Portland gazette, and Maine advertiser — Portland, Me., 1810-01-15 00:00:00, page 2

V ibcmii Cii<jvc&„ ..2i. £>f$cioii.
Mr. Dina’s .Spcerb.
We t?ii* d»y c mmeice the public toon of
>VIr Da mV* Speech on GiU\* ref.»ln i >u for
approbate jj the co!.du-‘t of the Executive
*u their refufal to continue the neif nation
with th- it iitib Minifter. Every man that
ha* a wrlh ro pref rve the peace o' tni*
country, will ^ive Mr, L)observation* a
i ferious and C'refu' peiufa* ; they a-e far
frun prry feeling1 a id p>lu >n*, bebif ad
dreileJ fo ciy *o the leafon and underftan
dm£ of hi* hearers —-\1r. Dtaa ha* taken
an exteulive ind impartial view of the pro
ceeding* of our Executive in their arrange
ment* with Mr. E jki*t and fhewn how
far thev w# e warranred in their proceed*
iug* hy adducing preceJeim from former
aJuiiniura.ion* in Guailar cafes.
A fblemn legiflatbe decifion is
propofed by the refutation now be
fore us from the Senate.
As it regards the public minifler ac
credited from one of the great bellig
erent powers of Europe, our relations
v* ith that power maybe confidered
as within the fair range of difeuf- ,
f:on.
i his country has claimed the pri- J
vileges of a neutral power, one of
whofe eminent duties is a conduct
itri£tly and truly impartial between
the refpeflive parties engaged in war.
Ofcourfe, the purport of this refolu
lion may be compared with the ten- .
or of our condu£l refpe£ling the
great rival belligerent, and our rela
tions with this power may be proper- }
ly taken into confideration. The
The queflion therefore is open to a
difcuiHon of our affairs with Great
Britain and France. j
The refolution propofes to declare
a determination to employ the full
force of the nation in a certain event, !
To execute the declaration may re- i
quire various means, and means
highly intcrefting to our country_
When therefore w*e are confidering
the propriety of making a declaration
fo ferious, we may inquire refpedling
our naval and military means to en
force it. We may enquire, what |
augmentation of our naval and mili
tary forces would be neccflary—what
is contemplated, and what are our
pocur.iary relources for meeting the
extraordinary expenditure which
may be rcquihte.
The refolution has reference to a
public minifter of the higheit order
ever'fern from this country. We
have in our ftatutes provided tor fen
ding rjsroad no minifter of a higher
grade than that of mimfter plenipo
tentiary or envoy extraordinary. As
it refpetfts the mtercourfe with the
foreign world and the rules eftablifh
ed by the maxims of pubiic law and
the general ufage of civilized nations,
this is not a queftion which concerns
only the United States and which
we can determine by our feparate
vote. It is a queftion to which the
whole civilized world is party, be
caufe implicating principles which it
has fantftioned ; amt in our proceed
ings upon it we ihould not act in a
manner which would make us blufli
if the whole civilized world were
prefent to witnefs oar deliberations.
Thcfe gt-eral confederations are
connected with the refolution, in ad
dition to another intereding inq*iiry,
whether the terms of the refolution
are warranted in point of fa£t by the
rranfaltions which have taken place,
as they appear in evidence before us.
l he fubje&s which 1 have men
tioned are fo intricate, and fo vari
ous, and fo vaft, that a complete dif
cuflion of them is what I do not
here adventure to undertake, but
to a part of them l propole to direct
lome obfervations.
Before I particularly examine the
refHution, l requeft per million to
Ante certain pofni ns in which l a
grec, fo that gentlemen may know' j
where we agree, and where we dif- |
ier *, becaufc in this cafe as in others,
i would dimirufli the ground of con- |
trover fv.
«
Without going back to the full ex
tent of our wrongs from Great bri
taio and France, i recur to decrees
effecting neutral commerce which
have been ilfued by the dictator ot
continental Luropc, ami or lers iffu
ed by the britilh king in council !
