H •*>^ \\ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) / r ri-^/ 7 o Si- ^j / ;/. A ^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 V. \m ™|2 5 f3 2 ' \ \ % V 6^ ^f % i^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques # 4^' Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notos techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming Features of this copy which may be bibliographica!ly unique. which may alter any of the images m the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilmo le meilleur exemplaire quil lui a ete possible de se procurer Les details de cet exemplaire qui sunt peut etre uniques du point de vue bibliographique qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite ou qui peuvent exiqwr une modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage sent indiqu^s ci dessous Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur 1 Covers damaged/ ^ Couverture endommagee n Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul^e c Pages lestored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurees et/ou pelliculees Cover title missing/ Le t.tre de couverture manque I 1 Coloured maps/ I I Cartes geographiques en couleur Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages decolorees, tachetees ou piquees Pages detached/ Pages detachees I 1 Coloured ink (i e other than blue or black)/ i Encre de couleur lie autre que bleue ou noire) ( \ Showthrough/ 1 Transparence n Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur D Quality of print var es/ Qualite in^gale de I'impression Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementoire Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge interieure 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 ajout^es lors d une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas ete filmdes. □ 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 feuillet derrata, une pelure, etc.. ont ete film6es ^ nouveau de facon i obienif la meilleure image possible Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplementaires This Item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filme au taux de reduction indique ci-dessous. 18X 22X 10X 14X 26X 30X 12X, 16X 20X 28X 32X The copy filmud hore has been reproduced thjinks to the generosity of Library of Conqress Photndiiplic.Jtion Sfirvice The irrtages aijpeciring hore <«re the best qu'«l'W possible consi.iering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications I HKtMnplfiire fihne fut lupioduit grace 6 la g^nerositJi de' library of Congrfcss Photod'U>li( .ifion Service Les images suiviintes ont 6t6 roprodiiites aver le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de I.I nottcte du I'exemplaire filrnu, nt en confurmit«^ avoc los conditions du contrat de filn^age 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 when 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 — i^ (meaning "CON TIIMUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END). whichever applies 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 oxemplaires oriqinaux dont la couverture en papier ost impriin6e sufU film6s en commencant par le premier |)lat et en terminant soit par la deftii6re page qui con\porte une ompreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commencant par la premiere page qui comporlo une enipreinte d'impression cii d'illustration at en terminant par la derni6re page qui comporte une telle empreinte Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la derni^re image de chaque microfiche selon le cas le syrnbole — •► signifie A SUIVRt ', le symbole V signifie FIN ". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc . peuvent etre film^s GREAT BRITAIN', RESPECTING NEUTRALSv^ ■^.•f' '--f'^" -^4 •• The ardour, with which the British miniitpy embarired in the waf ttpintt •« TnnOt, WM pretentiy manifested by, ptrhaps, the moat extraordinary " proceeding, that ever appeared upon record ; and this was to force th« " neutral powers to unite in the combination to crush the French republic*, [Britiah annual register ef ir93 ] f' i 1 i ,'l! ••• k ,S PHILADEIPHIA! pRIjI^ttCll *T B» GRAVES, NO. 40, NORTlft t-s. ¥ * tOt}RTB-STASl.T. ^|J»'V ' *%. S-V 1807. '^i ^ Nt i;i I'-t f i 9- .CS7 f: f -■ft-is.-. ■'* ■^A'w-; '4 AV EXAMINATION 0» TH« i/ CONDUCT OF GREAT BRITAIN, SINCE THE YEAR 1791, &c. No. I. AN enlightened bUic of tTie public mind is no less necessary to the political morality of a worthy nation, than " a luell informed conscience y'* is to the private virtue of an honest individual. In this view, the mild but per* feet illumination, given in a recent state paper* to the rights of our flag, in rel tion to persons of all descriptions sailing under it, appears to be of the highest importance both occasional and permanent. With that paper mure than tliree years before them, neither the friends of Eng- land nor the opponents to our administration have been able to shew, that foreign navies can lawfully exercise a right of search, as to any but " military enemies" even in our private vessels. The public mind, thus aided by every pertinent light and perplexed by none, which is not pertinent — makes in the present crisis a conscientious and determined stand upon the noble ground of ascertained truth. It is in vain, that some regret, that the citizens seized on board the frigate Chesapeake, were permitted to go to sea in her, after they had been demanded by the British. This, though it may have been otherwise in- tended, is an implied censure on Great Britain; because it presumes, that her character is so irregular and violent, tjiat it was to have been expected, that her officers would * The Letter of Mr. Madison to Mr. Munroe, of Jonuwy, 1804. l!!. r ( * ) ittmnl to MiK our men, at a moment of peace, in one of oT ,W,rof war. The riRht, of .hi, country to . « ;.lumury i-rvicc, of its own citizen.. <=»""« be^u^J^;''^,^, or ckstrovcd by foR Rn irregularities.— VVe wantul the S^c , aKe men mufie tlKirVvn siernment had offered agreeable •■ "'P'oy "«'"'■ '"f 1 1 caVtred seanun ha' 'h"\"f™ '^te «,emplo%l by their naliv^c^^^^^^^^^ J;;e^vS; tl'S|?.™^^o\r £s\f U, reason and ImiveSpuSic law. which com,K.sesthe state paper con- "7'if i^Ttolhe diplomatic letter in contemplation was written and published long before the outn,ge on he Chci^wake, but its relation to that case has rendered rt a TubS the severest scrutiny, by adversap- minds. An anxious solicitude to p^mote .he diffusion of s.m.-. ngh s °n •'^''"S tere. But the same a.ixiety for truth a^^fo^'in tee to our ^amen, our merchants and our Toun^-.^rhS, mov.^ o- t-r At T:,:z r^t. ^tts well known to America and Europe (for the appeal is made w h couficlence to tlic .hole c;vil-« jo^^) te^ IhiTeountry, in common with oth-^ "evj-^^^^'j ^as^^^ extremely harrassed and injured bj the conuuei u. aS iit the wars, Mhicb have been occasioned by the /i," jce, in one jntry to the : buspcndcd wanted the contract by neccssar) to ts to be em- us mariners, •regularities. )ymcnt, and own accord. i it is, would deprive thii )le, a^d if it ir right to be V such feeble (iccasion, are h, reason and ,te paper con- :ontemplation utriige on the rendered it a )• minds, jhion of simi-. md vexations, iduct of Eng. ht. It is true nsured to our solute demon- xiety for truth dants and our L, may operate »vents, he will itf mite he pos- (for the appeal zed world) that itates, has been iduct of Great asioncd by the ( 5 ) French revolutions. At the crisis of the apparent ma- turity of our negociati<.ns uiih the British govtri.ment in^ the close of the lust year, these uggrcssions had risen to the most offensive and injurious heiglit. The writer of these putres does not pretend to any ofHcial information (for he writes not on the motion nor even with the privity of any other person) but he ventures to alFuni from abundant and conclusive evidence tx-fore the public, that aik'r the form, the subst.ince, and one of the co| ies of the digested treaty had received the assent and signatures of Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, and in the final act of delivering the British counterpart, delilierately signed also, a written note was presented by their negociating ministers, to our ministers, purporting that though the treaty was thus formally signed aiid exchanged, yet the British government would cotisider themselves as entitled to do towards the United States whatever we should sustahi and permit from the French, in consequence of their decree of the 2 1st of November and, of course, of any other such decrees*. No observation is intended to be made here upon this British accompaniment of a treaty matured and mutually signed after the decree of the 2l8t of November, was known. That extraordinaiy act has happily met with its proper treatment, — an open stand, — calm, decorous, intel-r ligent and firm. So far as our country understands and considers the subject, it is strongly with the government on this point, and that too in the case of many persons eminent in the walks of party opposition. The state of mind displa}'ed by the British government, in thus endeavouring to draw us into a situation of assent to this dangerous and unwarrantable attempt of theirs, and the spirit of perseverance in wrong, they have manifested in their various orders of council of January 7th and of other dates in this year, have given rise to an opinion, that it would be of the greatest public utility to place before the nation, some of those anterior, successive and numerous acts of the British government, which have illegitimately thrown the neutral states into situations of unprecedented hardship and injustice, and which the history of tjic British * Sec the publication, ccnccmin|f the proposed treaty At New-Yoik in Sept. '*•' I ( « 5 •„M* T'ei will nrove to have brought on many rhi'suX cmU t S. .hcconaucrof InRlund sine. 7n ;ionr_l. •» our A, ^^ ''^.-^^f ;,";* Llmlv ami freely oe prl^!^3To d" Jmin. on .he eonduc. »e ough. .o p«r. •"?„ tt: » tlgT mut;^ r ■con.eo.pU.-.on, in-o . 'ZJ.I^Tal'a'nanl Jch ,he i.par.lalU, of neu.raU might to pirtnUlo her. , „^, ^|,,,„ „. cced « "'' ''f *S w";^^^ heretofore- made, or ap^ar to country. No. 11. Tt has been -^^:^^:;,^::^^^^ «'that the goveniment of France nas an 1 1 -to the culpable PJ^-emmence of hav.ng^^^^^^^^ i. in the violation of neutral "g^J^' f5^^^^^^^^ to their « the part of the Bntjsh S^jL^" ^^"J^^^^^^^^ nearly ht on many virnmcnt», f I rancc of l^luiul s'lMCV uplctc rtvo- iiKk'iKrnclent tiivcrsal hvf I our ri}?ht, v,c may be ght to pur- ition, into a litely submit t liiitiin'was y purswrd t9 >/■ //>thtlay of Mirch 1793 Vmm the very extraordinary nature of that con. vcntion lK-tweci» Kussia an I (i.eal Britain, from the div tance l)ctwect» Pctersburj; and Iv.ndon, and In.n. the season of the year, it cannot l)e doubted, that this >'J^P;>''t''[;' contract, which was mutually signed on the 2 .th "f J^'lf^^ 1791 must have Incn orimiiafcd in the autumn of 17J2, by the Kmnrcss and the British kin<<. In ihe corrcspon- dcnce between our sccrctiry of State and our Muustcr in London, wc do not perceive the least suggcHtion of the influence, ai an example, of the trench decree of the 9th of M IV 179 J. Su.h a pica c.niltl not uuloc2, and the Splures of nLtml vessels, which the Frend. government assign as the justifying reasons of their ac of May 17 '3. t^rfmade in consequence of the negociation and com- pktion of that convention and of those first oders in confirmation of these suggestions, we fi^lj^f V^^ French minister, M. Chauveli-i, in Londo.i, strongly re- mo^tra^l, in November I79i, against the detention of Tu rves;els in the British ports, laden ^v.th fjain «s contrary to the law of nations, and to the ex.sung t ca^ of 1786, nay, even as contrary to the laws of hnglanO. The B?.ish ministry actually applied for an .ndemnUy U> parliament. These facts followed by the captures of neu- ihe capture* of h order of Uic Hth icItTHtoo'l by both thr imcuMnn of i hignetl by tliosc Sth tlay of M irch atiirt* of that con- uin, from the i\\%- n, aiul from the hut thM important he 2 uh of Miirch, luiiumii of 1792, III ihc corrcspon- 1(1 our Miuistcr in sugi^fi'stiou of the decree of the 9th iiidecc ivovvcd, thutdrcat a solcmu compact ict, of which the irenvillc, uud the Hammond) huve, formly pretended, he law of nations, c their prior orders J us the convention ;h, IT9U and it is IS of neutral vessels in of 1792, and the Mcnch jijoveniment •actof May, 17'>S, 5ociaiion and com- thosc first orders. , we finil that the )n(lon, strongly rc- ist the detention of iilen with p^ain, as the existing treaty e laws of K.nf;land. for an indemnity to the captures of neu- ( » ) tral veaacln, after the French minl»iter wm ortlcrcd from Lable and unjust measure towards us ; still it appears true, and it is important in this investigation, that there really is a num- ber of most serious and premeditated instances of the evil on the part of Great Britain, prior to the French decree of May, 1793. — ^The contracting parties, £i^|^d arid * It hu been alreadj obMired. that M. Chauvelin, the FrefieJi minUter, pw- ticuluAjr grounded » |Mut uf hit remonstrance* to Lord Grenville in Nowmber, 1793. upon the tendency of the British measurea to produce famine or the fear of it in France. The memorial of the Enriish minister. Lord Anidand, to the Dutch Rovemment (April 5, 1793) holds up famine, as a calamity about to afflict France, he knowing tliat the Russian convention had been aigned in London, eleven dava before— and the empress of Rusua, in July, 179S, infbrmed the court of Sweoen, that, in consequence of an arrangement tirade with hia Britannic majeaty. slie liad given lawless insUvctions to the commander of her " fleet, to stop and compel all neutral ships, bound to or fi«{giitedf6r France. ** either to sail back or enter some neutral harbor." Now it is certain, that the convention of the 25th March, 1793 was the only arrauement, that was exe* cuted between Kuasia and Snglaa^, between tkat day mm July 30, I79S. I *>- iLTTT' .Trxrr .„ .