The enquirer — Richmond, Va., 1810-01-09 00:00:00, page 1

1
■' ■ - ■ - ■ ■ '
Vol. 6.] RICHMOND, TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 1810
(Ej* Published by Thomas Ritchie, nearly op
posite the Glsbe Tavern, Richmond, Virginia.
fClT CONDITIONS .-—Five dollars a year, to
he paid annually in advance. Those who wish to
he considered as annual subscribers, must hereafter
designate it at the time of subscribing, otherwise
their patters will be discontinued at the expiration
qf the first year.
RICHMOND PRICES CURRENT.
D. C.
TOBACCO,.5 00
FLOUR—SDFERriHE, .... 6 75
so. rnts, ...... 6 25
CORN, FSR BARr.tL. 3 00
WHEAT,.1 17
BACON, PER LB.0 10
WHISKEY, PER GALLON, ... 0 80
BAR IRON, PER TON, .... 110 00
1EMP, PER TON,. 270 00
PER LB. 25
THIS DAY IS PUBLISHED,
A New Theory,
or
The DIUHjY.IL ROTATION OF THE
EAHTH:
Demonstrated upon Mathematical Principles,
from the properties of tlte Cycloid and the Epi
cycloid.
WITH
AN APPLICATION OF T UK THEORY,
To 0»e explanation of the various Phenomena of
the Winds, Tides and of those Stony and Me
tsdlir concretions which have fallen from Hea
ven upon the surface of the Earth.
Jly JOHN WOOD,
Author of Elements qf Perspective, prin
ted in London, iti 1799.
December 14.
THE Subscribers having qualified as Execu
tors of the Will of the late Mr. Overton
Anderson, merchant Richmond; have appointed
Messrs. Thomas Norvell and Richard Anderson
of the city of Kichmond, agents to settle and ad
just the debt* and Haims of the Estate—All those
"indebted to the said Estate arc earnestly request
ed to make payment, without delay to the said
Thomas Norvell and Richard Anderson, who
are authorised to give discharges, and who will
discharge all debts due by the Estate.
SAMUEL MVS BY.
Dabney minor
December 6. eptf
A NTIGUA RUM. APPLEBRANDY, Cic
X\. 20 hhds Ant'gun Rum,
3C* bbls. Apple Brandy,
50 bis. Muscovado Sugar,
l‘> boxes White Havanas do.
cS S F,C,h Rai,in#»
50 boxes Chocolate,
10 casks London Refined Sail Petre,
17 bags Greeti Cofiee,
rou SALE BY
ASA OTIS,
Opposite Samuel White's Tavern.
J*nnary 6. 3tfl|
Subscriber proposes opening a School on
f Ar day the Sth inrt in the house lnoum by
th name of the Old Academy, for the instruction
of Tout h in the Fn~hsh Language, Writing and
Arithmetic : price of Tuition § 20 per annum, p-tv
able quarterly ; partial/,r attention shall be p ,id
t° the advancement as well as morals of those
Youths com mitted ‘o his care He is in possession
of testimonials <if hit abilities.
THOXf IS LE TELI.IF.R
Richmond fan 6, 1810. tf
Conovers.
II0 USE OF REPRESEJVTAT1VES.
07* The Debate in the H. of R. hat been
tifiuri out to no great a length, that we
shall find it impossible to lay the whole
Series tf Speeches before our readers.—
We shall therefore ext roc' such parts of
the debut v as we shall think most inter
esting. Here follows the Speech of Mr.
Macon.—E. E.
DEBATE
ov rnr. joint resolution
Approving the conduct of the Executive in
relation to the refusal to receive any fur
ther communication from Francis James
Jackson.
(CONTINUED.)
Tuesday, Dec. 22.
Mr. Macon said that it appeared to him,
tlx- first point for consideration in the reso
lotion ought to be, is it expedient; but it
seemed to him that those who had taken part
in the debate had looked nt every tiling but
the resolution ; and lie should probably fol
low the example. What good effect will
the resolution have it adopted? will it pro
dure unanimity at home, or respectability
abroad ? will it add strength to the nation?
will it till the treasury with money, or will
it convince the Civilized world that it is
their interest to act justly towards us ? No,
8»r. it will not produce one of these. I am
opposed to the resolution, not for the rea
souk which have been offered against it, nor
<oi any which can lie drawn from the docn
men's before us, but because I arn opposed
<o addressing the President of the U States
on any subject whatever. W» have nothing
to do with him in cur legislative character,
exerp’ the passing of laws, calling on him
for information, or to impeach. On the d :y
of the 1 residential election, we in c.ommnn
with our fellow-citizens are to pass on his
conduct, ar.d resolutions of thi1* sort will
have no weight on that day. It is on thi*
gtourd solely that 1 am opposed to adopting
ony resolution when ver in relation to the
r xeemive conduct. If the National Legig.
i -'iMe can pass resolutions to approve the
ccnduc of tile President, may tlicv not also
yth, t« ct.-smr* j nntl ii'hat would
be the situation of the country, if we were
now discussing a motion to request the I're
sident to recall Mr. Jackson, and again to
endeavor to nrgociate with him ?
