaded
places, before which she had not a single vessel of war ; — although a
place ought not to be considered blockaded, but when it is so invested
as that no approach to it can be made without imminent hazard. He
also complains that England extends the right of blockade to ports not
fortified, and leaves ample room for prevarication on the question of
what constitutes a legal blockade. The evasions that he might have
made, however, cannot, I conceive, be taken as conclusive of the
question, even us between him and England, still less can they enter
ipto the question of principle or construction, as between England
and the United States. There is another passage in this speech of Mr.
Kose, which cannot be overlooked. He thinks the blockade of the
coast from Brest to the Elbe perfectly right, and asserts that " it was
certainly legitimate on the ordinary principles of the law of nations^ for
wo had u naval (orce/uUy competent to enforce the order." This is some-
thing worse than Crede quod habcs, ct Imbes, — where the principle of the
law of nations ia to be found, that supposes a blockade to exist because
it might exist, I am at a losn to imagine. The sun shines at this mo-
nicnt; it was cloudy an hour ago, and might have rained ; but it has
not rained, neither docs it rain at present. From what h..s been
asserted above, and still more from what follows, in the text, it ap-
pears that no such very ordinary principles enter into the British con.
Struction of the law of uations.
There is yet another remark to he made on this speech of Mr. Kos^.
The Right Honorable Gentleman is reported to have said as follows:
" Then came the decree of Rambouillet, ordering the confiscation (he
should have said sequestration) of Americun property, which was tan-
tamount to a declaration of war ; and when Mr. Armstrong complained,
he was told that the measure was consonant to the principles of eternal
justice, and America was declared to be at war with England, whether
cil
ial
Mt
lat
lot
as
I in
ed
a
ed
le
ot
of
ve
le
er
d
r.
le
[.
ir
e
e
»
I
\J\
7
^decision shown that they had ipiso facto become null and
void, I am rot prepared tu siiy, ihul iiu previiricatioii on the
part of the rneiuy, nor any paramount intitsurcs would have
been adopted, but clear it is tliat any such n»(;asurcs
ahe would cr not." llii not tli<! contempt of phronolPi;ical orJti, lit
which event* of inoiv timii two yeiuV distance urc first invertrd, »nil
then amalfriiniated, that iiidnccs me to notice tlii» p.its.iLe. Anucliruninin
is purdonaiite ut a certain tiinu ut' hlr, even in u /^cntlcnirtn who may
have justly boasted, at im earlier period, (fl'liaMtt of oflUial itcciiracv.
TI.e decree of Riinihoiiilict, to be sure, which Mas dated the '.'3d of
Marcli, and published the 11th of May, 18i(), could not very will
have becD the subject of complaint on the part of Mr. Ariiistioug, upon
which, he was told, on the llth oftlie piec«di:in Februiiy, lli.it the
measure was consoimnt to tln^ pri.iciplts of ctiiii.il ji:-tli'c ; i.iiihcr
could it follow, on the l.)th of January, 1808, Hit An, erica wis de-
clared to be at war with Kn^land, wiiethcr she would or not. No ilouijt,
this aud many other impertinent exprcsiiioiis uic t<> be t'oii'ni in iLc
French correspondence, as well as llio bpiritt "I aud appropriate an-
swers of tlie government of the United Slates and its niini^tci <, m iiich
may be seen in a Pamphlet lately publislied, intit.'ed '* The Di'>;'iite
witli America considered, in a Series of Letters from a Cosmrpoliie
to a Clergyman." But ^le error I wish particular. y to point out \i
that which disparages the translation in the tc\t, respecting the eter-
nal principles of justice. The words are (Cadore to Armstrong, tlth
of Febnigry, 1810,) ; " Sa Majesty regarderait ses dccrels de Berlin et
de Milan conime attentatoircs aux principcs dc justice ^tcrnellc, s'ih >
n'^toicnt la consequent obligee des arrets du conseil Britaniqiie, et
lurtout de ceiix de Novembre, ii)07."
Surely these word^, which, however, I find the Right Honorable
Vice-President may have seen erroneously translated in the News-
papers, convey a meaning even with respect to the decrees they tfeat
of, very different from what could be imagined from those mistaken
by iiini; and as I find M. de Cudore, in tliis same letter, desiring Mr.
