^J %. s^. %^, p. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. :/. ^ ^ m. V, 1.0 I.I 1.25 -Has |50 ""'^^ IM 1.4 IIM 2.2 1= 1.6 Photographic Sciences Corporation « -^•\ €^ ^ \ % V o^ 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. )4580 (716) 872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques V Technicat and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D Coloured covers/ Couvertura de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculia □ Cover title missing/ .0 titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) r~n Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations an couleur Bound with other material/ Reiii avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long Je 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 ajouties lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela ixait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iti film^es. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6ti possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiquAs ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur r~~] Pages damaged/ D Pages endommagees Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es r~71 Pages discoloured, stcained or foxed/ Pages ddcolor^es, tacheties ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages ddtachees Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Qualit^^ inigale de I'impression Includes supplementary materi{ Comprend du materiel supplementaire idition available/ Edition disponible I I Pages detached/ r~7 Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ r~~l Includes supplementary material/ □ Only edition available/ Seule D 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 d'errata, une pelure, etc., cnt itd film^es d nouveau de facon ^ obtenir la meilleure image possible. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplimentaires; Wrinkled pages may film slightly out of focus. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X / 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: National Library of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grflce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Bibliothdque nationale du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la conoition et de la nottetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed ci' 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. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont filmds en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iilustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6» en commenpant par la premidre page :iui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON- TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole —^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds A des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clichd, il est filmd d partir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^x^<^^^^ 2. LETTER 10 THE HON. HARRISON GRAY OTIS, A MEMBER OF THE SENATE OF MASSACHUSETTS, OX THE PRESENT STATE OF OUR NATIONAL AFFAIRS ; WITH IREMAMKS UPON MR. PICK TURING'S LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR OF THE COMMONWEALTH. BY JOHN QUINCY ADAMa ♦ BOSTON : eUBLISHED BY OLITEB AMD MUNROE. 1808, r ,i i; LETTER TO Till HON. HARRISON GRAY OTIS. Dear Sir, WASHINGTON, MARCH 31, 1808, I HAVE received from one of my friends in Boston a copy of a printed pamphlet, containing a let- ter from Mr. Pickering to the Governor of the Com- monwealth, intended for communication to the Leff- islature of the State, during their Session, recently concluded. But this object not having been accom- plisl cd , It appears to have been published by some friend of the writer, whose inducement is stated, no doubt truly, to have been the importance of the matter dis- cussed in it, and the high respectabilitv of the author. 1 he subjects of this letter are the ii.mbargo, and tht difterenccs in controversy between our Country and Oreat-Britain— -Subjects upon which it is my misfor- tune, in the discharge of my duties as a Senator of the United States to differ from the opinions of my CeU- league. The place where the question upon the first ot them, in common with others of great national con- cern, was between him and me, in our official capacities a proper object of discussion, was the Senate of the Union— X here, it was discussed, and, as far as tht^ constitutional authority of that body extended, there it was decided— Having obtained alike the concurrence of the other branch of the national Legislature, and the ap. probation of the President, it became the Law of the Land, and as such I have considered it ^ititled tn Lh*» respect and obedience of every virtuous citizen. i^rom these decisions however, the letter in ques- tion is to be considered in the nature of an appeal ; in the hrst instance, to our common constituents, the Legislature of the State— and in tlie second, by the pub ication, to the people. To both these tribunals I snail always hold myself accountable for every act of my public life. Yet, were my own political character alone implicated in the course which has in this in- stance been pursued, I should have forborne all notice of the proceeding, and have left my conduct in this a<5 in other cases, to the candour and discretion of mv Country. ^ But to this species of appeal, thus conducted, there are some objections on Constitutional grounds, which 1 deem It my duty to mention for the consideration of the public. On a statement of circumstances attend- ing a very important act of national legislation, a state- ment which the writer undoubtedly "believed to be true, but which comes only from' one side of the question and VN'hich, I expect to prove in the most es- sential points erroneotis, the writer with the most an- imated tone of energy calls for the interposition of the commercial States, and asserts that '' nothing but their sense, clearly and emphatically expressed; will save them from ruin." This solemn and alarmino; invocation is addressed to the Legis^lature of Massa! chusetts, at so late a period of their Session, that had it been received by them, they must have been com- pelled either to act upon the views of this representa- tion, without hearing the counter statement of the other side, or seemingly to disregard the pressing in. terest of their constituents, by neglecting an admoni- tion ot the most serious complexion. Considerhiff the application as a precedent, its tendency is daneer- ous to the public. For on the first supposition, that tlie Legislature had been precipitated to act on the spurofsuch an instigation, they must have acted on imperfect information, and under an excitement, not remarkably adapted to the composure of safe delibera- tion. On the second they would have been exposed to unjust imputations, which at the eve of an .election .