- 1.,-^; ^fm^xnm loticed, inthede- ese circumstances e they afford a de^ min^ the empress wers cannot plead ' the captures and ■existence of their conduct of Great stances, by much certain from our '94, and not send- ippears the more csident ministers., Ir. G. Morris in The object of iations committed nuate them in the e ideas have been :rely because they the subject. To i not of a certain cessary, to deter- rs of femine, and [>w appear to have e of English and opt a cu!;>able and !ars true, and it is R really is a num- stances of the evil Fr^ch decree of ;s, Eng^d and le French minister, pur- Grenville in Nowmber, idiicc famine or tho fear r. Lord AnhJand, to the u a caUmity abiout ta ion had l>een signed in i, in July, 1793, iniSwrned igement awde with hi* to the conmuuiderof her or frei^ted fdr France, ow it is certain, tha^ the Muement, that was exe« od July 30, 1793. ( 11 ) Russia, bound themselves to use all possible means with the neutral states to prevent their accustomed and lawful commercial intercourse with France; — from which, among other things, that republic drew many of the comforts and necessaries of life, and the neutrals drew just and fair ad* vantages to the farmer and merchant. It IS of the utmost importance that we have the explicit declaration of Lord Grenville, that it was in execution and fulfilment of this convention of March, 1793, that the British additional orders of the 8th of June, 1795, were issued. The English secretary of state did not allege, or even intimate, that the French Order of the 9th of May was the cause. He knew Great Britain had previously thereto, committed detentions of neutral vessels with grain, and had commenced depredations on neutrals, in the manner set forth in the French declaration of war in February and in the decree of the convention of the 9th May, 1793— and he therefore plainly assigns the Briti^ concert with Russia, and a p.^tended authority from the law of nations, as the ti:ue and only causes; and it is upon this British and Russian pretence, that the provision article of our treaty proceeded on the part of the English. Even injured and reluctant America was induced or compelled to yield to this new and illegitimate system of England and Russia, It schema particularly worthy of remembrance, that Lord Cvrenyille also alkged, that Spain would act as England had done, in regsurd to the neutrals— and we know that Spain did act accordingly*, in the course of the year 1793. We dierefore clearly owe our spoliations by Spain, to the support, influence, and pursuasions of EngUuid Qjfi^ t\^ empress of Russia, in pursuance of the extraordinary con^ vention entered into by diem in March, 1793.— A pp^- vention, which is not only calculated, by its dreadful e^- * A treatv was made by Great Britain with Spun, in the very terms of the ^ Rusuan and British convention :— Also with Austria and Prussia Tbu doctrine, to it^wrimu to tie trade «/" tbe neutral pcmert, ba§, therefore, by the zealoue^and hoetile pnemretnent* tf Great Britain, been exiemied tbrqiighout the council* of Eurcf. France, even in hef most extreme moments, has certainly been less ' active inreci|irocaUiw it| fbr with all herinfluence over the Dutch anfl Spanish councils, we do not find that stopping ^ neutral vesseU bound to Enelahd, haa beeh committe4 by either Holland or Spain. Even the French decwe of No* veittber, 1806, ia short of the moiistroqa British convention of |793i whicb 4F9laivs «w •ftiBBt a// tr«dc bet wera ftnUGC aad tbe neutral countrtcfl, *i:'l' ( 12 ) ample and obvious tendencies, to bring down upon France and all future belligercn'. nations unprecedented and awful miseries, but to inflict upon all neutrals, however peaceful and equitable, the suspension of their ordinaiy and rightftil navigation, the prevention of the sales of their most valua- ble commodities, the interception of their supplies of foreign comforts and necessaries, and the dependent revenues fiom exports and imports. It is also, too well calculated to cm- broil neutrals with the other Belligerent powers. If Por. tugal should be involved in the present war, England acting upon this principle, would suspend the accustomed and lawful commerce of the United States, with nearly all the civilized world ; and France, invited b^ these examples from 1792, and prompted by notions of mterest and neces- sity, would suspend our rightful commerce with all the rest. In these views, the convention of 1793, between Russia and Great Britain, as unreservedly and dearly ex- plained by Lord GrenvHle to Mr. Thomas Pincknw, is a matter of the most serious importance to the United States. It is the real and illegitimate foundationdf all the neutral suf- ferings. To acquiesce in the doctrines and principles which are its avowed basis, must go for to destroy the merchant, the fisherman, and the manner, aiid must deeply wdund the manufacturer, the plainer, and the farmef.- No class of citizens — no description of property can cteape the direct evil, or its immediate consequjences. Upon the whole, we Cannot feil totecogni2e the British, ; as tbe real devisers and originators of this-J^tld schemejpf neutral sacrifices. The writer of this paper will only ad^ , that it is not to t^gravate this country against Gitiat Bri- tain, that this publication is now made, but t6 promote a prudent and united endeavor, by all parties in America, to terminate British irregularities by a cahn,' decent and de- termined stand. No. III. The most interesting: considerations appear to invite to fiirther temperate and caudid discussions of this subject, at the present crisis. Thb brief inverigation, was re- spectfully and unresenrecBy communicated, in the eariy down upon France cedented and awful (, however peaceful rdinary and rightf\il >f their most ralua- r supplies of foreign ident revenues ft om :11 calculated to em. it powers. If Por- /var, England acting le accustomed and , with nearly all the bv these examples ' interest and neces- merce with all the of 1793, between »dly and dearly ex- mas Pinckney, is a \ the United States. afaU the neutral suf« nd principles which itroy the merchant, must decjJv w6und farmef.' No class ty can ctea^ie the ices.'";'' ■■ ' ■"■^ Bognii^e the Britlafi, ■ us;^nd scheme of paper will only a(HI, against Gniat Bii* e, but t6 'promote a rties in America, to ibn,' decent andde. I appour to invite to ons of this subject, res'igation, was re- cated, in the eaily ( 13 ) part of 1797. to the executive, nearly as it » P^n^i" J* iwo first numbers, with the writer's name. It is hoped, that rd'oLrpmclenceand c»ecency.^wa«ls ihegovej^^ the public interests, weiemamfcsted. 7^^'''^^^ deemed at all proper for open discussion ^^ Aat momei^ Yet it appeared vJiy haaardous to the country, that it w^ ]oc^nKvith?olitical inconvenience; fortheinc^ tion of Fiance, in a case clearly and »»?I^»<>"«»y^r»j2^ tlie inculpation of England as *^''>''S'P^''!;''^Z^ made in America, not only without refutation, butevai to the apparent conviction of our gove"»'"«"\ il°T» T*^ dangS«cists, and the Legislature «^.P^JJ„ «f°J* J^ dete^ine Uoon important measures, the frc^^^jj ^ presi iauadTto lay the investigauon. with decency antt moderation before them and the countpr. ^ . . It wiU not be denied, diattiw British P«^^TS^"2 the iSth of November, one thousand seven hundr^ and ninety two. and the accompanying directions of that go- Verhmenti dieir custom-houses, did P^venj;^^^^ piwlsion* belongingtd powers at peace ^i* f« Ac WOTU^ flt>nl prtKxeding tolFrance, contrary towhat ^^^^ been done by Se English statutes, contrary to the trencft SSJ/^d tontitiiy to die fiiith and- law of nations.^ It faS»ir^?th^^H tiien adieadful war fbrtiiepnnci- pl«»bf liberty, the ^ght of intenofjotjm^^ Int^ty of tiiif dominions, betwe^ France onthe one oartTand Austriji and Prussia on theuUier. -L Ehgland w^ not formally nor actually at war^ ^ k neuLl also J and, tiiough a neutral w.^h numor^ treaties of peace and cgmmeree, she^acted cont^ toti« rights, as wen of neutrality, ^^T^^^^^^^^^^^J^^ iifintiruptingher "sterneutrakin^hcirlawfta ^ to the ports of belligCrtnt France, from the pcjts of peaceftU Britaiira?which&osfe neutrals had touched, or in whidi their had purchased or laden "^^f^^V^i^^J^L natidns, Mid under the protection of the British statotes and treaties. TOs conduct, though s^ng^y compton^^^^ of by Fiance, was repeated^ until and after M. Ctouvelm s last itpreaentatibh, on the 7tii of January, 1793. ^r^ friendly vessels of France were similarly treated by neutral England. Thus we see, that England, even when a neu- i' 1 ■ 3 «.«W!*«->«««»!teiiSA*SS»a«*.'S believe, that it was England upon bale :r and cordage. ( 15 > We have been told that France did not complain of thfc English stoppage of grain, as an infraction of neutral rights. This, if true, would not alter the injurious nature of the British conduct. It was most natural for France, who was •t war w ith Austria and Prussia, not to complain as a ncu- tral, but to remonstrate as she did, on various grounds, that her treaty was openly broken, and that tlic laws of England were deliberately violated to injure her alone. But she went further: she dechu-ed on the 7th of January, 1793, by M. Chauvelin, her resident minister in London, to Lord Grenville, that England had broken faith with all Europe; that foreign merchants had Ijcen induced to send their cargoes of grain to British ports by an English pro- clamation, dated soon after the 15th of November, 1792, which took off the prohibition from foreign grain ; and yet, that their foreign grain so imported, was refused a clearance for France alone, about four weeks afterwards. M. Chauvelin treated these measures as highly injurious and offensive, nay, as actually hostile to France, in which he was perfectly regular. He could not widi propriety go further than incidentally to make a general representation of a breach of faith in regard to other nations, seeing that they all had ministers on the spot. This criminating re- presentation he did make in the most explicit and serious terms. It appears that Lord Grenville acknowledged, on the 9th of January, 1793, the receipt ofM. Chauvelin's re* presentation of die 7th, about the British measures con- eemmg grain. He, however gave no other reply to itci strong and solemn complaints, but that of declaring, that the English proceedings about the exportation of grain, &c. were founded on political motives of jealousy and un- easiness. He does not deny one of the facts brought for- ward by the French nor pretend that they were measures intended to prevent want in England*. The neutrals re- Diipinr the time of the tiansactions we ha%e iiist stated, British influence •mlcxampfe were euding other poweni to injure France and the ne« rXta"es rSc! tei^of'^r'S'" '"'*^'"? "r^ »»''V Tl.e litUh State of E.no,« and AnnuU Register of 179o, recoid* that " when the Ilriiish ministry laid an embartro on f .In?."'" '." »'•? B"""'' P""" /«*'> ""V^ corn for />..,«. the Fre'^h "^.1! eoisul.. and residents, at Hamburgh. Lubec, Bremen. S.^;. contracted for corn '793, to ?he inaj,'istr»t«B •« thosttoitio*, cummandinff then, in the ni-.st pe' j.:i.: I U 5 , I* Mr , I i ^^ ^Z h^^ainqfcau*** of the decree of U»e emperor of |rance of NoX™ K whfch howVer does not prevent our trade to Great Britain, aad if there- (ore far short of the British precedents. -nor security, tor ovcmment having 1 conduct, so pal- nd injurious to the neutrals, pursued lies, on the Ist of he ver}' day, prc- vay M. Chauvclin, y and magnitude, af August and the (cited the attention mvinced them, that in the king of £n- i. Dundas, of the he English minister government, from irt not only recalled of the events of the ■ality; but that they were entering upon It of violence to the minirttrt to deptH m two urred with Pruisit in the 3, a treaty with Pruwia, in ion, on which we have seen 1793 neutral Britiah cniiaer* iltic veaaels in their vojragca al convention heard of thia Bremen, Lubec, and Dutch May 9th, 1793, and lyreatJy sselii for France, even with >een communicated by the temperately ordered a rein- the iUbject. Their embargo a Febniary, when the Prua- of the Enpiah cruizem, had tbe tarty and real btgtnning* eror of Fnmce of November Great Britain, ud i* tliciC' ( 17 ) late French royal family, would excite the British indica- tion, with that of all huroiKf. The French publishcti the case of the British nation against k\x\\r Charles the first, as a prt'cedcnt, jtistifying the trial of a kiiifr. Anotlur com- munication was made from Knfrlandou the 2ith Sentem. bcr, 1792. through their minister at the Ha^ue, to the Dutch government, which appe.us to be a part of a p an or course of measures of Kn-rland, and other po\^•cl -^ then neuter, avowedly to be direcfecl ag linst all those persons, Who might participate in such acts against the late roval famdy of France. These fiots, though in them,eU'es merely political, must have occasioned France to see, that those measures, which srxjn oecuned, concerning the neutral trade (taken before the d, cree of frittrnity, and be- fore the affair of the Scheldt,) were founded in a dcciJed nostihty to a republic in their country*. ^ It has been already mentionetl, that a separate an-l sne. cial remonstrance against those measures con( erning grain clothing, &c. was mack by the French minister, dared in London on die 7th of January, 1 793. It concludes xvith an expostulation of the most serious nature, such as cor. responded with the deepest solicitude for the bread of a whole nation with the apprehensions of famine, and of those irrcsistable tumults, which famine might be cxiH^cted to produce, in the midst of a great revolution. It uas obvious, that peace could exist but a very short time be- twcen the two countries, after this deportment on the patt ot the Lnghsh government; and M. Chauvelin was ar. cwdingly forced to depart from London, by their order of Hie 24th of January, on eight days notice. .uJ^*" French government mention, among the causes of the war, which took place on die first of Fcbruarv 1793 that the cal)inet of St. James had endeavored to obstruct Uie different purchases of com, and other supplies made by the trench c.ti2ens, or by the agents r,f the Freneh republic; that the same court laid an embargo upon (divers vessels, including neutrals, and boats laden with corn for France ; while, contrary to the French treaty of 1786 the exportation of corn was permitted toother countries;' and the' Ernfhtt «' """'*' '■'^'*' "°* '" '^^^"'^ *'"^^''^"' '^'^^ ^ "-^t«"> i io ) lliat t!ie same court ha', were as similar in their nature, design, and tendency, as possible, which we havealreadv shown; particularly, as to a real and deep injury to neutral rights and commerce. 