No doubt can be entertained but at this
and the last session, the policy of passing
approbatory resolutions will have been as
well investigated as ever any question was
in Congress, because as well as I recollect,
when at the last session it was proposed by
a resolution to approve the conduct of the
President, for making the arrangement with
Mr. Krskine, those who support the pre
sent resolution opposed that, and those who
supported that oppose this, so that all the
talents of the House seem to have been em
ployed on each side of the question at the
two sessions. In fact it appears to me, that
gentlemen have completely changed sides.
I mean not by this to cast any imputation or
reflection on any one. I consider the right
of changing opinions a sacred one, and that
which tfvery man ought to do, when con
vinced that his opinions are erroneous or
wrong, and it is one of the few rights of
which the most tyrannical government can
not deprive us. Convince me that I am
wrong in opposing the preseut resolutions,
and I ton will change sides.
The dismissal of a foreign minister is no
new case in the country—Genet was dis
missed, Yrujo wag dismissed, and no bad
consequence followed, and why should any
be anticipated because Jackson has been dis
missed? I will not trouble the committee
with rending any part of the documents,
they must be tired of hearing parts of them
already, and every member has surely read
them with attention, besides the nation has
them, and will decide on them, without our
assistance; to me it appears on a fair exi
ruination of his letters, that he was properly
di'-missed, but to the resolution—it will not
be denied that either House might pass an
approbatory resolution without asking the
concurrence of the other. Then what would
be tne situation of the government or the
country, if one branch of the legislature was
of a different party from the Executive, and
the branch agreeing with the Executive
should pass an approbatory resolution ; might
we not from our knowledge of the intolerant
spirit of party expect the other branch to
pass one to censure ? But suppose both
branches opposed to the Executive, and
they pass joint resolutions against him,
what then becomes of the Executive ?_
Strong as it is with all its patronage, it must
fall. No Executive could maintain itself i*
this situation. This state of things would
agitate every part of the nation aiul shake
me union nscii; unu ims government is so
organized, that it is n»t impossible but all
this may happen. This House is elected for
two years, thu Senate for six .and the Presi
dent t«r tour. If ever it should happen. I
fear you would not only have no President,
but no federal government. This would be
a very different case, from that which took
place, when Congress repealed a law, be
cause it was opposed by a part of the nation ;
that opposition was used as an argument to
shake the firmness of the National Legisla
ture, and it succeeded. I have, since 1 had
a seat in the House, heard a great deal a
bout foreign influence; I never believed
much in it, but it events, like those I have
mentioned, should ever take place, then yon i
may look for foreign influence.
Permit me, here, to notice an argument
of the gentleman from Connecticut, (Mr.
Dana) relative to the disavowal by the Bri
tish government; if the ground he assumes
be true, his argument is unanswerable. If
I mist&te him, I wish he would correct me,
because I have no desire to do it; I under
stood him to say that Mr. Erskine had no
full po wer to do what he did, and that the
administration ought or must hare known
it; I believe, sir, it is as difficult to decide
what an accredited minister may do under
his letter of credence, and what would re
<ptire a new or full power; as it is to distin
guish the lines which separate the shades of
c°l"r. All the gentleman’s argument* went
to shew that a full power was necessary to
make a treaty. This I mean not to deny,
but he assumed as a fact that the arrange
ment made in April last was a treaty. 1 d«
ny that it was a treaty; if it was a treaty,
how does it happen that at the last session
«f Congress, neither the gentleman himself
nor any one else in this House ever said a
word about iis being laid before the Senate ?
ft very one knows that a treaty cannot be
made under the constitution without the
consent of that House. I am not diplomatist
i nough to say to what class of public agree
meats the disavowed arrangement properly
belongs; Mr. Erskine called it an arrange
ment and Mr. Jackson an agreement; and
I challenge any man to say it was a treaty
i and ought to have been laid before the Se
nate by the President. If a full power was
necessary to the conclusion of the arrange
ment, where was the sagacity of the gen
tleman from Connecticut last spring when
he was so desirous of voting thanks to the
t U.r i . • _ . ...