-.gx.wittv.. upciULca in tne most inequitable manner upon the characters of individual members. The interposition of one or more State Legislatures, to controul the exercise of the powers vested by the general Constitution in the Congress of the United States^ is at least of questionable policy. The views of a State Legislature are naturally and properly lim- ited in a considerable degree to the particular inter- ests of the State. The very object and formation of the National deliberative assemblies was for the com- promise and conciliation of the interests of all — of the whole nation. If the appeal from the regular, legiti- mate measures of the body where the whole nation is represented, be proper to one State Legislature, it must be so to another. If the commercial States are called to interpose on one hand, will not the agricul- tural States loe with equal propriety summoned to in- terpose on the other ? If the East is stimulated against the West, and the Northern and Southern Sections are urged into collision with each other, by appeals from the acts of Congress to the respective States in what are these appeals to end? It is undoubtedly the right, and may often become the duty of a State Legislature, to address that of the Nation, with the expression of its wishes, in regard to interests peculiarly concerning the State itself. Nor shall I question the right of every member of the great federative compact to declare its own sense of me? ures interesting to the nation at large. But whenever the case occurs that this sense should be *' clearly and emphatically" expressed, it ought surely to be predi- cated upon a full and impartial consideration of the whole subject— not under the stimulus of a one sided representation — for less upon the impulse of conjec- tures and suspicions. It is not through the medium of personal sensibility, nor of partv bias, nor of pro- fessional occupation, nor of geographical position, that the hiikole Truth can be discerned, of questions in- volving the rights and interests of this extensive Union. When their discussion is urged upon a State Legisla- ture, the first call unon its membf^rs sho"!'"' be *— '"•5'-♦• all their feelings and interests as the Citizens of a sin-' gle State into the commoji Stock of the National con- cern. Should the Dccurrcnc? upon which an appeal is li S.e's"tcbt';r"'' °' ^' ^'"'°"' "> '1- of a the State had bee • TVl^"^ ^ representation of found himself in .hr.-"^"*?^' *"^ *^ ""e-nber who ■ «f duty to invoketeTnT""^-' •'^=" '"'P^"<=<> ''r " «'«» pared to exhibif h^T vi wTo th?' .' •" '"'«''* "^ P'^ the difference of oph.iJ^^Z,? tl ' i""' "P°" ''^'"'^ that the resort sho^^rfhiV J *»•=«"?'»«; or at least would leave h within^' ^^^ of time as t^present^Ifons to h. ^^ •"'> "^ Possibility for his Constituens before, h''""'=?J,'^y *"^ '^"'""•on eeeSinVmus?b:"sLrP""^°^ ^'"'' '=°»«^ °f re- ceive olThe proprietv of"""' *"!.'' '' '''""'" '° «>»- another inconveE..-"^ " ^ct it presents fit)m th!r«r?J™ r ''''"'^'' •"">*' necessarily result -^ht:d5^t3?--"=^^ of the mai' T^"". *° ''"'^. '"' *^" » denunciation ed musXl Wmself'^:''"' «? a policy thus reprobat. self-defence to vIh- t"™"""""* ^^ ^""y "o'ive of eral sense of hi, n^? • ,'J"'. '=°"*'^' = ""^ 'f his gen. mdusSs^detrifn": hu'whTl- "'""T •° *^ business of the Se«inn . i *',"?^ '° *''« P"blic fo«.ed to empty frhis*;^r,-f'?' '"= ™'g'>' l^' course be deducted frnmT J"'",'''^''''"". would of regular and apXt'eTunctus^'^lfouM "it """^ cas.onsfrecpKicIy'^recur tTe?"o„M^l"'£,'L'=^.^°'=- JCTC With the f]ii#:. n.«^r ' - VT"* ""'^ ^'*" *■" i»i€r- Nor can itr^^to rarr.le1e' H P""'^ tagonizin? ipppVi ,^ j^- . , tendency of such an- i« its ow f Sat ° ''T1 *''' ^°.""<="= °f 'he State legislature, to destroy its influence, and expose It to dcnsion, in the presence of its sister States, and to produce between the colleagues themselves mutual asperities and rancours, until the great con, cerns of the nation would degenerate into the puni controversies of personal altercation. " It is therefore with extreme reluctance that I enter upon this discussion. In developing my own views and the principles which have ^govern^d my con! fo"tL'V k'"*" '"^ °"' ^°''^S« affairs, and particularly to the Embargo, some very material differences in point of fact as well as of opinion, will be foqnd be. tween my statements, and those of the letter, which alone can apologize for this. They will not, I trust, be deemed m any degree disrespectful to the writer. Far more pleasing would it have been to me, could that honest and anxious pursuit of the policy best cal- culated to promote the Honour and welfare of our Country, which, I trust, is felt with equal ardour by us both have resulted in the same opinions, and have given them the vigour of united exertion. There is a candour and liberality of conduct and of semiment due from associates in the same public charge, to- wards each other, necessary to their individual repu- ation to their common influence, and to their public usefulness. In our republican Government, where the power of the nation consists alone in the sympa. thiesof opinion this reciprocal deference, this open hearted imputation of hon^ ^ intentions, is the only adamant at once attractive .nd impenetrable, that can Nar, unshattercd, all the thunder of foreign hostility Ever since I have had the honour of a Lat in thL mfnT^P £°""^*^«' I '^^ve extended it to every depart- mcnt of the Government. However differing in mv conclusions upon questions of the highest moment, from any other man, of whatever party, I have never t".^ ^"/P{?»°"> 'fPuted his conduct to corrupJ m.n*o j^ ^^^\«. confidence argues ignorance of pubfiq men and pubhc affairs, to that ignorance I must plead pilty. I know, mdeed enough of h.im«n n...*.!;? ' Slf ^' '^'' vigilant observation isTt'airiimcs! and that suspicion may occasionally become ijccQsgar^J upon the conduct of men in noner R..f r i government — Election is the verv test of r«nnn^»„ and n, periodical return i. tl^^^nltiu. b !f .'i:;! uponns abuse ; of which the elector,, must of course be the sole judges. For the exercise of |,ower where man IS free, confidence is indispc„sable_a,H "hl^ 1 once totally fails-when the men to whom he pco pie have commuted the application of their force, (ot their benefit, are to be presumed the vilest of man brisoLd""' foundation of the social compact mu J be dissolved Towards the Gentleman whose official Station results from the confidence of tl-.e same UgU. ature, by whose appointment I have the hono^? of peculiarly due from me, nor should I now notice his letter, notwuhstanding the disapprobation it so obv ! ous y implies at the course which I have pursuedYn relation to che subjects of which it treats, ^Tno" ai>pear to me calculated to produce upo^ the puNk S ;7thr„Xir '"°""''^ '° '""^ "^"^^^ -" '"- Having understood that a motion in the Senate of Massachusetts was made by you, requesting the Gov ernorto transmit Mr. Pickering's letter to Ae Lerf,' o rA,- "^ff'?"" "''^"^"^ cotSmunications, relatf^g to public affairs, as he might have received from me I avail myself of that circumstance, and of the friend! ship which has so long subsisted between us to take itat ion f °^ addressing this letter, intended'for pub! lication to you. Very few of the facts which 1 shall ^ate will rest upon information peculiar to my e f - Most of them will stand upon the basis of official documents, or of public and undisputed notoriety for my opinions, though fully persuaded, that even where differing from your own, they will meet wwf" tair and libera! judge in you, yet of the public I ask neither favour nor indulgence. PretendiL to no ex- traordmary credit from the authority of thi writer I steiiH^hvT ""^ '"'''' '''V^>' "'^*' ^^'^ weakness, or stand by then' own strength. ^t' 9 The first rr mark which obtrudes itself upon the mind, on the perusal of Mr. Pickering's letter is that in enumerating all the ;,rcafl, by a topical application to the con- genial feelings of any one— not even of my own native Section of the Union. 