1 hey were a suitable prelude to the isian convention, and to the orders of June, and November, 1793, and M'ly, 1795. The words of the Russian and British conventiOT, upon ^ l:f fral stacU-holder France. whole French rs by famine, at :stly in a course , from the 15th ; interrupted the 25th of March, inicatcd with M. in London, there V new and deep ic views of two Acr, die politics, (I neutral rights ■vithout the most ing parties. The lo has long suf- L- had engaged in was maturing the (rights, through )lded it so clearly . Be this, how- laturc it, she put 3f Russia, on the ipcnly in the Lon- ville has given us f that convention, emselves to make iglibh made under ich were the same reviously made of g of the war, and lie detentions and grain by England, : war in Februarj', and tendency, as particularly t as to d commerce. They convention, and to J, and May, 1795. conventipn, upon ( 19 ) which the violations of neutral rights arc grotmdrd, arc that the Britii>h am! Hussians •• tt.g;igf to unite all tlicir efforts to prevent other powers, not imj)ii.atcd in iJjis war [I. e. neutrals] from giving, directly or iiulirettly, any protection whatever, in consequence of their n< utrality. to the commerce of the French, upon the seas, or in the ports ot France." The commerce of provisions U notoriously the greatest branch of the c(inimerce of the world, 'i'he iTench, in i)eace and in the war with Knglan.l, and the neutrals had iK-en grossly attacked itr d.at branch of com. merce, from Noveml>er, 17<)2, to the date of the Uussian convention. The English treaty.makcr, himself, Lord ijix'nvillc, had avowed, ihat the intrnuption of the Freneli and neutral mtercourse in provisions, was includifl in, and was a busi ess of the convention. There could be no room for doubts about the injury to neutnl inde, which was m effect retrosjiectively sanctioned, and intended to be contmued by that fatal ami unprecedented caxwiy^a. In regaru to the declaration of lord Greriville, it really appears, that nothing can be more explicit. Mr. T. Pinck- ney was officially making a representation a},rain.st the injn. nes to us from the plan of operating on Fiance, by lu utral detentions, captures, and spoliations, as executerl under. or intended bj. the British June orders. Lord Grcnvillc said, that Spam would pursue the English line ofeonduct that IS, would violate neutral commerce, and that Russia and Lngland had previously intended it bv their compact of March, 179.J. The particular case of that business actually in discussion, by the two ministers, was the June orders, to the end of reducing France by fimine, by inter, rupting our and other neutral intercourse and commerce with her. It follows, logically, that if the convention in- tended the object, the execuUon of the object was an exc cution and fulfilment of the convention. Those papers as received by the department of state from Mr. Pinckney,' appear to afford the most clear and positive evidence, th-it -ejigland, by a treaty requiring months to digest and com- piete, had deliberately matured, in March, 1793, the fatal system of violating neutral commerce, in a manner abso- luteiy unlawfid, and most pernicious and unprecedented, above a naonth before die Frqiich orders of May. It may ^ f ( 20 ) be rcjTcniccI, that *hc aUo apiietirt lo have eommencwl ?t on the 1. th ol NhvuiiIkt, 1792, and ti) have pursued it for month > alter, hy liir own uiiluuiul und Hcpurute ucts, if<;j'ort' Ht4ss a concurred. \V f were toltl that the mcnmirc, as once settled by treaty, W'a& iiguinvt hiiulund, und in oir favor. This is nut at all the qucH'ion with Fiantc. Tie Duties say it tuns a dread of neutrality even to treat on it. It in not hkcly, however, that n nuiihiuf is on the whole, against Knplaudund beneficial to us, wliiih she urged; nay, absolutely forced us into; which GUI government repiobated, in the Englitih sense of it, in ITV^^f which Knglish sense of it, the lute president Washington honestly denmrred against in 1795, and for which he refused to ratify the British treaty, until he should be satisfied that a measure, which he supposed the English to consider as an execution of it, was countermanded by ihcm.* The measure of violating the commercial rights of America will plainly appear, to any candid examinant, to l)e a part of the great system of measures, infracting the rights of pacific and neutral nations, ailopicd by the com- biiicd pQ>vcrs to annoy the French in their revolutionary stn gglc. We know that the revolution was odious to llum fiom its outset. For, in the month of August, 1792, Austria and Prussia, the two leading members of the combination against France, declared in a public mani- festo, that all I'-urr pe had beheld the French revolution with increasing indignation for four years; that is, from the fust dawnings of liberty, in the )ear 17i'b, in the meeting of the '* Notables;" and it has been frequently declared, in the course of the measures pursued by them, tJbot the French vierc not entitled to the ordinary benefits resulting from neutral intercourse, with, what they denominated, *• regular governments." — The ministers of England, abroad, have gone the utmost lengths upon this subject. One of them, Mr. Drake, declared to the »*epublic of Genoa, in 179.'', "that in the present war against the usurpers of the supreme power of France, no government can declare itself neuter, without becoming an accomplice." • tlie Britiuli renewal of the order to «letain provitinn ve****!* in May, 1795, only sismoDtliy aftcrour firilUb treaty «-as ligncd by Mr. Jay. eommeneecl h ivc purnued it Kpurute ucti, Itlcd by treaty, IS nut at ull the uit a breach qf houcver, tlwt und beneficial orced us mo\ iigltHh sense of lute president 1795, and for until he slioidd cd the Entfliiih itermamled by rcial rights of cxuminunt, to infnictinf^ the ;d by the com- r revolutionary uus odious to ih of August, g members of a public muni, revolution M-ith It is, from the in the meeting tly declared, in ihtm, that the mcfits resulting ' denominated, s of England, 3n this subject, he republic of var against the no government in accomplice." t%v\% in May, 1795, r. Jay. ( 21 ) The annals of the world eannot pretUiee an equal outraK upon neutral rights. It is an appropriate preamble to /2c immente vo/unie of their illcgitinute auli-iicutrui ordcr» of council. So early as the 23d of May, 1793, when the British ortkrsof Jinic did not exist, Lord Hurvey, the British minister at Florence, . ■IIHllllM..,. 5S»i I; and then, rc« rights, by rea. the former con- ;ssc(l himself— nstorftV isonly^ e sale ofuncon- the disposiil of than it is to the a nation, whose tagcs they reap f it be permitted towns, belong. e Justice in toe others, iv/joare •e provinces that ' of misery from icquence of .'he extraordinary a have been pro- t all times, been itions, Africa, with more pro- f. in applying to om being new, a real famine in ing use of such ; IV.* was en- ingdom, as well s for the supply lents to prevent I order by those to apply a case ;able or justifia- brts. ect, on accQunt that subject, by ' by that of Great ' England ( as ) •''■ fi:^;j:'"' ""-^ " -- P---i"'. and „>w orZiTs "" ""'"" '"""™"'" upon ritSftv' carry ne trade If ;« ♦h«^^f vcgciaoies — as also our the'vowXrinc Pies of 1^ F "'T'"'^. *S ^'"'' '" »"i"d subjected to the mosTnalmMi^ '° ''T"'^ ^'•^«^'' «"d provisions going ,o unblockSdert ik.*^ '° "^^ """"^' No. VI. . i -I i^*^ \l t] ;i 1 I ( 26 ) each order for the seizure of neutrals against the law of Sns and as the orders of the 8th of June 1793, were has eSiatc; and further as the frt^cjuent passing of acts of ndemnity would excite the attention of neutral govern. "^tTandof Englishmen, ^ --'- 4^1X^7^,3^ tworecedented cast was adopted on the 17th of June i / JJ, vhichvvS calculated, by an insinuation or implication to cover the British orders of that month and all those which Kn-land might chuse to make during that war*. The «e. cuiive and judiciary departments of Great Bntam had la d down in tlimostYormi, -lem^n^l open manner, befo^^^ i\m whole world, in the case with Prussia, of the bilesia 1? t^^ t the universal la^v of nations and exiting tr^^^^^^^^^ vcre the true and only rules to govern the British courts of Xira tv and that the crown never interfered o give £ or lui^cSons to these courts, yet an act of Par« was passed, as a necessary accompaniment to the illcgit . rte^convention with Russia, which act contained the foU ^tairst - Provided that nothing in this act contained sha^l be con^^^^^^^ restrain his majesty, his heirs or sue cessors Zmghing such further rules and directions from TmetoiZto his respective courts of admiralty and yjce 1dm rally for the adjudication and condemnation of prizes, JZ^SJ^cIiy^h^ heirs and successors widi the advice of hfs o^theii v^y council, shall be thought necessary and ^''Xe convention of Britain with Russia and this section of /hefr law of 1703, which J- exceed m prmcip^e he ' French decree of the 21st,of November, 1806, laia inc wSe commerce of all neutrals, as a devoted sacrifice on IhenltarTf unlawful power. These two acts of ^nglaiid strul Itthe v^^^^^ of Se independence of our country, fo a nation'd^^^^^^ floating property can be seized and 'concSned upon the ground of t-eign.convenUo^^^^^ fnreiim orders, which she cannot modify or restrain, is, 'r:^:Z^k not indepei^dent. That^ -^0^ ^^^.^^ maintoins its station among the powers of the earth, wnose . This Sec,i.m and .l.e ndakion by fbe BritUb .Ion. to the proposed treaty of December 1806 aie nearly connected. + See the famous c«= of ..« Silesialoan ix large and tte ab^act herein. ■•WPliiP»-*« nst the law ol* 1793, were thus issing of acts of neutral govern- ' a singular and hof June 1793, . r implication, to I all those which var*. Thecxc- Britain had laid I manner, before I, of the Silesia existing treaties British courts of itcrfered to give ict of Parliament U to the illegiti- lontained the fol- this act contained his heirs or suc- d directions from dmiralty and vice mation of prizes,, 5, with the advice »ht necessary and I and this section in principle, the r, 1806, laid the voted sacrifice on acts of England f our country, for an be seized and conventions, and ify or restrain, is, hat country alone f the earth, whose le to the proposed treaty jd tlte ftb*ract herein. C 27 ) territories, whose flag, whose property and whose people ore completely respected, according to the universal law of nations and to her own treaties voluntarily made. This Enj,dand rightfully demanded of all the world. Let all the ivorld demand this of England. It peculiarly behoves the American merchants to convince themselves of the necessity of standing on this impjegnable ground. From it alone can vital and permanent safety to their interesting pursuits be derived. If our government must yield any part of the law of nations, we can have no security for the remainder. Commerce must become precarious, and domestic con, sumption in the form of home manufactures must empliAr our people and our funds; for our commerce will perish with the subversion of the only rule for the government of the republic of independent states — the universal or pre- •criptive and written law of nations. This august code is the federal constitution of the civilized world. It may not be violated with impunity by any power. Its violation may not be ?'Mowed by any power, without baseness and ruin. But let us return to our historical review — It has been maintained in these papers, that it was erroneous and unjust to ascribe to France, the origination of the neutral sufRr- in^ — a matter of great importance with respect to the claims of retaliation set up by England. An entire view of that division of the subject was given in onr first num- bers, commencing in 1792, and bringing the enquiry down to the date of the British orders of the 8th of June, 1793. A distinguished act, continuing and extending those vio- lations, took place secretly in the British privy council on the 6th of November, 1793.* It went the length of au- * COPY) George R. Additional instructions— 6th November, 1793, to all ships of war and privateers, &c. " That they shall stop and detain all ships laden with goods, the produce of any colony belonging to France, or carrying provisions or odier supplies for tiie use of such colonies, and shall bring the same, with their cargoes, to legal adjudication in our courts of admiralty. " By his majesty's command, (Signed) «< HENRY DUNDAS," i I h ■ I ( 28 ) thorising the seizure of all American and other neutral ves. scls, and even of the allies of England, having on board the produce of the French colonics, or provisions, dry goods, and other supplies for the use of any French colony. 1 he French dominions in the East Indies, and the West Indies were equally and fully included. Thus the whole French empire, which chequered the terraqueous globe, was pre- postcrously treated like a little blockaded port---for their European dominions remained under the operation of the unresSnded order of the 8th June. The Americans and other neutrals were subjected to incalcuable injuries anu innumerable violations. This, too, contrary to all decency and precedent, was done in a secret, manner i for mlorma- tion of its existence was suiipressed, even at the ii"tisn .idmiralty, till late in December: and it was not till the 25th of December following its date that our minister at Loudon (Mr. Thomas Pinckncy) obtained a copy ot it, as will be sei n by his official letter to the secretary ol state, in the president's message to Congress of the 4th ot April, 1794 Here was a most serious act of continuance ot the violations of neutral rights in pursuance of the Russian con- mention, grounded upon a mere intention to attack, in Ue- ccmijer, some French colony.— It was accompanied by various circumstances to render it irregular, olfensive, and injuious. It was clandestine, being kept from the view of all the neutral ministers in London, for seven weeks alter its date, and even reserved among the secret papers ol the British lords of the admiralty. In the mean time, pas- sages of four and five weeks carried it to the West- Indies:— and our unsuspecting mariners, our vessels, car- goes, and money, were odiously entrapped in the fatal tnare. Thus did they secure the possession of our sailors, our vessels, and our mercantile capital. Even in the case of a blockade, the law of nations and the treaties of England with the powers then owning the majority ot neu- tral shipping.