|- . iui llirtliU HUM VCi y .11
rangemcnt ? In this House it is well known
that I was as much opposed to the motion
last spi mg as I am now to this, anil intend
ed to have delivered my sentiments upon it,
but was prevented by the House not deci
dmg on it. Why did not the gentleman then
conte forward and tell us that this boasted
arrangement was all nothing? For in the
whole correspondence, which was then laid
before us. there is not a word about full
powers; in fact the British government in
the disavowal has not made this objection ;
nor has it called the arrangement a treaty ;
both governments and every man in both
count) ■ s understood it to he not a treaty,
but only an agreement by which the United’
States engaged to withdraw the operation of
a Certain law as to Great Britain, provided
(ircat Britain would withdraw her orders in
council; both engaged to do certain things,
and the United States fairly performed their
pa rt.
If the President was to blame, the blame
tints not begin with him j it begins with
Congrt-i, because Congress passed the law,
whith authorised him to do as he did. He
was authorised to suspend the operation of
the i on Intercourse net, provided 1’ranee or
G. Biitdn should do certr o things If the
j arrangement be a treaty, then. Coogresi
pussi.il a J-w iv uuUiOii.'.c the President to
* j * * i • < *
make a treaty ; and if Congress can consti
tutionally pass a law to authorise the Presi
dent to make a treaty, my lips are sealed an
this point—-to use a modern phrase, they
arc hermetically so forever. But Congress
did no such thing; the arrangement was
made under the law, and not under the con
stitutional power to make treaties. If the
President was to blame, or was not authori
sed to do what he did. the last session was
the proper time to have objected; but in
stead ot obj-rctions of any kind, no man in or
°lV Congress discovered that the British
minister. Erskine, hnd not full power. In
truth, it this objection be good, we ought not
then to have said *l well done” to the Exe
cutive, not only we, but every man in the
nation said to him “ well done.” If the
British government had not disavowed the
arrangement, and the President Sc Mr Jack
son differed, we never should in my opinion,
have heard a word about this want of foil
p i-ver in Erskine, it would not have been
thought o'',
1 confess, sir, I have been most egi .gions
ly disappointed, since the dehate on the re
i solutions commenced. I did not believe he
fore, that there was a man in the nation who
thought the administration hostile to an am
icable adjustment of all our disputes with
G. Britain, or who could read Mr Jackson’s
first letter without feeling the insult offered
in that. In that letter he intended either to
insult the administration, to laugh at it, or if
you please to humbug it. His appeal is no-!
thing compared to his first Itttfir. iMstead
of his appealing to the people, supplfe the 1
I resident had ^refused the arrangement of j
fered by Mr Erskine. and he had in an up '
peal to the people, stated the offer and the 1
refusal. Should we have had motions to!
approve the conduct of the President ? no, not
one, all would have declared that theadmi- !
nistration was hostile to negociation with
England, every one would have been as'
much displeased with the refusal, as tli. v !
were pleased with the arrangement, and so
pleased were all parties, that all seemed to
claim the President, it seemed to he almost
a dispute in the House to which of the two ;
great part ies he belonged, and if he had not '
concluded the arrangement, both parties ;
would probably have disclaimed him, one i
saying they never expected any good from 1
hiin, and the other that they always enter- i
tained doubts of him. If the administration i
were unwilling, as has been said, to settle 1
our disputes with England, why make the '
agreement with Mr. Erskine, especially if!
they knew, as the gentleman from Con.iec
ticut has told us they did, that he had no j
full power? If this assertion of the gentle
inan proves anything, it proves an over anx
icty in the administration to settle our dis
putts with G Britain, and if they have er
red, they have erred from this ever anxi- !
Vtv .
This debate, I fear, will have a most un
fortunate effect on the nati >n, it has more
than once put me in mind of'.women, who
should be present when the house of a third
was burning, who instead of assisting him tn
save his property, were endeavoring to call
his attention from the fire, to some unim
portant circumstance, such as look t onder
Is a jack a lanthorn, or a star sho.rtmg ; they
were willing to amuse the man with ti ifles.