Omitting a particular difcufTion of
them, i wilh to be didinctlv under
4
flood as avowing that l do not ap
prove either the one or the other ;
and from the mod deliberate judg
ment which I have been able to form,
on fuch examination as I have given
them, l exprefs my difapprobation
of both I conftder them both as
neither confident with the rights of
the United States, nor warranted by
f1e principles of public law. And I
uteri y dTclaim the whole doctrine
if belligerent blockade without a
alxkading force. The principles on !
which thefe opinions are founded, 1|
• ill not detain the houfe by Hating 1
it the prefent time.
Further, i agree that the condi
uons Hated in the defpatch from Mr.
Canning to Mr. Erlkine of the 23d
of January i3 9, eipecially the two I
j laft of them, are fuch as ought not
to be admitted explicitly or by impli
cation on the part of this govern
ment. 1 admit not only that we
ought not to Hipuiate that the Brit
ifh navy migiit take our veffels, but
that we (hould nor even by implica
tion cede the principle itlelf. Of
courfe, therefoie, I do not admit,
when any VclTel of the Bririfh under
their orders in council, fhouid h ve
taken one of our vefTels violating a
law of the United Statet, that it
would not be perfedly competent for
the United States to take cognizance
of the queilion whether llie had vio
lated our laws or wot \ for it would
be a queilion foleiy between our gov
ernment and its citizens. I o leave
a law of the United States to be ex
ecuted by the Britifh navy under the
cognizance of their admiralty, would
be to relinquifh an attiibuie of our
fovereignty, and t© abandon the pre
cious duty of executing judgment in
mercy.
1 further agree that the privilege
of a foreign minifler here accredited
does not extend to charging the gov- I
eminent of my country with the de
, teftable turpitude of intentional fal
fification in a matter of fad. And
on this fubjed I do not enquire
whether the charge be w'dl or ill
founded. It is not admillible within ,
the principles of diplomatic inter- 1
courfe. If the government fubnht
ted to it in terms, intercourfe on the
principles of equality mult ceale.
I agree further that the immunity
of a foreign minifter here accredited :
does not extend to entering a public 1
appeal againft the Executive admin
illration. Whether the appeal be
well or ill founded in pome of fatt,
it is not for the foreign minilter to :
put the adminiitration of this couti- I
try upon its ariaignment at the pub
lic bar *, it is not for him, through
the medium of the prefs, to prolefs
peace towards the people and pro
claim war againit the palace.
I agree further that the Prefident
of the U. States has the conffitution
al competence to receive ambaffadors
and other public minilters, and ihat
in the power to receive is included
the power to refute for reafouable
caufes, and that he is conftitutionally
the judge of this realcnablc caute
Whenever therefore a foreign miuif
tcr has committed an off.nee for
which he ought to be refufed liberty
to communicate with the adminiiLra
tion, the Prelidcnt mayrelufe it. If
an offence more grols has been com
mitted, for which die minifter ought
to be required to depart from the U
nited States, the Frefident may order
his departure. If the minilter has
committed an atrocious crime for
which hr ought to fuffer corporal
punilhment, the Prefident may order
him to be fent home that he may be
punilhed by his own government.
■\nd the gentlemen ol the fvvord aru ,
the proper officers lo be employed
for this purpofe. As the minilter
has a rank of high public trult let
him be treated with public decency !
Put in a calc of atrocious criminality,
let the proceeding have the character
of decilion, that he may be duly pun- j
ilhcct ! Such l admit to be the pow
er of the Picfidcwt of the United
States without any llatute whatever
eliding on the luVj ct.
Having made thefe admiffions, I
I may hope gentlemen will acknowi
ed »e that 1 am not lolicitous to ex
O
• tend the points of difference between
! us.
1 lie inquiry antes, whether the
language ot this rdolution is warrem
td by iadfs as they appear before us ?