Arinitroiig not to submit to any blockade which is not real, " ui a
aucun d^cret de blocus, a moins que ce blocus ne soit reel," I cannot
but consider how different his pretexts must' have been, if instead of
the competency above mentioned, the Right Honorable Gentleman
kad h««n able to usart the fact.
8
would have been obnoxious to the severest censure,
and wouhi have thrown on him the odium from tlie pco*
pie on the continent, which he hast dexterously turned
upon his adversary. Not only the worda of the decrees
themselves would in such case be turned against him, but
the very strong expression in the note of the Minister of
exterior relations to Cjencrai Armstrong, of the 14th of
February, IrtlO; "His Majesty would consider his
decrees of lierlin and Milan, as violating the principles of
eternal justice, if they were not the necessary consequence
of the British Orders in Council, and, above ull, of those
of November, 1807."
Tlu: alternative enjoined on the United States, as de-
pending on themselves, was simply that they should make
their rights respected, conformably to the law, which they
had promised in such case to put into execution^, and
while that law remains in force as the evidence of their
resistance of the unlawful invasion of their rights ; their
flag cannot be considered denationalized. The period,
within which it would have been competent for govern-
ment to revoke the Orders in Council, is not accurately
defined ; but if at iiny time between the oth of August,
(the date of the revocation) and the first of November,
when it was to take effect, the Orders in Council had been
withdrawn, Bonaparte would have had no excuse, for
maintaining his decrees, that would have satisfied his sub-
jects, or his vassals. I have no doubt, my Lord, that
the event, as it turned out, was much more conformable
M'ith his views, and indeed precisely that which he con-f
tenipluted. This, however, is the view of the case as be-
tween France and England : the main object of my troub-
ling your Lordship : — the difference between the preten-»
sions of France and the acquiescence of America, is yet
to bu cuiisidcrcd. Ami liore 1 will not stop to inquire by
what fatuity, or by what tlcsi^n, but shall simply observe,
that it does appear to nii*, there is, somewhere, a latent
determination to Enthrall the United States in the war
against England, and to cajol<i the people into a belief of
its necessity : — it does appear to nie that, without sonic-
thing of this kind, it would be impossible that the perse-
vering eft'orts of the I'nited States, year after year, to use
the words of Mr. Madison, and war after war, to conci-
liate and place all the subjects of difference on a just foot-
ing, should not only fail of their eft'cct, but be perverted
and niisrepreaented in a manner so artful and continual,
that not only what is not true, but the direct contrary to
the most pal])able truths are made to pass current, till
nothing but the severest consequences of the error will
stop them.
^11 the declaration before us, and the debates that pre-
ceded it, clearly indicating the quarter from whence it
came, the pretensions of » France are so artfully twisted
with the pretended hopes, that when America comes to
see, she will reject them, nay, it has even been so insult-
ingly said, that she will find herself the dupe of France^
that I will venture to say nine people out of ten, that have
read them, consider America as asserting the same doc^
trines, and demanding the same conditions on the revoca-
tion of the Orders in Council, us respects the United
States, as have lately been promulgated to the conserva-
tive senate. But ought there not, my Lord, to be some
evidence of this, before it is so conclusively determined ? —
is there any such evidence, and where is it ? — Bonaparte
has demanded now more than he dared think of on the
5th of August, 1810; and his demands will probably
progress w ith the inarch of his Douanicrs. A year henc?
10
you \\i\\ find him demanding, that encm^^'s ships, as well an
goods, shall pass the ocean freely; but what have the
United States to do with that?— it will puzzle administra-
tion, my I^ord, to find any where an acquiescence in these
modern doctrines; and an ac«juiescence should be proved
before the United States are implicated in the pretension.
But what will the nation say, if they should discover, not
only that Ministers, with whom the burden of proof
should lie, have no evidence to produce to this effect, but
that they ore possessed of palpable evidence to the con-
trary : — evidence not hidden from them, nor afar off, but
nigh unto them in their heart, and in their mouth ; — evi-
dence, which, if those of them that have been long acting in
these concerns, do not possess at their fingers' ends, they
are ignorant of what it is their speci'il duty to know : and if
they do possess it, they ai e most cruelly deceiving the pub-
lic— I will now take the liberty of placing it before your
Lordship, or a competent part of it, to prove the fact
beyond all doubt. And first on the question of free ships,
free goods.