* required a proclamation, and notice ot the blockade,andaknowledgeofitbytheneutrals,toju8tifythe seizure. Reason and onscience require the same, mt Great Britain, treading under foot those obligations of the laws of nations and of h r own treaties and aU decency and • The Danes and Swedes. ithcr neutral vcs- ing on board the ions, dry goods, :h colony. The the West Indies he whole French , globe, was pre- d port — for their operation of the e Americans and lable injuries and ary to all decency nerj for informa- cn at the British it was not till the at our minister at led a copy of it, secretary of state, f the 4th of April, continuance of the if the Russian con- I to attack, in De- i accompanied by liar, offensive, and t fiom the view of seven weeks after iccret papers of the I mean time, pas- 1 it to the West- 3, our vessels, car- apped in the fatal ision of our sailors, al. Even in the and the treaties of he majority ofneu- n, and notice of the ;utrals, to justify the ire the same. But le obligations of the and all decency and ( 29 ) justice to us, clandestinely made and transmitted to her naval commanders the orders of the 6th of November, when no blockade existed. By those orders, a neutral American or Dane, bound with French sugar, coffee, &,c. from the U. S. a neutral country, to Denmark a neutral country, nay even to Spain or the Austrian Netherlands, then countries of the powers combined with England in the war against France, were rendered seizable, though the cargo w as neutral property also, but grew in a French colony! By the same order a cargo of American pro- duce and other goods, which could by the arrcte of August, 1784, be carried to the French colonies in peace, was to be treated in like manner ! Is it possible, that any secret order can be more extravagantly, more irregularly injuri- ous to an enemy, and more violative of neutral rights, than the British system of orders of June the 8th, and Novem- ber fith, 1793, as they stood in force, through the months of November and December? It was April, 1794, before we knew, that the November order either existed or was countermanded. When we did obtain the knowledge oi its being countermanded, the mischief was all done. — It was accompanied too with the very unsatisfactory and offensive information that it was not rescinded from any conviction in or admission by England, that it was wrong ; nor did they profess that they would not repeat it. On the contrary, they explicitly avowed that it was coun- termanded, because it had served the occasional end for which it was issued. They added too a reason contrary to the just rights and dignity of our government and na- tion. They said, that it was intended to produce an effect upon the interior circumstances and affairs of our country and government! Professing to consider it censurable to interfere with the interior concerns of a foreign countr}-, the British secretary of state did so interfere in the same breath. He committed a dangerous derogation from our right of interior government, and gave to our ministec Mr. Pinkney ^as an apology!) the assurance, that he had no right to do it. He affected to treat the complainers in America opaitist their orders of council^ as the enemies of Great Britain and of our own government! Mr. Genet having been caused by the French to expiate i^m i! • 1 !' \i • ( SO ) his offence by the loss of all his honors and emoluments, France stood on clear ground. Lord Grcnville must be uonsidered, therefore as the predecessor, in 1793, of all the unrepaired irreguhirities of foreign diplomatic charac- ters, in their transactions with our government. His con- duct has never received any censure, or notice, so far as wc are informed, except those m .nifestations of it, given in Mr. Pinckney's letter of the 9th of January, 1794, wherein he states, tliat ♦« of course he said nothing, (in reply to Lord Grcnville) of our internal affiiirs, nor, of those of France," they being our foreign allies. The next British orders of the 8th of January, 1794, authorised the seizure of all neutral vessels, bound from the French West India colonies to Europe; also of all French West India produce from those islands bound to the ports of neutrals, or even to those of the allies of England. Yet the British afterwards led us into a treaty for carrying not only their West India but their East India protluce to our ports during the war — Thus the verj' means used to aid all \.heir own colonies, have been made the cause of sei. zure against all the neutrals, \^ hen serving a part of the co- lonies of France. Neutrals too, who had secured by treaty the right to protect the goods of an enemy in their neutral ehips were deprived of this stipulated right, in order to injure France. But the section of the law of 1793 concern- ing orders of council protected the ministers. These were new repetitions of violations of neutral commerce, which manifested to France the British determination to continue, upon every call of interest or instigaion of hostility, ingeni- ously and without precedent hardily to apply the system and principle, they had commenced and reiterated in 1792, & 1793. They never permitted the irritability of the French to be abated, nor the wounds of neutral rights to be cured. If the French became inflamed at the sight of their own wrongs, and at the vast expences, injuries, and dangers, which they produced, Britain surely was the cause. I No. VII. It has been unfortunate for neutral commerce, that the ma-chants could not know, in time to avoid confiscations, nd emoluments, envillc must be in 1793, of all )lomatic churac- ncnt. His con- notice, so far as ons of it, given January, 1794, Jill nothing, (in afFairs, nor, of allies. January, 1794, bound from the so of all French 1 bound to the lies of England. ?aty for carrying India protluce to '{ means used to the cause of sci. a part of the co- secured by treaty r in their neutral jht, in order to af 1793 concern- Ts. These were ommerce, which ition to continue, hostility, ingeni- ly the system and terated in 1792, lity of the French ;hts to be cured, ight of their own ies, and dangers, :he cause. nmerce, that the aid confiscations, ( 31 ) r I ^c detached sections of foreign lawa, executive orders^ I &c. &c. by which their property was unwarrantably con. I dcmacd. It is of consequence, that ihcy should now sco I and understand these great sources of danger. Nothing can protect our merclianis, but our maintaining inviolate the law of nations. We have contended, that our pro- perty was often captured and condemned without any real and sound lawful authority, and, of course, against exist- ing law. It is proposed now to olfcr to the American merchants a decided opinion on this subject, which a very great majority of them will receive as the most respectable and indisputable. It comes from Mr. King, who as a man of natural abilities, as a lawyer, an experienced diplomatist, and perfectly informed by the Knglish ministers themselves, in recent negociatio^s, of all their pretensions, writes thus in the 40th page .-.' his pamphlet in " Reply to war in Disguise," published by Riley & co. of New- York, and S. F . Bradford, of Philadelphia, in February, 1806. He expressly states as follows, in regard to British captures. *' The prize courts therefore spoke to neutrals (by their decrees) this clear and distinct language. We acknow- ledge, that by the law of nations you are entitled to the prohibited commerce, and should not hesitate to restore your captured properly, but we are bound by the text of the king's instructions. VVlv.re they do not apjily we shall restore, as we did during the American war ; and as soon and as far as the instructions may be withdrawn, so soon and so far, we will conform our decrees to the law of nations.*' Again in page 41, Mr. King writes more concisely, though indeed not more explicitly thus. " It has in the strong and pointed terms of Sir VVilliam Scott," (the pre- sent judge of the High Court of Admiralty of Great Bri- tain,) " been adjudged^ thl^, die text of the king's instruc- tions is the true rule of a piize court." The conduct of the Briti^,h naval commanders, upon the foundation of the order of council of January, 1791, and ou the plea of blockading islands, was wry dreadful to America. It is certain that blockading Vifort^ a castk, a town, or a port, is a preccdeuted and common measure. But the blockading a lo/.'c/f groupe or chain of i.dands, :it I 1 C 3a ) one tinle, ami the blockade of an entire great islandy like St. Domingo, is a new stretch of English nuvul retincment. The island of St. Domingo is considerably longer thun tlie kingtlom of England, and it is therefore a preposterous affectation of blockade^ to put all the ports of it nniler an inhibitory proclamation, because one port or two arc pro- perly and really blockaded. A ruinous list of captures, however, took place under these orders and proclamations of blockade, by the English, during the year 1794, and examples as wild, as loose, and as injurious, as poM.siblc to the French, and to the neutrals, were set by the Bcr- nuidians, Halifaxmen, Providencemen, and British frigates to the French cruisers. In the close of that year, the treaty was hesitatingly made by Mr. Jay, and Lord Grenvillc, between the U. States aiul (jKat Britain. It was thought only better th.m nar by persons of both parties. By this treaty the British, by mutual contract t gave to the Americans, and we accepted several nevi rights, to trade in the war, with the En^lish colonies in the East and West Indies; which rights were of the same nature, as certain other rights to trade, in the war, which the French had allowed by their own separate acts to the Americans. Those rights to trade, granted by the French, were constantly made tbe avowed ground to confiscate neutral American ships and cargoes by the Bri- tish orders of council and courts of admiralty, because the neutral Americans, as it was (dleged, thereby undertook to aid the French colonial agriculture. Yet great complaints have been made, that the French have condemned Ameri- can vessels for giving the same aid to islands taken from themselves by the British, though we had guaranteed those islands by the treaty of 1778, then in force. Here the French have acted much more favorably to the neutrals than the English; for their courts do not hold the general English principle, viz. to condemn vessels from the East and West India British colonies, because the privilege of trading with those colonies was given to us in the war, and was not previously allowed by law, in peace. Thus the English afford an example extremely injurious to the neu- trals, which the French have refrained from following. Tliis is an important truth. «m teat island^ like iivul rt-tiiicnicnt. longer thun tlie a preposterous ut it uiHter un or two urc pro< ist of cuptures, d proclumations f'car 1794, and )us, as possible set by the Bcr- I British frigutes Jsitatir^gly made II the U. States better th.m nar the British, by m(\ we accepted ith the Kn^liiih lich rights were to tratle, in the ir own separate ade, granted by rwcd ground to foes by the Bri- ulty, because the eby undertook to ;reat complaints :lemne(i Ameri- mds taken from uaranteed those rce. Here the to the neutrals lold the general s from the East the privilege of in the war, and ace. Thus the *ious to the neu- tVom following. ( 33 ) It Is nn essential point of dlficrcncc in the condtjct of France and Great Britain, that France has hitherto ad* mitted the doctrine, th:it her citizens may change dieir allegiance and become American sailors, merchants, and shi|)-hoIders. The opposite doctrine is held by I'.nghind — and many a fine ship has Ix'en tntlangeicd or expensivt ly deUiined by the impressment of native F glishnicn, nuir. ried in America, and become, legally, citizens of the U. States. Numerous captures have taken place l>ecausi the cargoes were the property if Fnglishmen thus bee omo Americans, who had bought gomls in places belonging to the enemies of Fngland. The Fnglish courts doi\y the American citizenship, of such former Fnglish subjects, and condemn their property, iK'cause they are |x.rson'i claimed as British subjects, and have done business in countries belonging to their enemies. To a countrj like ours, inces- santly receiving foreign merchants and capital, this is an immense disadvantage, arising from the conduct of Fng- land alone, and not followed b} France. Fngland may fairly be considered as having forced America into an entirely new act, for a neutral power, in making the provision article of Mr. Jay's treaty; an article cx[)ensive, dangerous, and even capable of being rendered fatal to France, It may be justly asserted that this provi- sion article is without precedent in the annals of the civi- lized world. No neutral nation ever before made such a contract with a i>ovver at war. It is said to be advantageous to us, and to France, and yet Fngland adopted the measure of her own accord, before the treaty, and insisted upon it in making the treaty ! It cannot be doubted that Fngland did consider the provision article, as, on the whole, very injurious to France and very advantageous to herself. When the treaty was signed in London, on the 19th of November, 1794, the orders of the British council, which had injured and disgraced the neutrals, and brought on avowed defensive retaliations from France, were either revoked or considered as superceded. In this state of things, the treaty and Mr. Jay arrived in America. The President received the treaty early in March, 179 1. No objection to it being promulgated, and the senate b.ing called to receive it ibr ratification, there was every reason ( 3i ) l^ncrnlly to piTHume, that it was so Far apfrtwhie to the rrt'sidciit, that he wouUl oficr it without objct lion to that Ixxly, i\» iiulcfd he uftcrwurds *umcd, that the British government relied in May (two months after the call of the senate) with firm co. fidtncc, that the treaty would Ik ra ified l)cforc any thing, England might then do, could be known in America. Ill thin state of things the new orders of the British King in council of May, 1795, for carrying incur provi- sion vessels, Were issued. To judge of the shock to Franc: , let us rcmemlier how the bare rumour paralized the late President Washuigton. He madr an immediate and solemn stantl, and caused it to be made known to the British minister, that be ivoiiid not return t/.e treaty vibtle those orders ivere continued in force. The Biitish minister here, suggested