JU1. net to aid him in putting the fire out—so
with us, any thing will do to debars on. that
will take off tee attention of the nition from
the great questions which it ought to c-msi i
•let.. One says, Smith is wrong ard J ick
soii is right, another that Jackson is wrong
and Snrii*h is right; is this to cal’ 'he atten'
tion of the nation to this pe?t\ quarrel, for
so I call it, in comparison with the o'her e
vils inflicted on us. is it equal to the attack
oi. the Chesapeake? Js it equal to the im i
pressment of our seamen ? is it equal to the
Ft ench decrees and British order* in noun
cil, which violate all our neutral right-? Or !
is it equal to France, paying no sort of re 1
gard to her treaty with us? It is pointing ;
the eyes of the nation to Jackson alone.—
Mow comes it to pass that the ins .lence of
this minister makes so touch noise in this
Moir e when that of D’Vrujo m.tde none, and
that of Genet very little—to me this is in
conceiveable.
A gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr.
Potter) who made a very elegant speech,
said that the whole dispute between the two
great parties, was that of the ins and outs, a
contest who should have the loaves and fish
es. If it really be so, I have been very un
i fortunate, having been here a longtime, and
have not got either loaf or fish ; I do not
doubt, but the gentleman believes it as he
s,ated, nor can I doubt, what he says con
corning his own party, he knows them better
than 1 do, and I therefore must believe him
as to them, llut, sir, the men who were in
opposition in the year 1798, did not want
places, and they afterwards proved it by
their acts. As soon aj they got into power,
they put down four or five hundred snug
[Places, by repealing the laws under which
i they existed ; if t’ nse in power now possess
jthe same principles with the opposition of
the year 17158, they do not want places.
I » 'ic almost warmed mo up lo
war pitch, when lie talked about the insults
wc had received and the wrongs we had suf
fri ed for the last lift en years—if he had laid
[a declaration of war on the table, I am not
sure but I should from the impulse of the mo
mun have seconded the motion. Indeed I
begin to think he hid such a motion in i'iew;
•is for ntyse!! J feel no hesitation in slaying,
that 1 had rather wait longer and even de
pend on chance, than to declare war at this
j time.
To tny mind the cause of the disavowal is
as Clear as the noon dav son. The embargo,
which the gentleman from New-YVk (Mr
I (»old) hasbro’t into the debate, produced the
j arrangement, and the repealing of it tile
disavov.il, ,Vt the list session Thad notes,
with which I thought I < inid then defend the
embargo, and unde reveral attempts to do it,
i’’ it some how or other was always prevent
cd, I was then willing to have undertaken
it against talents a hundred to one niy supe
rior. Gentlemen may laugh, hut it is err
t limy true, that by lepcthug the embargo
they gave their party a sevtpe .low, nml did
the couutry great .tijurv. The tevcal too
was hot made, until the House had dtxiared
liat to repeal the embargo and not go to
w.tr would be M)b,n>*sion; notwithstanding
a“ (••’iJ»,TU the ouestiou to authorise ilm Fie
| Mdent to issue forth, with lefteis of niarqu;
nntl reprisal, only seventeen voted in the a
.‘intuitive. 1’lu: British government sent Mr.
; l ikely . Here with instructions* under *ne
i lira* belief, as I concede, that the embargo
| w. ih in force, and had Mr. Erskine, after rc
i ceiving the instructions, instead of obeying
them as lie did, informed his g >vernment of
the great change which h id taken place here,
he would not, 1 believe, have been disgra
ced, bin ennobled. The instructions were
sent under the belief that the embargo was
in force. When thev arrived, the embargo
was given up, and the non-intercourse act
substituted in its place, and not ■ ar. The
embargo and no i intercourse united, would
have been like .Sampson and iii> hair. iu> io
cible; but the non intercourse alone, is not
worth the hair alter being cut from the
head of Sampson. It hashed tin* e‘F*c.r ex
pec-ed—ir has operated upon ourselves, and
nobody else, and scarcely on ours* Ives; for
no one, I i>eliev,»t regards it. I have seen
leuers from Knghtnu, written as 1 was told,
by respectable men. which stated that the
people of England could not have stood the.
embargo three month's Unger, and that'hey
were determined to stand it as long asp >ssi
ble ; because if they yielded to it, we obtain
ed a victory in a way that would always put
them in our power. The nation was prepa
red to continue the embargo agreeably to the
votes of this House. We had made ’lie
stand, and ought to have adhered to it. We
th.’it solemnly pledged ourselves to the na
tion, but we did not mind that; we unfiledg
ed ourselves with great *ta«e, and I ant un
willing now to make any pledge to the Ex
ecutive whatever.