12 r If n The Embargo, however, is a restriction always un- der our own controul. It was a measure altogether of defence, and of experiment — If it was injudiciously or ovcr-hastily laid, it has been every day since its adop- tion open to a repeal : if it should prove ineffectual for the purposes which it was meant to secure, a sin- gle day will suffice to unbar the doors. Still believ- ing it a measure justified by the circumstances of the time, I am ready to admit that those who thought otherwise may have had a wiser foresight of events, and a sounder judgment of the then existing state of things than the majority of the National Legislature^ and the President. It has been approved by several of the State Legislatures, and among the rest by our own. Yet of all its effects we are still unable to judge with certainty. It must still abide the test of futuri- ty. I shall add thteit there were other motives which had their operation in contributing to the passage of the act, unnoticed by Mr. Pickering, and which hav- ing now ceased will also be left unnoticed by me. The orders of Council of 11th Nov. still subsist in all their force ; and are now confirmed, with the addition of taxation^ by act of Parliament. As they stand in front of the real causes for the Embargo, so they are entitled to the same pre-emi- nence in enumerating the causes of hostili,ty, which the British Ministers are accumulating upon our for- bearance. They strike at the root of our independence. They assume the principle that we shall have no com- merce in time of war, but with her dominions, and as tributaries to her. The exclusive confinement of commerce to the mother country, is the great princi- ple of the modern colonial system ; and should we by a dereliction of our rights at this momentous stride of encroachment surrender our commercial freedom with- out a struggle, Britain has but a single step more to take, and she brings us back to the stamp act and the tea tax. Yet these orders — thus fatal to the liberties for which the sages and heroes of our revolution toiled and bled — thus studiously concealed until the mo- 13 ment when they bu.st upon our heads— thus issued at the very instant when a mission of atonement was professedly sent—in these orders we are to see no- thing but a ♦' retaliating order upon France "—la these orders, we must not find so much as a cause— BrLIin^ ^^ "^"^^^ ^s a pretence, for complaint against To my mind, Sir, in comparison with those orders, the three causes to which Mr. Pickering explicitly li- mits our grounds for a rupture with England, might indeed be justly denominated pretenccs^m compS^i- i*on with them, former aggressions sink into insiff- nificance. To argue upon the subject of our disputes with Britain, or upon the motives for the Embargo and keep them out of sight, is like laying your finger over the unit before a series of noughlts, and then i»-nthmetically proving that tiiey all amount to nothing. It IS not however in a mere omission, nor yet in the history of the Embargo, that the inaccuracies of the statement I am examining have given me the most serious concern— it is in the view taken of the ques- tions in controversy bet\i^een us and Britain. The wisdom of the Embargo is a question of great, but ransient magnitude, and omission sacrifices ni na- lonal right. Mr. Pickering's object was to dissuade ^„!n^' '!fi'°"i^'^.^' ""."^ ^"S^^"^' i"to which he suspected the administration was plunging us, under Freiich compulsion. But the ten^denc^y o^f hi. pam' phlet IS to reconcile the nation, or at least the com- mercial States, to the servitude of British protection, and war with all the rest of Europe. Hence England of T'k "!, "^ ^l contending for the common liberties 01 mankind, and our only safeguard against the ambi- ton and injustice of France. Hence all our sensibil . ties are invoked m her favour, and all our antipathies against her antagonist. Hence too all the sub^e^s of „., „.._"". ■"" "° """ •"'"■""' are aijcUirwi to be on our part mere pmences, of which the rhht is une- quivocally pronounced to b' on her side. ProceedTng from a Senator of the United States, specially ctareed as a member of ihe executive with the mahUenance u II of the nation's rights, against foreign powers, and at a moment extremely critical of pending negotiation upon ail the points thus dcncated, this formal aban- 4ionment of the American cause, this summons of un- conditional surrender to the pretensions of our anta- gonist, is in my mind highly alarming. It becomes therefore a duty to which every other consideration must yield to point out the errors of this representa- tion. Before we strike the standard of the nation, let us at least examine the purport of the summons. And first, with respect to the impressment of our seamen. We are told that " the taking of British sea- men found on board our merchant vessels, by British ships of war, is agreeably to a right, claimed and ex- ercised for ages." It is obvious that this claim and exercise of ages, could not apply to us, as an indepen- dent people. If the right was claimed and exercised while our vessels were navigating under the British flag, it could not authorize the same claim when their owners have become the citizens of a sovereign state. As a relict of colonial servitude, whatever may be the claim of Great Britain, it surely can be no ground for contending that it is entitled to our submission. If it be meant that the right has been claimed and exercised for ages over the merchant vessels of other nations, I apprehend it is a mistake. The case never occurred with sufficient freiquency to constitute even a practice, much less a right. If it had been either, it would have been noticed by some of the writers on the laws of nations. The truth is, the question arose out of American Independence — from the severance of one nation into two. It was never made a question between any other nations. There is therefore no right of prescription. But, it seem-i, it has also been clamed and exercised, during the whole of the three Administrations of our njitinnal Crnv^prnrnpnt. Anrl ic Ji- menn*- *■'^ l^*:* nooo*.