On this point l am willing at this
time to wave dilpucr ; not that I ad
mit the refutation to be warranted in
j point of fact, for the documents laid
before us together with the mdlages
of the Prefident of the United States,
alFord matter for much, very much
obterv-ition inrereftingto the country,
but on that lukjetf I will not now oc
cupy the time of tiie 1 Joule, For in*
the view which I take of the resolu
tion, I propole to conlidcr it on the
balis of what is contained in the let
ter of the 23d ot November from
Mr. Smith the Secretary of State to
I
Mr. Pinkney our rrunifter in London,
and the mefoge of the Prcfidcm com
municate d to Congrefs at the open
ing of this fcliiion. I am not at p' e*
Cent about to difpute whether an
adjuftment of differences was proba.
ble ; I may even admit that after the
irritating and d’fgufling circumfian
ccs attending the correspondence be
tween the secretary of State and Mr.
Jackfon, it was not probable that they
would have come to any definitive
adjuftment. And I am willing to
admit that Mr. Jackfon may have
waited for prepofais to be made to
him as propofals were made to
France, without this power’s having
firft made propofals to us, if I do not
mifapprehend the Prcfident’s mef
fage.
Faking up this refolution and the
letter from the Secretary of State to
Mr. Pinkney, I afk in the firft place
what is the import of the refolution ?
Is it merely approbating the conduct
of the Preidcnt of the United States
and a manifeftation of refpett and
decorum towards him ? For myfelf,
if it be merely the language of appro
bation of the condutf of the Prefi
dent of the United States, I am not
making objection to it on the ground
that we ought net to pals a vote of
approbation. I am afflicted with no
fcruplcs of that fort, if gentlemen
who oppofed a refolution of appro
bation at the lnft felTion chufe now
to fupport this refolution or the prin
1 ciple which they then oppofed, it is
! not for me to objeft to it for iuch
caule. If they are dlfpoLd to con
fider their former arguments as fo
many collcdlions of ftraw, it is not
for me to deny to the gentlemen the
privilege of overturning and deftroy-,
ing futh works of their own hands.
Nay — further—If this refolution is
to be confidered as having the na
ture of a joint addrefs to the Prefi
denr of the United States, I make no
olje&ians on that account. Son*e
gentlemen may heretofore have
feemed to be afflicted at the manner
of addreiiing the prcfulent of t.i* U- ,
tilted States as being too adulatory. 1
I am not troubled with their pall i
fcruples on the fubjcCt of addrefles, ‘
and, confidering this as a joint ad- ■
drefs to the prefident, fhould make no
fuch objection.
If the principle of approbation be
confidered as involving an equal
right to ccnfure, 1 make no objec
tion to the refutation on that account,
But on this fubjecl I would be cau
tious, becaufe I might cenfurc ‘
wrongly. The Prefident might!