In the project of a treaty inclosed in the instructions of
Mr. Madison to Mr. Monroe, the 6t\\ of January, 1804,
after enumerating the articles of which contraband of war
shall consist, he adds " and no other articles whatever,
not here enumerated, shall be rep-jted contraband, or
liable to confiscation, but shall pass freely without being
subjected to the smallest difficulty, un/ess they be enemy's
properti/." In the treaty of the 31si of December, 1806,
article 8th, the above in^ttruction is carried into effect, but
it should have been observed in the order of date, that, in
the observations accompanying the plan, Mr. Madison
has the following words: " She (Great Uritain) will find
in both (received authorities and usage) tliat a neutral
I ;
11
vessel does not protect certain objects denominated con-
traband of war, including enemies serving in the war, nor
articles going into a blockaded port ; nor as she has main-
tained, and as we have not contested, enemy's property of
any kind."
I will not trouble your Lordship with any other quota-
tions on this subject, though it was my intention ; it will
be a shorter mode to observe that an examination of the
correspondence, and of the public documents of late years,
and even of the treaty of Lord Grenvjlle with Mr. Jay,
will show a desire on the part of the American government
to establish the principle of free ships, free goods, and the
perspective hope so to fix it when both nations shall be at
peace ; but the sun ender of the pretension, nevertheless,
to the English doctrine on diat subject.
On the subject of blockade, Mr. Madison, in a letter
to Mr. Thornton, of tlie ^Tlh of October, 1803, writes as
follows : — " The law of nations is perhaps more clear on
no other point tlian on that of a siege or blockade, such as
will justify a belligerent nation in restraining the trade of
neutrals. Every term used in defining tlie case, imports
the presence and position of a foice rendering access to
the prohibited place manifestly difficult and (laiigerous.
Every jurist of reputation, who treats with pieci-ion this
branch of the law of nations, refers to an actual and par-
ticular blockade. Not a single treaty can be found, which
undertakes to define a blockade, in which the definition
does not exclude a general or nominal blockade, by limit-
ing it to the case of a sufficient force so disposed as to
amount to an actual and particular blockade. To a num-
ber of such tref fies, Great Britain is a party. Not to
multiply references on the subject, I confine myself to the
fourth article of tl»e convention of June, 1801, between
12
Great Britain and Russia, which, having been entered into
for the avowed purpose < of settling an invariable deter-
mination of their principles upon the rights of neutrality,*
must necessarily be considered as a solemn recognition of
an existing and general principle and right, not as a stipu-
lation of any new principle or right limited to the parties
themselves. The article is in the ^rords following : ' that
in order to determine what characterises a blockaded port,
that denomination is given only to a port where there is,
by the dispositions of the power, which attacks it with
ships stationary or sufficiently near, an evident danger of
entering.'"
Mr. Thornton having transmitted this representation to
his Majesty's government, Mr. Merry, who succeeded
him, was instructed to co:nmunicate to Mr. Madison the
instructions which the Lords of the Admiralty sent to
Commodore Hood, and the Judges of the Vice- Admiralty
Courts in the West Indies ; which Mr. Merry inclosed in
a letter to Mr. Madison of the 1 2th of April, 1804, in
tlie shape of copy of a letter from Sir Evan Nepean to
Mr. Hammond, to wit, " not to consider any blockade of
those islands as existing, unless in respect to particular
ports, which may be actually invested, and then not to
capture vessels bound to such ports, unless they shall
previously have been warned not to enter them."
The instructions of Mr. Madison to Mr. Monroe, of
the 5th of January, 1804, anticipated this definition, and
in those to Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney of the 17th of
May, 1806, he refers to it as a rule in the meditated treaty.