*^^ that this claim and exercise constitute aright? If it is, I appeal to the uniform, unceasing and urgent re- monstrances of the three administrations — I appeal iiot only to the warm feelings, but cool justice of tho f-*«M %B American People— nay, I appeal to the sound sense and hononrable sentiment ©f the British nation itself, which, however, it may have submitted at home to> this practice, never would tolerate its sanction by Iaw» against the assertion. If it is not, how can it be affirnif ed that it is on our part a mere pretence ? r But the first merchant of the United States* in an- swer to Mr. Pickering's late enquiries has informed him that since the affair of the Chesapeake there has been no cause of complaint- that he could not find a single instance where they had taken one man out. of a merchant vessel. Who it is, that enjoys the dignity of first merchant of the United States we are not in- formed. But if he had applied to many merchants m Boston as respectable as any in the United States, they could have told hhn of a valuable vessel and qargo^ totally lost upon the coast of England, late in August last, and solely in consequence of having had two of lier men, native Americans taken from her by impress- ment, two months after the affair of the Chesapeake-. t On the 15th of October, the king England issued his proclamation, commanding his naval officers, to im- press his subjects from neutral vessels. This proda- mation is represented as merely ** requiring the return of his subjects, the seamen especially, from foreign countries," and then *' it is an acknowledged princi- ple that every nation has a right to the service of its subjects in time of war. ' ' Is this. Sir, a correct state- ment either of the Proclamation, or of the question it mvolves in which our right is concerned ? The kma of England's right to the service of his subjects m tune of war is nothing to us. The question is, wlic- ther he hasanghtto seize ^^hem forcibly onboardof our vessels while under contract of service to our citizens, withm our jurisdiction upon the high seas 9 And whether he has a right expressly to command his na- val othcers so to seize them— Is this an acknowledged principle? certainly not, Whr then h th?- Pro- clamation described as founded upon unc'c^^ttited prmciplc ? and why is the command, so justly oflfen. sive to us, and so mischievous as it might then have been made m execution, altogether omitted ^ 16 J M But it is not the taking of British subjects from our vessels, it is the taking under colour of that pretence our own, native American citizens, which constitutes the most galling aggravation of this merciless practice. Yet even this, we are told is but a pretence— for three reasons. 1. Because the number of citizens thus taken, is small. 2. Because it arises only from the impossibility of distinguishing Englishmen from Americans. 3. Because, such impressed American citizens arc delivered up, on duly authenticated proof. 1, Small and great in point of numbers are relative terms. To suppose that the native Americans form a small proportion of the whole number impressed is a mistake — The reverse is the fact. Examine the offi'- cial returns from the Department of State. They give the names of between four and five thousand men im- pressed since the commencement of the present War. Of which number, not one fifth part were British Sub- jects — The number of naturalized Americans could not amount to one tenth, — I hazard litde in saying that more than three fourths were native Americans. If it be said that some of these men, though appearing on the face of the returns American Citizens, were re- ally British subjects, and had fraudulently procured their protections ; I reply that this number must be far exceeded by the cases of Citizens impressed, which never reach the Department of State. The Ameri- can Consul in London estimates the number of im- pressments duriqg the War at nearly three times the amount of the names returned. If the nature of the offence be considered in its true colours, to a people having a just sense of personal liberty and security, it is in every single instance, of a malignity not inferior to that of murder. The very same act, when commit- ted by the recruiting officer of one nation within the territories of anothei-, is by the universal Law and u- sage of nations punished with death. Suppose the crime had in every instance, as by its consequences it has been in manv. deliberate murder. Would it an- rom our pretence istitutes practice. For three aken, is )ility of zens ar€ relative s form a ised is a the offi- hey give Qcn im- nt War. ish Sub- ns could 1 saying lericans. jpearing were re- irocured [nust be d, which Ameri- ir of im- mes the e of the a people urity, it inferior :ommit- ithin the 7 and u- lose the ences it Id it an- 17 swer or silence the voice of our complaints to be told that the number was small ? 2. The impossibility of distinguishing English from American seamen is not the only, nor even the most frequent occasion of impressment. Look again into the returns from the Department of State — you will see that the officers take our men without pretending to enquire \yhcre they were born ; sometimes merely to shew their animosity, or their contempt for our country ; sometimes from the wantonness of power. When they manifest the most tender regard for the neutral rights of America, they lament that they want the men. They regret the necessity, but they must have their complement. When we complain of these enormities, we are answered that the acts of such offi- cers were unauthorized ; that the commanders of Men of War, are an unruly set of men, for whose vio- lence their own Government cannot always be answer- able, that enquiry shall be made—A Court Martial is sometimes meritioned— And the issue of Whitby's Court Martial has taught us what relief is to be ex- pected from that. There are even examples I am told, when such officers have been put upon the yel- low list. But this is a rare exception — The ordinary issue when the act is disavowed, is the promotion of the actor. 3. The impressed native American Citizens how- ever, upon duly authenticated proof are delivered up. Indeed ! how unreasonable then were complaint ! how cffisctual a remedy for the wrong ! an American ves- sel, bound to a European port, has two, three or four native Americans, impressed bv a British Man of War, bound to the East or West Indies. When the American Captain arrives at his port of destination he makes his protest, and sends it to the nearest Ameri- can Minister or Consul. When he returns home, he transmits the duplicate of his protest to the Secretary of State. In process of time, 'the names of the im'- pressedmcn, and of the Ship into which they have been impressed, are received by the Agent in Lon- don. He makes his demand that the men may be C 19 delivered up— The Lords of the Admiralty, after a reasonable time for enquiry and advisement, return for answer, that the Ship is on a foreign Station, and their Lordships can therefore take no further steps in the matter — Or, that the ship has been taken, and that the men have been received in exchange for French pris- oners — Or, that the men had no protections (the im- pressing officers often having taken them from the men) — Or, that the men were probably British subjects. Or that they have entered, and taken the Bounty ; (to which the officers know how to