the advice of revoking them for a time, to give u factitious moment of their non-existence, lor the ratification of the treaty! He explicitly proposed, however, that they should then be renewed! How dangerous to the neutrals were the examples of British conduct, set before the government of FraiKc. The English minister actmg thus, is publicly known to have solicited the executive of this country, for the favour of being made tl^ bearer of the trcatv to England. Instead of continuing to l)c i.iformcd, that the provision orders must be revoked before the treaty would be signed; the President's signature was subscribed to the instrument, and the beneft and Ijonor of carrying tt to England conferred upon the British mtnister, agreeably to bis request. It is with infinite pain, that such facts are noticed. But they are necessary to show the deportment of England, and her tide to injure us now by rej^aUng original aggressions under the name of Retaliations. The British orders of May, 1795, may be deemed faith- less to us, and peculiarly offensive and injurious to France, who would as naturally consider them as explanatory o4 the British sense of the treaty, as our own President is known to have done. It is years since the publication oj that fact was made in America; with what degree of good intention or prudence will not be discussed. The cap;ures under these orders were so many, that at the end of twenty ■•MM- ilTfrnlite to ihe )jtH lion H) that in^ ihe apncnr. it may be fairly ctl in May (two rm cot fidtncc, thing, England a. of the British »g in our provi- r the shock to imour poratized f an immediate e known to the tU treaty vibi/e Biitish minister iicm for a time, Kistcncc, lor the posed, however, langerous to the iduct, set before I minister acting the executive of t\\e bearer of the to l)c informed, before the treaty r was subscribed or of carrying it ftister, agreeably at such lacts are ' the deportment ow by repeating !:taliations. be deemed faiih- irious to France, IS explanatory oi' )wn President is he publication of U degree of good :d. The captures the end of twenty 1 ( 35 ) l\vo months, aljout one hundred und t« etUy cases were car- ried imo the Uritihh liigh court of admiialty appeals. 'rhci, (imMion, or deny, that such t law ami tkcrtc ol I'latici ill l.yj, would have l)ccn justly churKcabIc to Great IJriittin, and that it would havf Ircii a cleur, aimple, and mcie retaliaticju on the part ol the Frtm h. It rrquuoi bill link- effort ol a nouud mind ami an honest heart then to plait- to the ai count of the govemnicnt of Great Bri- tain, t\w varioun inlraclions of our neutral rights by the goveinmt nil of France and her allies, which havecKCured nini e the trokc, to destroy our Britain, further, ccssary duty.— iml all her allies, ct her from the ted engagement her. She was and to save her- of France. No vanish neccsbity .Ison, published ; to the neutrals, hat Spain should of the civilized »f a mere block. x:luim to all na- have any trade, struction of ncu- powcrful bclligC' ( '17 ) rfnt mftt^archaahmjU!, in rttaliat'on, d? half what a sccon* Umtv Kitgii»h admiral has thus done muo.) ycara l)cfurc. This strange and extravagant act of admiral Nelson's Is a part of that monstroiDi and crude mann of British violations ol neutral rightM, ivhich are to Ik- found in the or«lrr» of their king in cotmcil, in dte prm'him.itiom of their generals anti admirah, and even in the acts of (Kirliamcnt, under the two heads of Blockades and regulations <([ neutrtl trade. These acts of the British government are, in a great many very im|>ortant instances, and for nuich the greater part, en- tirely unsupiiorted by law or reason, in direct violation of the law of nations and indisputably injurious to n. utral rights. As they apply to one important subject, they arc most accurately, faithfully and ably charai tcrized in the fol- lowing concise summary of the Knglish conduct, in the pamphlet (of 18061, written by Mr. Madison: a work which every neutral »M! j tini'i a'>d merchant, and evrry honest bellig«'rent, shoni Icardully read and iv ell consider. '* The ^iysteni of Oreat Brit;iin, (bay* this inval'iablc *' pamphlet) may therefore now Ix' considered, as unnoun- " cedto all the world, without disguise, and by the most " solemn acts of her government. Her navy having des* ♦• troyed the trade of her enemies, as well Ixtwten the •• mother country and their colonics, a» bctwau the " former and neutral countries, ai\ I her conrts, by ** putting an end to rc-cxport.itions from neutral toun- " tries, rtnlucing the importation into these to the niurc ** amount of their own consumption, the inimenvc surplus " of productions accumulating in fhr American posses- '• sions of her enemies can find no outlet, but throuf^h the '* free porta" (of the British West Indies), " provitled for ** it, nor any other market than the British market, and •* those to which she finds it her interest to distribuU: it: " with a view to which she not only allows her enemies to *' trade with her possessions, bvit allows her subjects to •* trade with her enemies. And thus, in defiance as well *• of her treason laws, and of her laws of tiade, as of the " rights of neutrality, under the ljr.uof ruii'ions, wctfiiui \ ^^ ( 38 ) V her, in the just and emphatic language of the President, " taking to herself, by aa inconsistency, at which reason "revolts, a commerce with her own enemy, which she " denies to a neutral, on the ground of its aiding an enemy *' in the war." Could it liave been credited of Great Britain or of any other respectable government, that they would have passed laws to promote and facilitate trade between the British dominions, (and by British subjects) with the dominions and ports of France, after entering into four solemn treaties with the great European states to prevent the neutrals from trading with those very French ports and dominions, un- der the penalty of a degrading and fatal confiscation? Can it be expected by Great Britain, that the neutral world will ever submit to the substitution of so monstrous a sys- tem of monopolising inconsistency and oppression for the eternal justice of the laws of nations. The hostile influence of the government of Great Bri. tain upon neutral trade, has been manifested in another form, particularly unjust, injurious and offensive. From the earliest time the British courts of admiralty have bur- dened both acquitted and condemned vessels and cargoes with costs and charges, fatal to ordinaiy adventures; and every shade of inconsistent opinion, from acquittal to con- demnation in cases turning on the same principle, has marked the decrees of the judges themselves. The mpre high and proud are the claims of the British judipiaiy de- jwrtment to honour and confidence, in its dispensations of justice at home, the deeper is the stain of such facts, in their administration of law to neutral suitors. Such as we have stated in these papers was the conduct of the British government towards her belligerent adver- sary and the neutial states in the first months of the war of *93. So did she teach that adversary, by her own illegi- timate example, to impede, to harrass, to despoil, to mulct, to diminish, and to dc^stroy the commerce of neutrals — so did she induce and teach Spain, Russia, Prussia and Austria. So did she coerce the U. States, Genoa and Tuscany: and so did she attempt Denmark and Sweden. So did she still continue to act towiu-ds us in the month of Nowjmber, 1806, when the government of France adopted ■ the President, it which reason Tiy, which she liding an enemy ritain or of any uld have passed een the British the dominions solemn treaties tie neutrals from dominions, un> infiscation? Can : neutral world monstrous a sys- pression for the »t of Great Bri. jsted in another "ensive. From iralty have bur- cls and cargoes idventures; and icquittal to con- principle, has es. T|ie more sh judiqiaiy de- dispensations of ■ such facts, in )rs. vas the conduct :lligerent adver- bs of the war of her own illegi- (.■spoil, to mu'ct, :c of ncuirals — ia, Prussia and tes, Genoa and Ic and Sweden, in the month of France adopted ( 59 } Its acts of avowed and actual retaliation. For this act of France, tironeously supposed at tlic first to be a total pro- hibition of neutral trade w ith the British kingdoms, hng- land sets up, against the universal law of nations, and a new formed treaty with the U. States a pretension to st right to retaliate; profiting of her own 'Mrong, against the maxims ol' our common law, and the absolute rules of reason and justice. — The great original parent-ag^rcssor and seducer of Europe, in the moment of a retaliation inlerior liir to her acts of provocation, and drawn by years of malconduct on herself, preposterously claims from that retaliation a right to repeat her innumerable malefactions against the most useful and necessiiry of her neutral friends! The law of nations she had long and often torn, in public, to miserable tatters, and our new treaty was not to bind her, because she had taught France her own new system of iommercial blockade. On us, the written letter of the treaty articles and the old fashioned rules of the law of nations were to continue absolutely obligatory, 'i'he treaty with England, though suspended or annihilated there.by a convenient rider of her dictation, was to be and continue *\ the supreme taw of the land'' in the U States. Thus did England prove, that she had repeated her injuries till our apparent insensibility caused her to believe we hadwo feeling; and that she had deceived us by the color of law in her council orders and of regularity in her pretended blockades, till we fad no sense. The hopes of the two coun. tries arc brought now into a narrow ground, capable of feii- and thorough explanation. We are two nations. Both independent. — The universal prescriptive law of na- tions must govern both, as to men and things. No dis- wensation can be claimed by either party, as of right. We can yield no solid provision of the law of nations, with safety or innocence. The times require of us .nn cnlight- fcned, a sincere, and an undannted neutrality. I i MP ( 40 ) No. IX. It may be well for the United States calmly and closely to enquire and to consider what would have been the state of things between thcni and Great Britain, if the treaty of December had been perfectly satisfactory in all its arti- cles, and if it had l)een mutually ratified, without the at. tempted British rider. From the state of things in the month of December 1806, immediately before its date, and from the course and condition of things since and at present, we could not have expected, that it would have made any difference in the con- duct of Great Britain, beyond the strict 'dictates of its com- ponent articles and provisions. In all those important, numerous and diversified cases and circumstances, w hich. the treaty did not contemplate and which no treaty can em- brace or effectually provide for, in all those cases resting merely upon the universal law of nations, we should remiiin subject tot he usual English operations, founded on grounds like her stipulations of 1 793 with Russia, covered by her act of the 17th June 1793 and its continuance in 1803, and exemplified in her orders of council from June 1793 to January 1807, with the flue uating principles of her admiralty judges, and the habitual extortions of the other officers of those tribunals. If an effectual rt medy for the incessant aberrations of Britain fivm public law, could not be secured, a treaty, which would have left us open to the usual discretionary repetitiono! them, in virtue of the des- potic pretension of the English crown, to make rules for the government of their courts in the condemnation of our property, would have subjected us to the most serious evils. We should have been bound even in our own courts, by the law of nations and the ratified treaty, while an order of the King and Council would direct British cap. tures and ensure British condemnations of our ships and cargoes. The repetition of the orders of June 1793, at the first moment in 1795, that it was supposed Mr. Jay's treaty was ratified, and the attempt in December last to release themselves from the obligations of the new formed urn Imly and closely ^e lx:cn the state , if the treaty of ry in all its arti- without the at> h of December n the course and e could not have rencc in the con» :tatesofitsconi- hose important, nstances, ^hich. lo treaty can em- )se cases resting ve should remain nded on grounds , covered by her nuance in 1803, from June 1793 )rinciples of her ions of the other il rtmedy for the ic law, could not ft us open to the i^irtue of the des- make rules for [lemnation of our he most serious ven in our own fied treaty, while irect British cap- of our ships and June 1T93, at the iposed Mr. Jay's December last to f the new formed ( *1 ) treaty in the very act of cxchanj^ing it, too plainly instruct us what tv/jat could and what viould be done. Unplcasing indeed is it to believe, that the general order of things in any foreign country, is such as to forbid tne h- pe....as to bar the possibility of a satisfactory arrangement with her. Yet such, it is sincerely believed will be found to be the factitious atixte of things, which the several administrations and legislatures of Great Britain have created there, since the year 1791. This serious idea is not suggested as an attack upon her, but as an important reflection upon those historical truths, which have been submitted in these papers. What then is to be done. It is easier for humble indi- viduals, and even for able and responsible public men to see immense evils than to devise a cure. Yet the present case seems to call for one. The simple though vast evil of our situation is, that the laws, •which governed the rcpub- lie ofindpendcnt states before 1 7'^2 have been, since that pe- riod, in an uninterrupted course of infraction and suspen- sion by the nat on with whom our differences depend. To bring things back to that sound and right state, which our mutual honor and interests require and admit,— //6f resto- rat. on of the universal law of nations to its proper sanctity^ is all that is necessary. All without this wdl be nugatory for us and will issue in sure disappointment and new vex- ations, embarrassments andinjuries. It is vain to hope for either peace or honor, or profit, while any foreign go- vernment undertakes