In a letter of so old a date as the 20th of September,
1800, from Mr. Secretary Marshall to Mr. King, the
necessity of an investment by land is given up as a depart-
ure from principle, which has received some sanction
1 entered into
iriab/e deter-
Tfneutraliiy*
ecognition of
ot as a stipu-
the parties
►wing : ' that
ckaded port,
lere there is,
acks it with
nt danger of
esentation to
succeeded
Vladison the
alty sent to
;e-Adiniralty
y inclosed in
•il, 1804, in
1 Nepean to
blockade of
9 particular
then not to
' they shall
n
•
Monroe, of
inition, and
the 17th of
ated treaty.
September,
King, the
IS a depart-
e sanction
13
from practice; and in a letter of so late a date as the 14th
of January, 1811, from Mr. Pinkney to Marquis Welles-
ley, we have the following words :
'* It is by no means clear that it may not fuirly be con-
tended, on principle and early usage, that a maritime
blockade is incomplete with regard to states at peace,
unless the place, >Yhich it would affect, is invested by land
as well as by sea. The United States however have called
for the recognition of no suck rule."
In respect to ship-timber too, and other articles of naval
equipment, we need only look to the ninth article of the
treaty of the 3 1st of December, 1806, to perceive that
the United States conform to tiie English doctrine, on
that subject also. There is nothing in the objections to
that treaty that goes to controvert this article.
Now, my Lord, I beg leave to ask where is the evi-
dence of American acquiescence, that should involve the
United States in die consequences of the French preten-
sions ? — in my conscience, I must say, and I hope your
Lordship will join me, that not only do I find no acquies-
cence on the part of the American government to French
principles; but that on moot points, — points much mooted
in Europe, — points in which England stands alone in
Europe, and in which the faith of America has been much-
shaken, she has still acquiesced in the doctrine of
England. — Well then may Mr. Pinkney say, as he does in-
the very letter to Lord Wellesley above quoted, " What I
have to request of your Lordship therefore is, that you will
take our views and principles from our own mouths ;
and that neither the Berlin decree, nor any other act of any
foreign state, may be made to speak for us what we have
not spoken for ourselves."
A few words, my Lord, on the consequences of thi«.
unfortunate and most erroneous identification of French
14
\i
ami American principles. — Tho exports from the United
State* to the Peniusiiia in one year have amounted at the
cost in America, in round numbers, to eighteen millions
of dollars. The flour, purchased at an average of nine
dollars per barrel, has been furnished to the army by con-
tract at fifteen ; a rate at which, when the enormous and
hitherto unknown discount of bills on England of more
than 20 per cent is added to the freight and msurance, little
proflt would remain ; and as ihe other articles may be
supp )sed to have averaged in proportion to the flour, we
must set down thirty millions of dgllars thus expended in
specie, which, at five shillings each, amount to no less a
sum than 7,500,(iOO/. Had the edicts of Great Britain been
90 revoked as that they should cease to violate the neutral
commerce of the United Slates, instead of being paid in
specie or its equivalent, in a circuitous exchange, all this
property, with the exception of some trifling charges of the
ships while in port, would have been paid for in British
manufactures, the raw materials of which, imported from
abroad, with even the addition of the value of so nnich of
the labor employed in them, as might possibly be bestowed
on agriculture, would not exceed at most 1 ,500,00(J/. —
Here then is a direct loss to the nation, however the sum
might have been distributed at home, of six millions by
the American non-importation, and nothing can be more ,
erroneous than to consider this a temporary inconvenience.
Every hour of the continuance of this system is adding to
the future exclusion of a portion of those manufactures,
(the generative produce by which the exhausture of former
wars has been supplied) by the establishment of o'hers in
the United States ; where the comparative rlit ;ipm\ss of
living, which has heretofore influenced the locality of iiiaiiu-
factures at home, is enhanced both in fiict a>id in prospect
by the measure which is transplanting them,
t . I
1*1
15
)m the United
loimted at the
iteen Djillions
erage of nine
army by con-
snormous and
land of more
stirance, little
ides n)ay be
the flour, we
expended in
to no less a
Britain been
s the neutral
eing paid in
"ge, all this
larges of the
• in British
ported from
so much of
>e bestowed
00,00<j/.—
er the sum
niliions by
n be more ,
nvenience.
adding to
lufaetures,
of former
of hers in
apness of
<jf rriaiiu-
jjrospcct
In the above estimate are not included the value of
twenty millions of dollars (fnst cost) imported directly into
Great Britain, and paid for, if not in specie, as the bread
purchased for die Peninsula, in something equivalent ; not
certainly in the profitable mode by manufactured goods.'