reduce them.) Or that they have been married^ or settled in England. In all these cases, without further ceremony, their dis- charge is refused. Sometimes, their Lordships, in a vein of humour, inform the agent that the man has been discharged as unsermceable. Sometimes, in a sterner tone, they say he was an itnposter. Or per- haps by way of consolation to his relatives and friends, they report that he has fallen in Battle, against nations in Amity with his Country. Sometimes ihey cooly return that there is no such man on board the ship ; and what has become of him, the agonies of a wife and children in his native land may be left to conjecture. When all these and many other such apologies for refusal fail, the native American seaman is discharg- ed — and when by the charitable aid of his Government he has found his way home, he comes to be informed, that all is as it should be — that the number of his fel- low-suffierers is small — that it was impossible to dis- tinguish him from an Englishman — and tliiit he was delivered up, on duly authenticated proof . Enough, of this disgusting subject — I cannot stop to calculate how many of these wretched victims arc natives of Massachusetts, and how many natives of Virginia — I cannot stop to solv« that knotty question of national jurisprudence whether some of them might not possibly be slaves, and therefore not Citizens of the United States — i cannot stay to account for the wonder, why, poor, and ignorant and friendless as most of them are, the voice of their complaints is so seldom heard in the great navigating States. I ad- 19 mit that we have endured this cruel, indignity, through all the administrations of the General Government.— » I acknowledge that Britain claims the right of seizing her subjects in our merchant vessels, and that even it we could acknowledge it, the line of discrimination would be difficult to draw. We are not in a condi- tion to maintain this right, by War, and as the Brit. ish Government have been more than once on the point of giving it up of their own accord, I would still hope for the day when returning Justice shall in- duce them to abandon it, without compulsion. Her subjects we do not want. The degree of protection which we are bound to extend to them, cannot equal the claim of our own citizens. 1 would subscribe to any compromise of this contest, consistant with the rights of sovereignty, the duties of humanity, and the principles of reciprocity : but to the right of forcing even her own subjects out of our merchant vessels on the liigh seas I never can assent. The second point upon which Mr. Pickering defends the pretentions of Great Britain, is her denial to neutral nations of the right of prosecuting with her enemies and their colonies, any commerce from which they are ex- cluded in time of peace. His statement of this case adopts the British doctrine, as sound. The rights as on the question of impressment, so on this, it surrenders at discretion — and it is equally defective in point of fact. In the first place, the claim of Great Britain, is not to *' a riglit of imposing on this neuti'al commerce some limits and restraints'^ — but of interdicting it altogether, at her pleasure, of interdicting it without a moment's notice to neutrals, after solemn decisions of her courts of aduiiralty, and formal acknowledgments of her minis^ ters, that it is a lawful trade — And, on such a sudden, unnotified interdiction of pouncing upon all neutral com- merce navigating upon the faith of her decisions and ac- knowledgments, and of gorging with confiscation the greediness of her cruizers — This is the right claimed by Britain — This is the power she has exercised — What Mr. Pickering calls " limits anc' laxations of her right. straints,'* sb*:" calls re- 20 It is but little more than two years, since this question was aj^ilatcd botli in En.^'land and America, with as much zeal, energy and ability, as ever was displayed upon any question of national Law. The Britiijh side was supported by Sir William Scott, Mr. Ward, and the author uf War in Disguise. But even in Britain their doctrine was refuted to demonstration by the Edin- burg i-eviewers. In America, the rights of our country were maintained by numerous writers profoundly skilled in the science of national and 'maritime Luav. The An- swer to War in Disguise was ascribed to a Gentleman \vhose talents are universally acknowledged, and who by his official situations had been required thoroughly to investigate every question of coniiict bcUveen neutral and belligerent rights \\'hich has occurred in the history of modern War. Mr. Gore and Mr. Pirxkney, our two commissioners at London, under Mr. Jay's Treaty, the former, in a train of cool and conclusive argument ad- dressed to Mr. Madison, the latter in a memorial of splendid eloquence from the Merchants of Baltimore, supported the same cause ; memorials, drawn by lawyers of distinguished eminence, by Merchants of the highest character, and by statesmen of long experience in our national councils came from Salem, from Boston, from New- Haven, from New- York and from Philadelphia to- gether with remonstrances to the same efiect from New- buryport, Newport, Norfolk and Charleston. Tl.i, ac- cumulated mass of legal learning, of commercial infor- mation and of national sentiment from almost every in- habited spot upon our shores, and from one extremity of the union to the other, confirmed by the unansA\'ered and unanswerable memorial of Mr. Munroe to the British minister, and by the elaborate research and irresistible reasoning of the examination of the British doctrine, was also made a subject of full, and deliberate discussion in the Senate of the United States. A committee of seven members of that body, after three weeks of arduous in- vestigation, reported three Resolutions, the first of which was in these words " Resolved diat the capture and con- demnation, under the orders of the British government, and adjudications of their courts of admiralty of Ameri- can vessels and their cargoes, on the pretext of their being 21 employed in a trade widi the enemies of Great Britain, prohibited in time of peace, is an unprovoked aj^iijression upon the property of the citizens of these Unitecl States, a violation of their neutral rights, and an ancroachmant upon their national Independence.''^ On the 13th of February, 1806, the question upon the adoption of this Resolution, was taken in the Sen- ate. The yeas and nays were required ; but not a solitary nay was heard in answer. It was adopted by the unanimous voice of all the Senators present. They were twenty-eight in number, and among them stands recorded the name of Mr. Pickering. Let us remember that this was a question most pe- culiarly and immediately of commercial, and not agri. cultral mtcTQst ; that it arose from a call, loud, energet- ic and unanimous, from all the merchants of the Unit- ed States upon Congress, for the national interposi- tion ; that many of the memorials invoked all the energy of the Legislature, and pledged the lives and properties of the memorialists in support of any mea- sures which Congress might deem necessary to vin- dicate those rights. Negotiation was particularly re- commended from Boston, and elsewhere— negotiation was adopted— negotiation has failed— and now Mr. Pickering tells us that Great-Britain has claimed and mamtahicdherri§->^?