have reafons for his conduct which I
did not know •, 1 would be cautious j
alio, becaufe if I ihouid cenlure
where cenlure ought not to be p;o
nounced, l might do injury by con
curring in a procedure tending to di
minilh the confidence of the nation
in the chief magiltrate
But this is not a refutation mere
ly anpiobattn the comta£\ of the
Prefiaent ot the United ltates. It is
not ca.led lor by any thing which
has been done If is not conforma
ble to the true fpirit >f what has ta
k- » place It is rather reproachful
to the P efidunt than honouring him
with prahe It is a denunciation of
a foreign minifter here accredited ;
ir is exprt iTed m language which our
I chief n agiltrate would not adopt in
his meii'age to conertfs, and which
he did nor auihoriie in addrefling-4
our miniiter abioad Sir, public
min«fters and other public men may
be exp'Ted to wrongs of two kinds,
perfonal violence, and violence done
to their reputation. 1 he cafe is rare
indeed in which a public minifter, a
Secretaiy of rotate or head of any ,
otner department commits an of
fence legally expofing him to corpo
real punifhment. But on a queftion
of decorum fhould we permit our
fdves to outrage it ? When repre
hending a violation of decorum,
dull we ourfelves violate it ? Sir, I
requefl you to look at the letter writ
ten bv the fecretarv of ftate, under the
direction of the Prefident to our min
iiter in London 1 will not fay that
the Secretary of State in his letter to
iVr. Pinkney meant to affirm that
thofe printers in this country who
pubiifli matters alleging the reputa
non of a public miniller might be
piolecuted at common law here, and
be lubjetted to a fine and imprifon-1
ment at the diferetion of the court;
and yet, if that be not his meaning,
where is the law to which a foreign
minuter could have rfcourfe ? But
hislangugeat lea ft fhows that he
ccnfiders a wrong done to the repu
tation of a p ublick minil'er as an in
* f *
jury for which he may reafotubly
complain, as he may for a wrong
done a his pcrfon, and taat howev
jer freely our cirizens miy fpeak or
publiffi their femiments, it is notpro
i per in our pubiick a£ts to Ipeak wan*
tonly again ft any perfon coming iiere
I in a public charaaer from a foreign
fgovernment. When a public n.intf
ter has been admitted to come here
in the faith of an honourable recep
tion, ihall the national legiflature un
dertake to blalt his character ? Gen
tlemen will feel it as becoming them
to be cautious of inflicting this
wound on the reputation of a Gran
ger, having a public trull of high
diltinction and thus honourably re
ceived by our adminiHration, efpe
cially when they are not warranted '
by the courfe adopted on the part of
the adrr.iniHratiou.
Let us then, fir, compare the lan
guage of this refolution with the lan
guage adopted by the prefident of
the United Sates. The refoiution
charges “ Francis J. Jackfon mimif
ter plenipotentiary of his Britanniek
majeity near the United States” with
having ufed in official correfpondence
a language highly indecor'us and info
lent ; and theft going on in form of
elaborate clima*, language [till more
infoient and affronting ; next outra
geous and premeditated inful!s; then
a Jlill more direct and aggravated infult
and affront to the American people
and their government,—an infiduous
attempt to excite refentments and
diHruHs ; and laltly, appealing
through falfe or fallacious difguifes.
Let us now ohferve in what manner
the prefident has thought ^.proper to
fpeak by the fecretary of Hate with
rtlpefl to what is called the appeal
in the letter, headed “ Circular,” and
purporting to be a [letter from Mr.
Jack fun to the Britifh confuls in the
United States. After Hating it in
the letter to Mr. Pinkney, the fec
retary of Hate remarks, “ it can on
ly be regarded as a virtual addrefs
to the American people of a repre
fentation previoufly addrdTed to their
government ; a procedure which can
not fail to be feen in its true light by
his Sovereign.”
[TO BE CONTINUED ]
—
WEDNESDAY, JAN 3,1810.
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE.
This day the President communicated
the following- Message to both Houses : —
TTj the Senate, and House oj Representatives,
The act authorizing a detachment of one
hundred thousand men from the militia,
will expire on ihe-30Ui of March next. Its
early revival is recommended in order that
timely steps m.«y be taken for arrangements
such as that ret contemplated.
Without interfering with the modifica
tions rendered necessary by the defects or
the inerlicacy of the laws restrictive of com
merce and navigation, or with the jjolicy of
disallowing to foreign armed vessels the
use of our water*, it falls within mv dutv
to recommend also, that in addition to the
piecautionary measures authorized by that
act, anu to die regular troops for completing
the legal establishment of which enlist
ments are renewed, every necessary provi
sion may be made for a volunteer force ot
twenty thousand men, to be enlisted tor a
short period, to be held in a stato of organi
zation and readiness for actual service, at
the shortest warning.