It cannot be uniijteresting, at this moment, to consider
among what hands Uiis money, thus sent out of Uie king-
ilom, would have ciiculutcd. I'he sale of those manufac-
tures, and the consequent demand for more, would in Uieir
■ Mr. Rose, iii his spcpch above referred to, lias also nolknd tlipse
exports from the United States. Tiiey include only tiieexpoits of
domestic articles ; and the inference he draws from the cireiinistance
appears to me to be erroneous in all its branches. That thirty-tight
millions, out of forty-five, vivnt to Oieat Britain, and her allies, and
only one and a half millions to France, shows to be sure that the
United States liav«' a profitable export trade to Great Hrituin and her
allies ; as necessary to the sustenance of her army and her allies in the
Peninsula, as hard to spare from the n . '.luie at homo. Rut the mode
in which these goods arc paid for, is the most pernicious to the interests
of the nation that can be ima^'ined. Nolliinj; but the importation of
cambrics and laces from Fra'.i(;c can be so ruinous, even in the small
proportion that Uicse artick's bear in respect to amount ; it is observ-
able too that the disparity arises from the mea-ure complained of.
Before the Orders in Council existed, the exports to France and to
other foreign ports in Europe bore a very diU'crent proportion. Of
seventy-ei^lit millions of dollars, total amount of the exports of the
United States in tht year 180 1, only twenty-two niillioiis were exported
to Great Britain and all her dependencies; one third of which wan
sent to tlie British West Indies ; the same proportion may be pre-
sumed, where particulars cannot be hud, of the one hundred and eight
T'^illions to which the exports had progressively increased by the year
1807, the last preceding the operation of the Orders in Council But
the difference here was that, instead of paying in specie, or at a ruinous
course 01 exchange, for our own consumption of American produce, the
proceeds of a great portion of that consumed abroad were remitted
here to pay for their consumption of our manufactures ; and not for
their consumption only, but for that of other markets aiito, which, with
«U our pretcusious, we know not bow to find.
l(j
I
- s>
I
Hir«;ct ojM'ration have furnished employmcnl to the valu-
able subjects become paupers, aud desperate paupers ;
yet Mr. Perrcval asks, is there any one who imagines that
under any pretence of conciliating America we ought to
rescind our Orders in Council ? — Quis Juror iste noriis?.^'
If your Lordship will give me credit for the sentiments
expressed at the beginning of this letter as respects myself;
you will readily conceive that I must be one of the last to
believe that either the prince or the people is inimically
disposed towards the United States. And if it conforms
to the freedom I have asked leave to use, to notice, in the
opinions that Ministers have thought fit to propagate, a
corps de reserve to justify them in the event of a rupture ;
A^ I hope they are not so inveterately detennined to provoke
v^ ^ ' it, and that such determination doen not enter so necessarily
into the scheme of a mysterious policy, as to be incapable
^ of allowing the true case to be known, or of yielding to
■what must be the desire of both prince and people under
^ a just estimate of the real fact.
\ To inflict on your friend the evils provoked by your
\. enemy is unjust, I think, in your Lordship's estimation.
Vs^ With those who plead necessity, it is a subject of regret.
^ But to suffer the contested rules of your enemy to influ-
si -^ ence the right of your friend who has subscribed to your
\,'^ own to allow & profitable intercourse with your fiiend
^ to depend on, or be? suspended by, the doctrine of your
A enemy, which he has rejected, is neither just nor necessary.
Need 1 add my conviction, after what has been said, my
Lord, that in the present instance it is as ruinous as it is
wicked.
U
I
London, April Q.Mh, 1812.
-i i
lie valii-
•aupcrs ;
nes that
ught to
itiments
myself;
; last to
mically
informs
, in the
igate, a
ipture ;
rovokc
iSsarily
apabic
'ing to
under
' your
ation.
egret,
influ.
your
Friend
your
isary.
I, my
it is