/ He argues that her claim is just— and is not sparing of censure upon those who still consider it as a serious cause of complaint. But there was one point of view in which the Brit- ish doctrine on this question was then only consider- ed incidentally in the United States— because it was not deemed material for the discussion of our rights. We examined it chiefly as affecting the principles as betvveen a belligerent and a neutral power. But in fact it was an infringement of the rights of War, as well as of the rights of Peace. It was an unjustifiable enlargement of the sphere of hostile operations. The enemies of Great Britain had by the universal Law of Nations a right to the benefits of neutral Commerce withm their dominions (subject to the exceptions of actual blockade and contraband) as well as neutral na- 22 lions had a right to trade ^iih them. The cxchision from that <;ommerce by this new principle of warfare which Britain, . "• defiance of all immemorial national usages, undertook by her single authority to establish, bui t'H) naturally led her e, ' mies to resort to new and extraufdinary principles, by which in their turn they might retaliate this injury upon her. The pretence upon which Britain in the first instance had attempted to colour her injustice, was a miserable 7?c/io« — It was an argument against fact. Her reasoning was, that a neutral vessel by mere admission in time of war, into Ports from which it would have been excluded in time of peace, became thereby deprived of its national character, and ipso facto was transformed into enemy's property. Such was the basis upon which arose the far famed rule of the war of 1756 — Such was the foundation up- on which Britain claimed and maintained this supposed right of adding that new instrument of desolation to the horrors of war — It was distressing to her enemy — yes ! Had she adopted the practice of dealing with them in poison — Had Mr. Fox accepted the services of the man who offered to rid him of the French Em- peror by assassination, and had the attempt succeeded, it would have been less distressing to France than this rule of the war of 1756 ; and not more unjustifia- ble. Mr. Fox had too fair a mind for either, but his comprehensive and liberal spirit was discaic'ed.. with the Cabinet which he had formed. It has been the struggle of reason ann litniaaity, and above all of Christianity for two thousand years to mitigate the rigours of that scourge of human kind, wr •■- It is now the struggle of Britain to aggravate tliei Her rule of the war of 1756, in itself and in its cficf^^rb wi's fJiC of the deadliest poisons, in which it was |.o? lb . for her 'O tinge the weapons of her hostil- ity. In itself and in its effects, I say — For the French decrees of Berlin and of Milan. The Spanish and Dutch decrees of the same or the like tenor, and her own orders of January and November— these alterna- 23 tions of licenced pillage, this ^ager cdmpetition be- tween her and her enemies for the honour ot giving the last stroke to the vitals of maritime neutrality, all are justly attributable to her assumption and exercise of this single principle. The rule of the War of 1756 was the root, from which all the rest are but suckers, still at every shoot growing ranker in luxuriance. In the last decrees of France and Spain, her own in. genious ilrtion is adopted ; and under them, every neu- tral vv-ssel that submits to English search, has been car. ried into an English port, or paid a tax to the English Government is declared denationalized ^ that is to have lost her national character, and to have become Eng- lish property. This is cruel in execution ; absurd in argument. To refute it were folly, for to the un- derstanding of a child it refutes itself. But it is the reasoning of British Jurists. It is the simple applica- tion to the circumstances and powers of France, of the rule of the war of 1756. I am not the apologist of France and Spain ; I have no national partialities ; no national attachments but to my own country. I shall never undertake to justify or to palliate the insults or injuries of any foreign power to that country which is dearer to me than life. If the voice of Reason and of Justice could be heard by France and Spain, they would say— -you have done wrong to make the injustice of your enemy towards neutrals the measure of your own. If she chastises with whips do not you chastise with Scorpions Whether France would listen to this language, I know not. The most enormous infractions of our rights hitherto committed by her, have been more in menace than in accomplishment. The alarm has been justly great ; the anticipation threatening ; but the amount of actual injury small. But to Britain, what can we say ? If we attempt to raise o"r voices, her Minister has declared to Mr. Pinckney that she will not hear, a he only reason she assiguh for her recent orders of Council is, that France proceeds on the same princi- ples. It is not by the light of blazing temples, and amid the groans of women and children perishing in the ruins of the sanctuaries of domestic habitation at 24 Copenhagen, that we can expect our remonstrances against this course of proceeding will be heard. Let us come to the third and last of the causes of complaint, which are represented as so frivolous and so unfounded—'* the unfortunate affair of the Chesa- peake, »» The orders of Admiral Berkley, under which this outrage was committed, have been disavowed by his Government. General professions of a willingness to make reparation for it, have been lavished in pro- fusion ; and we are now instructed to take these pro- fessions for endeavours ; to believe them sincere, be- cause his Britannic Majesty sent us a special envoy ; and to cast the odium of defeating these endeavours upon our own government. I have already told you, that I am not one of those who deem suspicion and distrust, in the highest order of political virtues. Baseless suspicion is, in my esti- mation, a vice, as pernicious in the management of public affairs, as it is fatal to the happiness of domestic life. When, therefore, the British Minis ers have declared their disposition to make ample reparation for an injury of a most atrocious character, committed by an officer of high rank, and, as they say, utterly without authority I should most readily believe them, were their professions not positively contradicted by- facts of more powerful eloquence than words. Have such facts occurred ? I will not again allude to the circumstances of Mr. Rose's departure upon his mission at such a precise point of time, that his Com- mission and the orders of Council of llth November, might have been signed with the same penful of ink. The subjects were not immediately connected with each other, and his Majesty did not chuse to associ- ate distinct topics of negotiation. The attack