I submit to the consideration of Congress,
moreover, the expediency of such a classifi
cation and organization of the militia, as
will best insure prompt and successful aids
fr. m that s» u:ce adequate to emergencies
w iden may call for them. ♦
It will rest with them, also, to determine
how far further provision may be expedient,
for putting into actual service, if necessary,
any part of the naval armament not now
employed.
At a period presenting features in the
conduct el foieign powers towards the Uni
ted Slates, which impose on them the ne
cessity of precautionary measures involving
expense, it is a happy consideration that
such is the solid state of public credit, that
reliance may justly he placed on any legal
provision that may be made tor resorting to
it in a convenient form, at * o an adequate
amount. JAMES MADISON.
| January 3, 1810.
heferied to the committee on naval and
military establishments, and to the commit
tee of ways and means.
IBs tljc flails.
Jf it Jbovld turn out that Secretary SMITH, at Mr,
j COLEMAN frtfumct, it tbe author ef tbe follow- I
ing Letter in favor of his own dear felf, at
paddy xvjuld fay, be would not be tbe frfi that
bat written in bit own pr tift* IVt need net go
beyond tbe county of Lincoln to f nd a wouli be•
thought gentleman, who bat (it (ulateJj'ome prtiieut
Jcrapt of tbit kind.
From tbe N. V. Herald, of Jan 4, 1810.
A Curious Letter,
Extracted from the Public Advtrtifcr of the
2lft of laft month, I only add, a* l introduce
it, that nobody will permit himfelf to conjec
ture, wbi.e he .tads, that it u from the renow
ned Secretary Smith himfelf:—
“ H’ajlirgtcn Dec. 21, 1809
“ Give yourfelf no cwnctai atom the piece*
inth- Event-g Pofi They lerd mJviAL
produce the iii.ift falutary effect,; jVJ : * 1 ,r
impreff d am I with this purluafi n ,i*^t
hope the writer will go ou, laboring jn{.*** * b
ration • Every h-cnd to the -Uinin.fp,/*
ought, iu my opiuion, to encourage l*im . 5
piece-, breathe an anti-American Ipuit, w'. ■
American# will not fail properly1 i0 *.
date
•
Ai thi# time he is ignorant of the tr^e f.;
it ofihe American people; he th:iu, ,h
daftardly enough to fubmit to the groflU^*
fults He IS ali ke ignorant of their true chU
acter as a people of diicertuaent, f0r |.e
the vanity to believe that his fcptrifliy 2
completely delude them . he thinks ihemfotj!
ly as not ro he able to perceive that hei« 1(j^'*
caring, not the caufet t his country, hut ih,j 1
its foe—I maybe wrong in one parufu ar ;
he may be advocating the cau'.e of lmco^
but that country is not America. Williugly Wu^J
I perf uadernylelf that the writer is not anArer^
But why are Inch p eces admitted into an Am 1
ericau prel* ?—a fo'urion of this quelW
would excite unplealant and indignant feelic
— I forbear the enquiry.
“ That tke Secretary of State is otter * in<!
capable of the conduA aferibed to him ^
this licentious writer, every one petfowi*
known to him would readily admit. An
quaintance of many year# with him ha*
bled me to form au accurate judgement a* t0
hi# character, and it is the perte& conviaioi,
of my mind that there lives not a man who i*
his fuperior in purity of virtue# or nobleoef,
of Ipirit. No man of equal rani nojiiddti
privilege!, dart! to que/J,on bit probity. Thu it the
man whofe word this writer would perfume
us to diferedit upon the affertions of a foreign,
er, whole intereA is not with us, but agiinft
us—whofe houndenduty it was to endeavour
to gain every advantage of us, in the adjuft.
ment of points, involving the intereftof two
diAinct and indeptudeat naiious. The Uni
ted Stares rtprefented by Mr. Smith, Gnat.
Britain by Mr. Jackson, and will the peepie
of the United States believe the agent of the
foreigu country in preference to their own l
No !—their patriotifm, their good fenfe, their
pride will forbid the admifEon of an idea f#
degrading !