to legislate for neutnu suites by a sole unauthorised executive order. The commercial spirit of England has been pampered with an inordinate quantity of the richest food. " The single company of merchants ofEng* land,'''' for example, •' trading beyond the C ipe of Good Hope,'' have expelled all the nations of the civilized world from ihe Peninsula of India, and hive laid at the feet of its own stupendous trading monopoly eighty millions of the enslaved natives ! Englarid has annihilated the cc of a real or per- lich will reach the und of friendship hut is to be done? ,' to consider the to discontinue all cts on her v. ithout ise to prohibit the ivate — of all their 1 silks— of all their ;oods — their giain e glass— and such iggcst. We may remain here — qnd on at their deport- h suggestionsj de- ar such treatment, ses, refuses all our I, presses our sea- lurts, violates our t of other wrongs, St displeasurs or to ,'ar. She injures— make war if you or nuy other coun- ntedly to meet the take good care. lie discontent. AH kl must be against erica. Her whole suspension of our urn. Wc shall take resent manufactur- ( press unlawfully passengers and seamen to man ten i . fifteen sail of sl(X)ps of war and frigates. It will not be fair to say that these papers arc partial to France, or against England, we contend only for the laws of neutrality and of sacred peace. We mourn over the wounds of marglcd humanity. Our faithful government exerts its parental care to save us from those evils. It is for this, among many other causes, dear to our hearts. We approve its conduct with all our minds — with all our souls, l^ct not our fellow men of England any longer persevere in error. They have not a shadow of public law for im- pressmcnt in our ships. It is not the interest of England to render it necessary for America to become a belligerent for unlawful injuries. Our government has shewn tempe- rate, and just dispositions towards Great Britain. Its mem-, bcrs are bound by the inviolable restraints of written con- stitutions, to do right and to avoid doing wrong— We have no power or influence here to assure the passage of acts of indemnity, as in other countries: The laws reign hore over the heads of our public agents. Fiat Lex-^ruct coelum is the con ititutional motto of the chief American function- ary. He may yield himself to no considerations unknown to the laws. He cannot, nor is he, we confidently and aR fectionately trust, in anywise disposed to surrender the liberties, the comforts, the neutrality of our faithful and intrepid mariners to the illegitimate claims of foreign na- tions— He well knows, that all our oppressions, in this form, since the year 1792, have proceeded from G. Britain. No other nations has done to us this pernicious and humi- liating wrong; this illegitimate, this vast injury. Great Britain docs this insulting wrong to no other nation. She never enters Danish or Swedish, or German, or Russian ships to impress her subjects in them; though she well knows many of those subjects are on board of those ve§. mm persons, who are rut assciiiojis and the alleged iicces- exclustuii of the ir more necessary iiise of V T to the It Brituhi > press liun ten d. fifteen pers arc partial to 1 only for the laws I mourn over the ithful government those evils. It is to our hearts. We •with all our souls. f longer persevere public law for im- itercst of England come a belligerent has shewn tempc- Britain. Its mem- tits of written con- wrong — ^We have ; passage of acts of iws reign here over Lex — rmt caelum American function- derations unknown confidently and afw ] to surrender the of our faithful and ims of foreign na- ppressions, in this ed from G. Britain, rnicious and humi- Tist injury. Great other nation. She rerman, or Russian i; though she well board of those ves* mmm ( 47 ) nrh, and they are easily distinguishable there. The pre. tciice of dilHculty to distinguisn Americans from Britons sinks to nought before this single fact, for England doAt not ubube the right of search by attempting to im> press in other neutral vessels. These insults and injuries are all for us alone. This remark is not intended to ag- jfravate — If there be in it ought of aggravation, it consists m iis weighty truth. The object of these papers is to place affairs Ijctwcen Great Britain and America on the only just, firm and satis- factory ground on which they can be restcd—/-6tf f^round of indisputable public Law. It is the law of nations only which prevents u foreign ship of war from impressing sal lorsand passengers out of unarmed vessels, in the bays and rivers of neutral countries. It is the same law of nations, which protects the neutral vessel from being boarded for impressment on the high seas. Annul or violate that law on tlie ocean, and you may witness its violatiou in our narrow seas, ouf bays, our rivers, and our ports. Certain and known law is us necessary to the \Kacc and harmony of nations, as of civil societies. Great B. prides herself in her courts of Common Law. If those courts or her admiralty courts would not give re- medy to the owners and master of a violated neutral ship, lost by impressment of its seamen, that cause of honest pride must lamentably fail. There is no instruction of the crown ; no order of the king and council, those arbitrary substitutes for legitimate rules, to warrant " the detenr. tion" of passengers and seamen and carrying them in for a «ort of legal adjudication or impressment. American citi- zens, fathers of families, are torn from their peaceful and lawful occupations incontempt of the law of nations, because they may be Englishmen ! ! — Reason is reversed. — An English sailor might well remain free from impressment, because an English navy officer could not distinguish him from an American. But it Is preposterous to say they may lawfully take an American, because they cannot distinguish him from an Englishman. 'Tis to subject our iiule|x;n(icnt nation to a British general warrant. Can the American officers enter English ships and impress their seamen hcause tbcy look like Americans? It is bclieveil, that the I ( 48 ) English sea captains, mates, und sailors would, in such a caste, do tho«*c lhir^|5^, which were proposed in the it cent Mil of a late Senator of Maryluiid. The Lovcninuut, |)Co. pic, merchants, and s<:amcn of England would Iht tnms- Sorted with rcscrumcut were the navy ofTiccn* of the U. itates to impress the crews of Knglihh merchantmen on the coast of Great Britain. This huhincss has rcachcVH do not warrant the Impressment of seamen, for If they arc exempted hereby " common law" principles, they arc criuall^ exempted thereby in England, and wc had hopes that this considera- tion would liavc secured us justice on the subject of our mariners, when the whig names of Fox and CJrey were found among the negociators. But it is not the least of tlw mortifications of the day, that the whigs of England have lx:en, at least, the involuntary framcrs of a treaty, which leaves the seamen of this single neuiral state tx- posed to the despotic operation of British impressment. If there be any thing rigntcous in law or sacred in justice; if there lie any meaning; any sincerity, in the alluswn to a community of language, blood, morals, and religion, wc may still hope that an arbitrary power over the bodies of unarmed men, committing themselves to the protection of our neutral flag, will be quickly and completely abandoned by Great Britain. Yet, however, the actual aggression of British impressment remains among the earliest, the most dangerous, the most offensive, and the most inju- rious evidences of the high charge wc have ventured to make. No. XI. A charge so high and so solemn, as that we have made against the British government, should be accompanied by the most explicit allegations, the fairest trutlis, and the vould, ill fltich a k;(I ill ihc n cent (ivcnimcut, peo- won 1*1 Ik- trans- Hiccis of the U. merchantmen on A it regards the ul (hitits of neu- icIvaiKcnitiit and t iH ol no conse- j not warrant the exempted hcrdjy |ually exempted at this consi(lera- \t subject of our ami (Irey were s not the least of hij^s of Etigland ners of a treaty, neuirul state cx- sh impressment, sacred in justice; { the aUuston to a and religion, we vcr the botlies of the protection of iletcly abandt -ned actual aggression the earliest, the 1(1 the most inju- havc ventured to lat we bave made t accompanied by t truUis, and the ( 49 ) sotjndeit arj^timents on our part. These g this, iKTspicuiiy will often rcijuirc a rrpctition of the onicial argument*. . , . • r We present to our renders with confidence, the ponition ol our government, that the law of nations (Icks no auUioiize a lx;liigeient |>ower to enter a neutral ship on the high seas, fur the putposc of Hcarching for, or Uikingout any iRihons but military enemies. Such an act cannot be justiiied by the proper or local laws or eonstiuitions of a paiticular belligerent country, because foreign munici|)ul lawsdo not aftect neutral ships, and jiersons out of the jurisdiction of the power at war. Nor can it Ik admittetl that a con- currence ol municipal luws, would render a principle valid in public Law. I'hese opinions ore unreservedly displayed, because they nre bi lieved to U- correct, alter examination and itlke- tion, andbecaustr they can be counter argued, if wrong. But if England had a rilsht to impress her own subjects at sea she ought to abstain from it on board of American ships, because she cannot ascertain lli< m. •' The dilitculty to distinguish." Americans Irom Biiions is an inf.ciii' us turn of expression. The correct language is that, in t ve i y case, wherein the British cannot ascertain their subjt cts, from their similarity to our citizens, there exists an insupef- able impediment to the execution of this extreme per- sonal pr(x:ess of impressment. No officer, with the clearest and strongest warrant, can consciensciotisly, safely, or lawfully take hold of anv person in virtue of such warrant, without first ascertainingnis man. By the common law, the man, v rongly taken in such case, may resist to death without being guilty of murder. If held, he will recover damages for false imprisonment. If every Englishman, falsely taken within the Island of Great Britain, can thus have remedy for the wron^ against the high sheriff of London, or the «iHicer8 of the civil adminis- tration, surely neutral citizens cannot, with impunity, be made prisoners on board the'r own vessels, out of the .■:v*r,T».: fSJXS rsfS -g- ' J".. ' " ' I ' js. ' ' ig" '^* ' * I 'l ( 50 ) Kngliih juiUdiction, at ihc ditcrctioii of every yount mi(ti»hii}mnn or lieiitcnunt. When it in done, the Knglish officer Ik Hubjcct to dunnigt%, or uc arc in a worse condU tion than sul»jtct«. It in u kokmn und im|)erioiis duty of the United Stateg to take a culm »tund upon the stron)^ ^r(>un, thui Knghhhmcn, lavvfiilly contracted to us, us >eanicn uiul pasbcngcrH, nre bound to remain with ua, till the contnict hhull be per- formed— und that thiti constitute!* another iusupirable ob- jection to luking them from us by imprcshment. 1 lure is no law of either nation, forbidding our agreeing with Ikitihh scumeii and passengers, und ue might an morally und justly break the contracts of our citizens with di<.ir sul)jccts for gom!h, as they breuk their subjects con- tracts V ith us for services or -''^ passengers, we repeat the suggestion, that law must necessaiily govern in the buhintss und personal intercourse between Americans and Dritons, if they mean (as we do) to preserve a gootl un- derstanding. We do not invude their personal rights. Tliey must cease to invade ours. We do not invade their rifirlits of propcily: They must not continue to invade ours. 'I'hc piacticc of the impressni^r.t o( \hc particular class of Briiish subjects, called •• seamen," even within the Biiiish jurisdiction, is not capable of being pursued, with- out an illegitimate sacrifice of the principles of the com- pacts between the nation and their king in the great char- ttis. Nothing but an act of parliament (perhaps not that) can abrogate the stipulations of these charters. — The long custom of impressing, like the custom of purchasing scats in parliament, cannot legalize the measure. Hence no man has ever been hanged for murder on account of a deiith clearly produced in resisting impressment. Great Britain wants soldiers more than sailors : yet she docs not venture to impress men to fill her regiments, bound to the simic places as her ships of war. The impressed sailors are uninformed, violently conveyed away, confined in floating prisons, and therefore unable to resist, w ith suc- cess, the particular measure of oppressior. often dealt out to'^ Try yount live Knglisn or»c coruli. litcd Statrs of law iiiid (ly in hiich 'nglitthmcn, Liigtr», nre mil be per- per able ob^ It. nir agreeing vc might m itizcns with Libiccta con- Wc repeat oveni in the lericuns and a good un. onal rights, invade their ic to invade •ticular class I within the rsued, with- )f the com- : great char- aps not that) irters. — The f purchasing iru. Hence account of a lent. Great she does not bound to the essed sailors confined in it, w ith sue- n dealt out Xf^ .( »* ) iheni, even hi limci of the moBt calm and r,etf ne jjeaoef The ilUgitimacy <>t the imprei»»ment of real hiijjlishrmn, withm their jiirinlicuoii, increanci* tlw: ditwti^fuction of the American* at the impressment of pcrtons in our «hi|)N on the high »ca». We know it to .Ik- unlawful and oppressive, and that it justilics our citixcn* in resistaiu e, at every huzartl. VV.' notice this, iKCU'tie Ameri. a \vas been vio- Icntly censured for introducuig a bill into her Ugislature to clothe du» right incertMin, known and |)-rmanent language. It will not Ik- denied, that the i.iptain an tioned the position, that no power, right, or pierofi.tUit; " to give rules and directions to the courts of aclmiriiry, for the adjudication and condemnation of prizes' exis ed in the king and council of Great Britain — Snch a power therefore, could not be inferred from, reco{,;iiii^ed, siivtd, or confirmed, by the 35th section of the act of . 