upon the Chesapeake was disavowed ; and ample reparation was withheld only, because with the demand for satis- faction upon that injury, the American Government ruid coupled a demand for the cessation of others ; a- likc in kind, but of minor aggravation. But had re- paration really been intended, would it not have been offered, not in vague and general terms, but in precise and specific proposals ? Were any such made ? None. 25 But it is said Mr. Munroe was restricted from negotia- ting upon this subject apart ; and therefore Mr. Rose was to be sent to Washington ; charged with this single object ; and without authority to treat upon or even to discuss any other. Mr. Rose arrives— The Annerican government readily determine to treat upon the Chesapeake affair, separately from aU others; but before Mr. Rose sets his foot on shore^ in pursuance of a pretension made before by Mr. Canning, he con- nects with the negotiation, a subject far more distinct Irom the butchery of the Chesapeake, than the general impressment of our seamen, I mean the Proclamation, interdicting to British ships of war, the entrance of our harbours. The great obstacle which has always interfered in the adjustment of our differences with Britain, has been that she would not acquiesce in the only principle upon which lair negotiation between independent nations can be con- ducted, the principle of reciprocity, that she refuses the application to us of the claim which she asserts for her- self. The forcible taking of men from an American vessel, was an essential part of the outrage upon the Chesapeake. It was the ostensible purpose for which ^at act of war unproclaimed, was committed The rresident's Proclamation was a subsequent act, and was avowedly founded upon many similar aggressions, of which that was only the most aggravated. If then Britain could with any colour of reason claim that the general question of impressment should be laid out of the case altogether, she ought upon the principle of reciprocity to have laid equally out of the case, the proclamation, a measure so easily separable from it, and m Its nature merely defensive. When therefore she made the repeal of the Proclamation an indispensible preliminary to all discussion upon the nature and extent of that reparation which she had offered, she refused to treat with us upon the footing of an independent power. Cc " "r"'* "i","^" """^'^ ^^ seii-aegraoation on our part, before she would even tell us, what redress she would condescend to grant for a great and acknowledged wrong. This was a condition which she could not but ioiow to be inadmissible, and is of itself proof nearly m p IP ericans, and disclaimed only wiUi respect to European sovereigns. In the mean time Admiral Berkley, by a court mar- tial of his own subordinate officers, hung one of the nien taken from the Chesapeake, and callied his name Jenkiix Ratibrd.-^There was, according to the answer so fre- quently given by the Lords of tl^ Admiralty, upon ap. plications for the discharge of impressed Americans, np such man on board the ship. The man thus executed had been taken froin the Chesapeake by the name of Wilson. It is said that on his trial he was identified by one or two witnesses wl)o knew him, and that before he was turned off he confessed bis name to be Ratford and that he was born in Enjgland-r-But it has also been said that Ratford is now living in Pennsylvaniar-and after the character which the disavowal of Admiral Berkley's own government has given to his conduct, what confir dence can be claimed or due to the proceedings of a court martial of his associates held to sanption. his pro-^ ceedings. — The three other men had not even been de- manded in his orders-rThey were taken by the sole au- thority of the British searching lieutenant, after the sur- render of the Chesapeake. — I'here was not the shadow of a pretence before the court martial that they were British subjects, or born in any of the British dominions. Yet by this court njartial they were sentenced to suffer 28 death. They were reprieved from execution, only up. on condition of renouncing their rights as Americans by voluntary service in the king's ships— They have never been restored. — To complete the catastrophe with which this bloody tragedy was concluded, Admiral Berkley himself m sanctioning the doom of these men— thus ob- tained—thus tried— and thus sentenced, read them a grave moral lecture on the enormity of their crime, in Its tendency to provoke a war between the United States and Great Britain. Yet amidst all this parade of disavowal by his govern- ment — amidst all these professions of readiness to make reparation, not a single mark of the slightest disapproba- ^on appears ever to have been manifested to that officer. His instructions were executed upon the Chesapeake in June — Rumours of his recall have been circulated here But on leaving the station at Halifax in December, he received a complimentary address from the colonial as- sembly, and assured them in answer, that he had no of- ficial information of his recall.— From thence he went to the West Indies ; and on leaving Bermuda for England in February was addressed again by that colonial gov- ernment, in terms of high panegyric upon his energy, with manifest allusion to his atchievement upon the ChesajDeake. Under all these circumstances, without applying any of the maxims of a suspicious policy to the British pro- fessions, I may still be permitted to believe that their ministry never seriously intended to make us honourable reparation, or indeed any reparation at all for that " un. fortunate affair. " It is impossible for any man to form an accurate idea of the British policy towards the United States, without taking into consideration the state of parties in that gov- ernment i and the views, characters and opinions of the individuals at their helm of State— A liberal and a hostile policy towards America, are among the strongest marks <^/^"»^»n^tion between the political systems of the rival statesiucn of that kingdom — The liberal party are recon- ciled to our Independence ; and though extremely tena- cious of cveiy right of their own country, are systemati- cally disposed to preserve /?«?flre with the United States. 