“ You want to know what Mr. Smiti
think# of thefe pieces. He would indeed, be
unfit for the Aation he hold#, if he fuffered
himfelf to pay any ferious attention to fuch
libellous attacks.”
RIMARZI.
I have already barred the conjedure that
the above is written by the great Secretary of
Stare, himfelf, and yet fomehow, I cannot
reft at the fancy, that it is. One thing isctr*
tain, that that gentleman has honored theft
numbers with a particular fhare of his “ very
ferious attention” uotwithflandiug this denial
of it, and he has made them the fubject of
his letters to certain correfpoudents ia this
city. I his fad I happen to iaoiv,—One of
thele correfpondents, it would feem, does not
hold them ia to very little eflimation as i*
here pretended ; for he writes to Wajhingtn
to exprefs ids ferious apprehend on of the con
fequences of fuch a public expofure of the
adminiflratioR ; and withes, moreover, to
know, if Mr. Smith does not feel fome ap
prehenfion too ? He, however, is confuted
by the affiirance that he need give himfelf 19
concern about the pieces in the Evening Poftt
and that the Secretary would be very unfit
for a Secretary if he paid them any attention ;
which is duly publifhed, for the encourage
ment of all good, (launch friends to the caufa
As to the inmlmijjihle vftnuation which it
contains, that Mr. Robert Smith would
vindicate his honor in a fuitahle manner,
againft my attacks upon it, were it not for
my being his inferior ia poiut of rank-1
confefs I hardly know how to receive it.—
“ No man (fays Mr. Smith) of equal rank, un
JiielJeJ by priv Hedge, daiet qutJUon bis probity
Equal rank / And what is rank in a republic f
This Mr Smith, if we may be'ieve his hi/to—
ry» a’ g'Ten *» in a highly refpedale print,
publifhod where he refided, was formerly an
obfcure attorney at the Baltin *, bar : at
which he earned his living, and at lafl acquir
ed a fortune, rather as a Jew broker than
lawyer ; for he was allowed to be the moll
knowing one at (having a note to the tune of 3
per ceut. a month, in all the place. At
•ength he got, God knows how, to be our
Secretary of State forfooth, and ever and
anon the fafidaw fkinet forth in borrowed pin ~
mage, and (Iruts and perks, and who but he ?
Does a writer venture to examine Mr Secre
tary’s public defpatches for the benefit aud
information of the community, lie is giveu to
underfland that if he was only of “ equal rank''
with his Grace, his Excellency wt-uld foon
0
call him out upon the turf and put a leaden
bullet into his body notwithftanding the late
raifhap of one of the “ royal aoujint" in Con
grels.
Since I now find, then, that I maydofo
with fafety, 1 fliail proceed in my number? till
the fHbjedk fliail be exhautted, and the tru*
character of Mr. Smith and for.ie ethers in
p'ace and power, (hall be perfectly underltood
by the gbod people of th s country— after
which I pro.»ofe, if (till in pofielfion of whole
booes, to re arrange, revile, and correct them
for a pamphlet.
I cannot quit this letter without taking no
tice of another iafinuation it contains, to wit,
that “ the writer of there fitushers it not am Ameti
sam." This is not the firft time I have heard
the fame infiuuation, and it is not difficult
to comprehend the policy of this poor at
tempt to lefTcn the influence of papers they
are unab'e to anfwer. I fe *e the occafion,
however, to fay, that whoever intimate* that
they are writen by any other than the editor,
or imputes to me, that I am lending tnf
name and prefs to either foreigner or native,
to give currency to fentiments that are neC
myown,isa bale calumniator ; whatever hie
rank or whatever his p>t+i!egei. 1 'heft uum
ber* are writer by an American; be their
merits or demerits what they may, they e*
written by an Aovericao—and l tiufl fctrea 4