3i. ofG.o. the 3rd, chapter 66. Nor do the w ords of that section \;\ a at such a right or prerogative to the crow n. It is therelore correct to assert, that all condemnations of neutral An e- rican ships and cargoes, made and confirmed by the Bri i: h courtvi of vice-admiralty and appeals agai.st the law of n - tions, or beyond or without that law, upon the order b of the king of England are unjust, ilkgitimate, matteisof r\\ li Hi lii rr ( s» ) iightful complaint on the part of the neutral countries, and which uutitorizc us " to demand that justice be yet done us, in those British courts, according to the law of nations", for all captures prior to Mr. Jay's tre ity and since its expiration ; and according to the l.iv oi' nations and lli.it treaty, fur ail captures during ith being and continuing in force. Never was there a fiirer, sounder or sliongcr ground to require, that a com- nu-iMioii be established to ascertain our damages and inju- rits, with costs, charges and imprest, in all cases wherein (ktentJoiis, captures and condemnations have occurred, solely in consequence of those British executive orders. \Vc have suffeted deeply from this act, from British anti- neutral treaties, and orders of that crown ; but the injuri. ous conse(|uences in the wars of 1793 and 1803, and hi future ivars cannot be estimated. We have before remarked, that our original nation of the 3d of July, 1776 having been divided in due form, we are full tenants in common with our late British compa- triots in all the ground of the constitution and general laws of our former empire, nvbicb we choose to occupy — and we may add, that at the epocha of our separation, no such section existed. It cannot therefore in law, right, or con- science be used to affect us, but the settled doctrines of Mansfield and his associates may be specially pleaded in our favor. There can be no doubt, that a foreign course of practice, under such orders, against the law of nations, is a sufficient cause of war^ whenever it occurs without redress. Nor can it be denied, that this unprecedented section, and that of the British act of 1803, in the same words, would give a broad foundation for similar executive orders of other foreign governments, if they passed with- out our protest. No. XIII. The notorious perversions and misapplications of the principles and rules of blockade are among the most perni- cious fruits of the British irregailarities of 1792 and 1793. The forcible prevention of neutrals from the lawful carry- ing of supplies to France from peaceful and neutral Eng- land, Hamburg, &c. and the British conventions with Russia, Spain, Austria and Prussia, after the war had neutral countries, lid that ju!iticc be , according to the trior to Mr. Jay's I according to the ill captures during Never was there require, that a com- damaecs and iiiju- in all cases w herein )ns have occurred, li executive orders. , from British anti- vn ; but the injuri. 3 and 1803, and in ir original nation of vidcd in due form, - late British compa- ion and general laws e to occupy — and we leparation, no such I law, right, or con- settled doctrines of specially pleaded in hat a foreign course : the law of nations, r it occurs without this unprecedented f 1803, in the same or similar executive if they passed with- isapplications of the on^ the most perni- i of 1792 and 1793. •m the lawful carry- al and neutral Eng- 1 conventions with after the war had MP* . ( W ) began, with the conduct observed to Genoa, Tuscany and America, the attempts of Kngland upon the Danes luid Swedes, end the monstrous practice of nt utral inij^ress. mcnts, held forth to the British naval conimandcif. the l(rcatcst encouragement of the practice of insult and injury against Lrj). The new and unv\arrantablc section of the act of parliament of the 17lh of June, 1793, impliedly sanctioning executive interference in judicial trials and decisions, and in the capture and confiscation of neutral property, under those forms of law, placed the illcgiti. mate acts of admirals and ministers under llic broad cover of an universal indemnity, if even a secret order of an irresponsible chief magistrate could only be obtained. What evil practice did not such a ataie of things teach France ? What vexation and injury did not such a con li- tion of things hold out to the neutral states? The unau- thorized regulation of all neutral trade, under the name, pretence, and forms of " Blockade,'* in eases wherein the rights of Blockaders and the duties of neutrals did not occur or exist, was a shorter step, on the part of Great Britain, from the ground of lawless violence on which she stood when executing her convention with Russia, than was her monstrous step to that ground, from the situation of a correct co-neutral before her French war, or from the situation of an honest and order y belligerent after ihc commencement of her quarrel with France. 'I'he neutrals were to be harassed, spoliated and impressed till they would consent to become parties in the war on the I''.nglish side. The whole French people were to be deliberately ^starved, till they would consent to the abandonment of their colonies, the partition of their home dominions, and the abolition of their civil constitution. To accomplish these things, the king of Great Britain, in the manner we have seen, usurped the legislation of the ocean, and sub- stituted orders of himself in council for the universal pre- scriptive law of nations and for his own obligator}' treaties. To produce the siirrender of the French colonies, they were deprived of all trade by the order of council of November 1793, contrary to the rights of belligerent Tuscany, Prus- sia and Russia and of neutral America, Denmark and Sweden. At that stage of British irregularity, the new perversions of the name of Blockades were not thought of, ?1 I ( CO ) nor were the forms adopted. A short but unparulklcd order, (iircctinf^ ilic seizure as well of liciligcrcnt allies as of neutrals, if guin^toor coming from or currying tlu; f>roduce of u French colony, wait secretly adopted. The iritish commanders followed up this act, by prnchimationii of DIockudc rct>iK:cting places and islands, which they did not cither invest or aituck. But it ansucred the purposes in the halls of their admiralty, for the couits had the orcicrs of the British king and council as "rw/M" forthe condem- nation of the neutrals, and tluy found the name oi blocka of their families, in those pursuits, her political occonomists com- plained, tliat this wooded and agricultural country, sup. plied diern and their colonics with the provisions and lumber, of which they stood in need. They wished to farm for the world too, and to cut wood where they had not people. Now that Kngland is at war, she wishes to have all the benefits of a nation at peace. As she cannot at the mo- ment, hold competition with neutrals in cheap navigation and trade, she endeavors unfairly and unlawfully to maintain the forms and rules of military blockades, to monopolize the commerce of the world. She commits aggressions on neu- trals, for a series of years and claims tlK- right of retalia- tion, which belongs to her adversaries. She denies the law. fulness of supplying and buying from her enemies, and in the face of the world, enacts statutes to enable her own subjects to do those things. She seizes, by the sword, on all India and deprives the civilized world of the commerce with seventy or eighty millions of their Asiatic inhabitants, and she complains loudly when her enemn s afterwards, deprive her, by the s;ime sword also, of commerce with a smaller number of the people of Europe. It is believed to be newssary to her future bcnclici;U intercourse with this countrj', that she claim nothing of us, inconsistent with public law— that she do towards us nothing contrar)- to it — and that she be zealous to facilitate the foreign sales of our produce, or contented to see us manufacture and consume it at home. The British nation is not either strong enough, numerous enough, or so situated and cir- umstanced, as to do the whole business of all mrnlind. y r. wmf ( tit ) • Ko. XIV. On « (lispasionate consideration '»(' the preceding his. toriuil lacta, in their i)alpal)tc uuniicction uith the iXnglo HuHsiun convention ol 17U.), wctruHt, that the high ih.>rge ol' ori inal agi^rtssion on ni-iitral connncrcc will appear to be fully esitubUhhed against the Hritish government. If the continuance, increase, aixl niuiti|iiicuiion of thoNC ag- grciiikiotis an not admitted by (i eat brituin and her i'rieiKh, n biici' recital will be Hullicient to shew them to the im- partial world. Aciuai iinprciiMmcntH of Uritons and other aliens 'ind of our own citizens have never eeaned. England has peiw- vered oexetutt her own «/'(/M/n»unirlpui law on l)oaitl of our ships* on the high seas, in vioiatirjiiof'the law of n.iM"ns, ofuur neutral rights, of written inu'ual contracts, and ot the safety of our property and crews. She has been utterly reganlless of our netitral duties and dangt rs in this respect j and to finish the subject, she at the samt moment takes our own contractev^l American citizens, on the high seas out of our own vessels, making tlicm prisoners, the neu- trals, while she claims of us. alleged, but unascertained British deserters, in belligerent form. The British government continues to encourage and to maintain their public and private ships of war and courts, out of ncutnil property, by suffering the exaction of the most extravagant anti unfounded bitis of costs and charges, as well in cases of cleared^ us of condemned vessels and cargoes — to the great vexation, obstruction and injury of our neutral trade. The ncvv^ overstrained and contradictory opinions and decisions of their admiralty tribunals, and their frequent contraventions of the law of nations in consequence of their holding, as " the rule of their courts, the text of the British king's instructions," continue illegitimately to in- jure and destroy our property and trade; while British merchants, seamen and vessels are often licenced by the crown or by law to give those supplies to their enemies, and aids to tlieir enemy's agriculture, for which they detain our citizens and condemn our property. The operation of blockade, (a mj^re and strict militiiry measure) continues to be substituted by excr varying and arbitrary commercial interdictions : measures levelled at tlie neutrals, preposterously and unlaw fully called by the name T^ ic prrcfflinn h'*- ) with lilt- iXii^ln It thf high 1 h->rf;e rcc will upfK,ur to govcinnu'iit. If iiioti of tluMC llg- II and her iVUiulH, thcni to tlic in\- ithcr allct\» ind of iglund has ptibc- lui i«m oil tK)ai(i of ihc law ofii.iM"ns, titructs, aiulot thd has briM iHUrly lb in this re sjicct j Ml niununt taken oil the hi(;h seas isoncrs, the tu u- ut unuNCcrtaiticd encourage and to f war and courts, r exaction of the Is of costs and ondcmned vessels action und injury )ry opinions and lid their frequent I consequence of :s, the text of the Egitimately to in- e; while British 1 licenced by the to their enemies, for which they perty. id strict militiiry fvcr varying and ires levelled at the ailed bv the name ( «5 ) •f biockn(te I . « I 'I I . * !■ 1 ( 60 ) rent power, since the commencement of the French Revoki- lion. It ib however, to be carefully obser\ ccl, that, the idea of being considered as accomplices in the plan of monopoly, whidi the Emperor charges on England, is strictly confined to the neutrals of the continent of Europe— This strong and explicit French denunciation is couched in terms, which cannot, by the most forced constiuctiou, be deemed to include the United States. It will be remembered also, that the apparently extreme idea, that '• to be neuter'' in these modern wars, is in fact to be ♦' an accomplice," was first unhappily proclaimed by the government of Grdat Britain. We have already seen that in the year I7i>3, the British minister at Genoa declared, inform and in writing, to diat government, in terms of absolute generality, that to be neutral, in the pending contest of i'.ngiand v» ith France, was to be ,' an accomplice'* of the latter. This unfortunate and excessive precedent, set by Great-Britain to France, was couched in language, which included every neutral countiT, and, of course, actually and fully compre- hended us. it is a matter therefore of no small importance in an accurate and candid estimate, that in the French act of li;06, actually retaliating that of England of 1795 in regard to '' neutral accomplices of belligerents,'' France has been as correct towards us, as Great-Britain was incorrect in her unwarrantable precedent. Another important point of comparison, as to the treatment we now receive from the two countries, merits our temperate, candid and seri- ous consideration. It is useless and injurious to admit passion. — Though France has issued her decree of block- ade of the 2 1st of November, we find that the only com- munications we have from their government, and from our minister at that court, hold out to us positive assurances tliat our convention (freely and fairly made by France and by us) is to govern, and not the subsequent Decree of last November, made by France alone, and her cruisers in the Atlantic have acted accordingly. But England, having formed a treaty >\ ith us on the 31st of December, holds out to us in a rider made by her self alone, and in the speeches of her minister in Parliament and in her January order oj council, that neidier, the treaty as made, nor the law of nations is to govern. This conduct is the more remarka- ble, because they knew of the French decree before the treaty was framed. IB T "iciich Revolu- that, the idea of 11 of monopoly, strictly confined rhis strong and 1 terms, which , be d€cn\ed to Ticmbercd also, J be neuter^'' in complice," was jment of Grtfat year 1793, the and in writing, gene/aliiy, that England with [le latter. This )y Great- Britain h included every id fully compre- mall importance 1 the French act land of 1795 in jw," France has in was incorrect important point ow receive -from candid and seri- jurious to admit decree of block- at the only com- nt, and from our sitive assurances e by France and nt Decree of last er cruisers in the England, having :ember, holds out d in the speeches January order of , nor the law of e more remarka- iecree before the ( 67 ) It is a mist unfortunate and indeed an unreasonable tiling, that Great Britain should claim to consider, that retalhiiiori for the violation and illegitimate treatment of neutrals is to be made nonu by her. She claims against us,:\ right to " retaliate'^ the uses, which France had proposed to make of neutrals, although England has been making those uses of all the neutrals