2d Their opponents harbour sentiments of a very differenf description — Their system is coercion — Their object the recovery of their lost dominion in North America — This party now stands high in power — Although Ad- miral Berkley may never have received written orders from them for his enterprize upon the Chesapeake, yet in giving his instructions to the squadron at Norfolk, he knew full well under what administration he was acting. Every measure of that administration towards us since that time has been directed to the same purpose — To break down the spirit of our national Independence. Their purpose, as far as it can be collected from their acts, is to force us into war with them or with their enemies ; to leave us only the bitter alternative of their vengeance or their protection. Both these parties are no doubt willing, that we should join them in the war of their nation against France and her allies — The late administration would have drawn us into it by treaty, the present are at- tempting it by compulsion. The former would have admitted us as allies, the latter will have us no other- wise than as colonists. On the late debates in Parlia- ment, the lord chancellor freely avowed that the orders of Council of 1 1th. November were intended to make America at last sensible of the policy of joining Eng- land against France. - This too, Sir, is the substantial argument of Mr. Pickering's letter. — The suspicions of a design in our own administration to plunge us into a war with Britain, I never have shared. Our administration have every interest and every motive that can influence the conduct of man to deter them from any suclr purpose. Nor have I seen any thing in their measures bearing the slightest indication of it. But between a design of war with Eng- land, and a surrender of our national freedom for the sake of war with the rest of Europe, there is a material difference. This is the policy now in substance recom- mended to us, and for which the interposition of the commercial States is called. For this, not only are all the outrages of Britain to be forgotten, but the very assertion of our rights is to be branded with odium. Impressment — Neutral trade — British taxation — Every 30 ilmig that can distinguish a state of national freedom from a state of national vassalage, is to be surrendered at dis- cretion. In the face of every feet we are told to believe every profession — In the nw4st of every indignity, we are pointed to British protection as our only shield against the universal conqueror. Every phantom of jealousy and fear is avoked — The image of France with a scourge in her hand is impressed into the service, to lash us into the refuge of obedience to Britain— .insinuations are even made that if Britain " with her thousand ships of war," has not destroyed our commerce, it has been ow- ing to her indulgence, and we are almost threatened in her name with the " destruction of our fairest cities." Not one act of hostility to Britain has been committed by us, she has not a pretence of that kind to alledge-^ But if she will wage war upon us, are we to do nothing in our own defence ? If she issues orders of universal plunder upon our commerce, are we not to withhold it from her grasp ? Is American pillage one of those rights which she has claimed and exsercised until we are fore- closed from any attempt to obstruct its collection ? for what purpose are we required to make this sacrifice of every thing that can give valour to the name of freemen ? this abandonment of the very right of self-preservation ? is to avoid a war ? — Alas ! Sir, it does not offer even this plausible plea for pusillanimity — For, as submission would make us to all substantial purposes British colo- nics, her enemies would unquestionably treat us as such, and after degrading ourselves into voluntary servitude to escape a war with her, we should incur inevitable war with her enemies, and be doomed to share the destinies of her conflict with a world in arms. Between this unqualified submission, and offensive resistance against the war upon maritime neutrality wag- ed by the concurring decrees of all ihe belligerent pow- ers, the Embargo was adopted, and has been hitherto continued. So far was it from being dictated by France, that it was calculated to withdraw, and has withdrawn — U from Witiim ner reach all the means of compulsion which, her subsequent decrees would have put in her posses^ sion. It has added to the motives both of France and England, for preserving peace with us, and has diminish- ed their induceinents to war. It has lessened their ca- pacities of inflicting injury upon us, and given us some preparation for resistance to them — It has taken from their violence the lure of interest — It has dashed the philter of pillage from the lips of rapine. That it is dis- tressing to ourselves — that it calls for the fortitude of a people, determined to maintain their rights, is not to be denied. But the only alternative was between that aixi war. Whether it will yet save us from that calamity, cannot be determined, but if not, it will prepare us for the further struggle to which we may be called. Its double tendency of promoting peace and preparing for War, in its operation upon both the belligerent rivals, is the great advantage, which more than outweigh all its evils. If any statesman can point out another alternative, I am ready to hear him, and for any practicable ex- pedient to lend him every possible assistance. But fet not that expedient be, submission to trade under British licences, and British taxation. We are told that even under these restrictions we may yet trade to the British dominions to Africa and China, and with the col- onies of France, Spain, and Holland I ask not how much of this trade would be left, when our intercourse with the whole continent of Europe being cut off would leave us no means to purchase, and no market for sale ? — I ask not, what trade we could enjoy with the colonies of nations with which we should be at war ? I ask not how long Britain would leave open to us avenues of trade, which even in these very orders of Council, she boasts of leaving open as a special indulgence ? If we yield the principle we abandon all pretence to national sovereignty — To yearn for the fragments of trade which might be left, would be to pine for the crumbs of com- mcrcial servitude — The boon which we should humili- ate ourselves to accept from British bounty wouW soon be withdrawn. Submission never yet sat boundaries to encroachment. From pieadhig for half tiie empire we should sink into supplicants for life — We should sup- plicate in vain. If we must fall, let us fall, freemen — If we must perish, let it be in defence of our Rights. 32 To conclude, Sir, I am not sensible of any necessity for the extraordinary interference of the commercial states, to controul the general Councils of the nation.— If any mterference could at this critical extremity of our affairs have a kindly effect upon our common welfare, it would be interference to promote union and not a divi- sion— -to urge mutual confidence, and not univerisal dis- trust—to strengthen the arm and not to relax the sinews of the nation. Our suffering and our dangers, though diflenng perhaps in degree, are universal in extent— As thcL- causes are justly chargeable, so their xemoval IS dependent not upon ourselves, but upon others. But \vhilethe spirit of Independence shall continue to beat in unison with the pulses of the nation, no danger will be truly formidable— Our duties are, to prepare with concerted energy, for those which threaten us, to meet them without dismay, and to rely for their issue upon Heaven. * I am, with great respect and attachment, Dear Sir, your friend and humble servant, JOHN QUINCY ADAM& Hon. Harmon Qrat/ Otis. necessity )mniercial nation. — lity of our welfare, it lot a divi- ersal dis- lic sinevv^s 3, though extent. — ' lemoval Ts. But le to beat nger will lare with to meet me upon irvant, DAMS.