in every yea- since 1792! ft would not be incumbent on us to interlere in this discussion, but that England claims a right to use the French act to justify repetition of the vast and numerous injuries she has done us, from year to year, in, and since 1792. Great Britain really knows this full ivcll: and the government and people of America know it as well. — Let her honestly and pru- dently examine her proclamation and executive orders in 1792, the remonstrances of M. Cbauv:Hn under thetli- rectionof M. Talleyrand in that year^ and the act of Par- liament to indcminfy her ministers. Lrt her read once more her own great leading anti-neutral treaty of March 1793 with itussia, and the similar treaties in o which o'.her powers were forced and induced by her: Let her candidly remember too, her orders of June and her secret orders of November 17'J3, and the conferences and correspondence of Mr. 7*. Pincknev and Lord Grenville on tho; e painful subjects; with the calm, comprehensive an J unanswerable representation of the whole, in the jiapers of Mr. Jefferson, then our secretary of state, laid before Congress by Picsi dent Washington in 1794 1 Let Great Britain impartially examine her orders of council of January 1V94, M^y 1795, January 1798, and at other times, with the illegiti- mate proclamation of Admiral Nelson off Cadiz in 17L>7, and similar acts of her other admirals, announcing the de- termined annihilation of a nations ivhole trade under the preposterQus affectation of legitimate blockades. All these wert prior to the Frence decree of November 1306, and were the real and indisputable causes of that decree. To talk to us therefore of our duty to oppose that decree is to remind us, /;/ the most forcible manner, of tiic duty we are- under to oppose and to procure the abrogation of the Bri- tish precedents, luhich have truly brought it on the world. I^et Great Britain hasten to enable the neutral world to take just and effectual measures for the abrogation of the late French Decree, by worthily and wisely treading back the unlawful steps, with which she has unhappily advanced J \ I ^m I V I. I c ( «8 ) during more than fifteen years, in her diversified and ruinous violations of neutral rights. Ii is in vain for her or for us to dt-ceive ourselves. Nothing but a return to Justice under the Law of Nations, can preserve harmony, serve her real interests, or secure inviolable those of the United Slates. We have proved too clearly, by our long and patient sufferance of vast, numerous, and repeated in- juries, that we have not been hasty to seek or hazard tlis- cord. Things are at last arrived at the most serious lengths. 'Tis unwise to hope that matters can happily remain as they are, or run longer on as they have done since 1792. — Weighty — solemn — a'^'ful circumstances, at home and abroad, have taken place, deeply aft'ccting them and us. New events of equal magnitude seem likely to arise. The times are portentous. If Great Britain is not determined to add to the evils, which press or menance her, the just loss of our good-will and an i evitablc privation of much or all of our custom and tra« e, s/je wUI not persevere in vio- iatinp the legitimate protection, tuhich ourjiag should giv( to aU persons, but military enemies, and which it s-jjould completely afford to neutral property, in every branch of lawful commerce. The United States will solemnly, sin- cerely and .truly deprecate a recuirence tp the system of counter measures, whereof our government has been forced to display the principles. But the government and people of Great Britain cannot fail to collect from the history of the two last sessions of our national Legislature ; irom the temperate and frank declarj^tions of our chief magistrate, and from the conferences of our respective ministers here and in Europe, that America is really, justly and deeply concerned for her rights and interests, and for her neutral character and her neutral obligations. It is time for us to end the real war upon our citizens, our property and our fl»g, which Great Britain has long waged. The practice has been deeply injurious to the neutrals ; The example, if continued, may become ruinous, No. XV. The dispositions of Great Britain towards the United States of America, after the ixjace of 1783 and before the wars produced by the French revolutions, were not marked by symptoms of kindness, or respect. They did not send HI 'A- diversified and 5 in vain for her J but « return to ;servc harmony, bie those of the urly, by our long and repeated in- k or hazard dis- t serious lengths, ippily remain as ne sinee 1792 — , at home and ig them and us. ly to arise. The 51 not iletermined ice her, the just 'ation of much or persevere in vio- 'Jiag should givf which it should every branch of ill solemnly, sin. to the system of It has been forced ment and people >m the history of ilature; from the :hief magistrate, 'e ministers here justly and deeply djor her neutral is time for us to )roperty and our The practice ; The example, ards the United 13 and before the were not marked hey did not send ( 69 •) , a minister hither till the year 1791, though we joined in territory awA had extensive connections. Their most (lis< tingui;>heci commercial writer, a member of the Irish lords andiiiitish ct>mmons,^ countenanced the idea, that it was not the interest of the mitritime powers of Euro]x; to re- lievc us from the depredations of the piratical states of B.ubary. For this Zv-alous anti-American work, he has been long since rewarded by a l3ritish peerage and an ofBce of prolit. It has been publicly stateil in a pamphlet writ- ten by a confiJcntial member of our administration,! that the British government meditated the dismemberment of our country at the Ohio. In 1"86, they agreed with France, that free ships should make free goods. But in 1791, the report of their privy council particularly ad. vised, that such an agreement should not be made with us: and they have conducted their treaties in the most decided and rigid conformity with that partial recommendation. Other circumstances of a more offensive nature might Ije stated, but it is not wished to prevent a dispassionate consideration of existing circumstances. Our object in these notices is to shew to Great Britain, thut early causes of dissatisfaction have occured on her part. After their war with France had taken place, Great Bri- tain distingui-hed us, beyond (.tlier neut als, by many em- phatic expressions of an adversary character, by a series of interpositions in our affairs, by attempts to commit our neutrality with the other belligerents, and by establishing principles, which bore upon our interests more than upon any other neutral. She established a press in the hands of one of her own subjects, in the bosom of our national go- I'ernment, to depreciate the principles of our institutions and to oppose the rights of our neutrality; and her public editor seduced the printer of our government gazette to the views and principles of Great Britain. I For these services the typographical agent of England received public honors on the floor of their legislature from the m(juths of their ministrj . — The great Premier of England declared in his place in the house of commons, that *' the inventors of the doctrine of the sovereignty of the |)eople were the * Lord Sheffield in his commerce of the United States. t The Ute \. Hamilton, Esq. in his pamphlet on tlic treoty of 1*94. % See letters of Noah Webster Es^. to 4. Hamilton Essj. in d(;fcBCe of Prestdvnt A^i'O)'' # (T , enemies of their kind« ' In pursuance of the absertiou in their report of couucil of l^ljk.4hat they had fonnccl a party in our senate, they carried iilto>cxecution their ho|)e.s of corruption, as was proved in the case of an expelled member of that body. — The same British minister, who was their agent in this corrupt attempt to commit our neu- trality, communicated to their American provinces, that he had drawn us into an arrangement on the subject of St, Domingo, which might be strongly hoped to implicate us in a war with thatet)wtr.--Briiish 'impressments of na- tive neutral sailors, oft board of iMiUtral ships, v\cre cunfiaed to the citizens and flag of the United States. — 'Die impress- ment of Britons and oiher aliens, sailing as seamen and pas» sengers in neutral vessels, was comniiiled only on board of our ships. Tc our neutral minister alone did a British se- cretary of state presume to insinuate* that the honest and reasonable cqinplainei;s against the British orders of cpuncil Jis we have seen ihcy are) were the intemperate enemies (such) of America am I England.— On our immense legalized traffic in wood, grain, vegetables, molasses, taffia, &c. &c. with the French colonies, did the prohibitions of the British order of council of November 1793, impose ruin— u traffic established by the French in peace according to municipal and public lavf—Awd annulled by the British in vjwv agaiftsi all law. — Upon the Americans, only, has been imposed that refinement in the business of neutral spolia- tions, by which two several and distinct voyages to and from the United States, have been pretended to be made one^ in judicial form, in order to work the confiscation of our ships and cargoes, and to destroy our commerce. — In our case alone has the British inconsistency occurred of taking the benefit of our new war trade to support their colonial agriculture, while the like trade in support of their enemies colonial agriculture is adjudged to be cause of ruinous condemnations of our vessels and cargoes. We refrain cheerfully from a further exemplification of the ])eculiar injuries to this neutral country — this useful coun- try, which has been the most abundant source of the ma- terials of British manufactures and of British necessaries, and the greatest purchaser of her redundant commodities. The rescinding of the dangerous articles in the Russian, * Lurd GrenriUe to Mr. T. Pinckney, f the absertiuii in L*y had Ibrinccl a ution their hu|)es e of an expelled h miniiiter, who commit ourncu- I provinces, tliat n the subject of jjK'd to implicate iressmenlsof na- ps, « CIV cunfmed >. — Tlic impress- i seamen and pas» only on board of did a British se- at the honest and orders of CQiuicil ate enemies (sucfi) sc legalized traffic fia, &c. &c. with IS of the British impose ruin— •ace according to by the Biitish in >3, only, has been 3f neutral spolia- t voyages to and ided to be made ie confiscation of • commerce. — In mcy occurred of to support their 1 support of their 1 to be cause of id cargoes. We plification of the ■tliis useful cpun- Durce of the ma- itish necessaries, int commodities. IS in the Russian, cy. ( 71 ) IVussian and Spanish trcuticsof 1793, or the candid aban- domneut of the principle, if the British nation should fincV herself at war with thobc three powers; the repeal of the 35th Svctionof tiic act of the 17th June 1793 or the simi. I jr section of 1803, and a frank declaration against die principle of them ; an abandonment of die pretension to nuke rules and regulations lor the trial and condemnation of neutral property ; tlie relinquishment of the practice and pretension of impressment in our vessels ; Kitisluctorv declarations upon the subject of blockades and a general restoration of its proper sanctity to the Jaw of nations would revive good humoiir between the two Countries, and open before each the bright prospect of mutual happiness. Wt expect and desire nothing beyond the duties, which jus- tice requires of Gicat Britain. Some have alledged, that self pix-servation forbids her present compliance. This is a recent pretence, and cannot be considered as just or true, or admissible. No light or imaginary obligations impel our government to preserve to us, their constituents, our personal rights by sea and land, the rights of our flag, our rights of property, the duties and rights of neutrality and the many blessings of the law of nations. I'hc im- pressiv^! facts in the prececding pages will perfectly con. vmce even candid Englishmen, that Great Britain has not claims upon our gratitude, sufficient to induce us to become ' knights errant" against tie combined powers of the Euro, pean continent. No : we arc ready to walk with England m the paths of justice,amity, and mutual benefits. But, if she continues to deviate, we may righteously cultivate our scpa- rate interests. We may continue her legalized exclusion from a portion of our trade. We may extend the principle further. We may include person-; .jnd private ships as well as manufactures and public shipt., in our reluctant prohibi- t'ons. We may select more objects of exclusion than we have yet chosen; or we may occupy the whole field of pain- lul inteivjiction. Unjustly wounded in our external com- merce,we may recur with vvh.dom and energy to the invul- nerable object of home manufactures. Obstructed in the ioreign sales of our agricultural productions by English orders of council and pretended blockades, wermav create for these productions at home a great, certain ancl steady market, by cncreasing exclusions of British manufacture^ it IS a sound maxini in pur political oeconomv, xh^t'so far ai' ( 72 ) tj;^ cannot trade abroad, we shall certainly manufckture at home. Great Britain may cherish opposite opinions, b«t a very little time of separation, particularly in war, would convince her of a fatal error. Those among us, who are not disiKJsecl to promote manufactures, will perceive the necessity for their aid to sup^rt our agriculture^ which is plainly created by the naval irrcgulariuts of Great Britain, and by her endeavours to monopolize external commerce. In the beginning of the recent wars, she made a combina- tion to accomplish naval dictation; but haying ruinous substitution of power for «ght, ^^ w?m!A' '^<^ / JURISCOLA;^ • S«« her tie»Uci with Rusii* kc. March 1793. ^ M'l ' manufdciure at te opinions, biit yr in war, would )iig us, who arc I'llT perceive the uUure^ which is )f Great Britain, :mal commerce, [natle a combina- lavine 'luarreled with Kiissia, fche As she lessens of the nemrals, Every maritime iource of profit, ading with them, :r own subjects rbidden to trade jnts, while by a »j>e adversary beU neutral ships arc free good8,*while s free good<^ the sh Knemies. 1 he )f the trade of one krer of England,* of her adversaries, ly neutrals. TW&/ war. The spwla in le awful pro8f)ecto«|i lit, require a aitand.? JtlRlSCOLAf ^ I ,t L