In my digressive way I go back to the
resolution. I dislike it on account of the
language.; to say the least of it. it is too
rough, one state paper excepted, and all the
rest issued by the government, have added
to the American character. The man who I
ever he may be, that dislikes Mr. Jefferson !
most as a statesman, cannot but feel pride,
when he reads hi# correspondence with Ge \
net and Hammond, his language alwavs po |
lite and correct, constantly putting them ■
down by refuting their arguments; ! may
be mistaken, lji«t I really consider tin* re>o j
lution a sort of public manifesto. If 1 was!
to vote lor a thing ol the kind, I should wish '
it to be strong, but not rough or rude. Ir is 1
notolten that I undertake to give advice, but i
1 cannot forbear recommending mtheli ntse, l
if they mean to pass die resolution, to cum- I
mit it to a select committee *. i put it in a '
dtffe’ en* and I will add a brt.ci dress_ i
though I s’.i- u!d not be hb e to do titis my- !
self, [ am sure it could be lone. It appear- '
to have been copied nearly from a precedent |
... ...v jwm I..HO Ui lilt- Iimise OIV.O'11
'non# and ui nri Istc date—it such language
was then fashionable in England, I hope it
i-» not now here, I know it may he said, that
I otten m debate speak roughly of the belli
gerents and their agents, but then i speak
to my brethren, and not to thorn. 1 wish
never to see a state paper under any admi
nistration, that may not add new lustre to
the American name and that the world may
say tlie style of the men of Vo is not banished
from the U. S
It is a li tie remarkable, that this question
about full powers has never been started be
fore either in this country or England. When
Mr. Pi-kney was instructed to make an of
fer of the repeal of the embargo, provided
the British government would withdraw their
orders in council. • he was not ask-'d for his
instructions or full power ; his auho'tty was
not doubted. If between its and the English
there should be a departure from the strict
rules of diplomatic etiquette, may it not re a
sonably he imputed to this circumstance, -hat
we speak the same language and of course
there may be .1 ore ease and ICS’s firm gene
rally in our diploma'ic intercourse, than
among nations not speaking the same lan
guage?
Whs her Mr E’skine had competent
powers or not, is a question between him Sz
hut government, with which •> e h ivemnht'-g
to do. He told the executive he had audio
rity to make the arrangement, and the exe
cutive whs bound to believe him. 1 put this
question to the gentlemen—suppose tiie exe
cutive had not believed h'm, or that the exe
cutive had told him his instructions were
not sufficient to make the arrangement, and
had declined all negociatipn for either cause,
what would have beinsaid? Surely this:
that here was a fair offer to adjust a part of
our disputes, and the accredited minister
was not believed ; or that it was refused
on a matter of form—a mere point of eti
quette.
What is it that makes it necessary for the
House to pass the resolution ? The dismis
sal of Jackson cannot be the reason, altho’
it appears-.o me, from all his letters, that
he did not come here with any friendly in
tentions. The style of’nis letters sufficient
!y shows this. It w ill not he said for this
we ought to pass the resolution. It seems
to ine, in asking for passports to protect
him from the insults of the people, he has
continued his insult. Genet and TVYrujo
were dismissed—they asked for no pass
ports. 1 beg of the members to compare
his letters with the letters of any other mi
tiister, and the, will be satisfied I have nut
mistaken their meaning, especially the first,
with any first letter written i>y any minis
ter in the world. Rut his letters, indecent
as they are, ought nottoinduce the House to
adopt the resolution.
It has been said, that the administration
were unwilling to settle our disputes with
Ureat Britain. In my conscience, sir, I
fi mly believe, and I judge only from their
transactions, that they are not only willing,
but anxious to Settle our disputes with all
the world. It' welt-id an ambitious military
man in the Presidential house.it might be
though , that he would not be willing to have
our disputes settled. l»at rather to increase
them; that he might thereby get armies
and navies to fo!l»»w the steps of ('*>*!•, of
Cromwell or of Bonaparte. Examine the
message oftliw President of the 29 h nit. to
Congress, ip which lie informs us, that Jack
son had been dismissed, and you wiil not
find a single expression in it, that looks as
if lie was not 9incc*’,ely desirous td settle our
differences with all tlto world; if there bo
such an expression, 1 will thank gentlemen
to point it out After mentioning the disa
vowal, aud the breaking off of ike negociaU*
———:q————a—
on, doe# he not plainly trll y>u. that he is
stiil for another attempt to settle hv tug -cia
turn? Every part of the messajt hrratl.es
« si-h-it friendly o the peaceable settlement
' f ill our disputes-according to my un
derstanding, it speaks of nothing hnt pence;
not n word to be found in it, advising a war
like attitude ; no advice to increase the ar~
mv or navv. It is strange, indeed, that
after reading such a message, it should
thought, that there was a hostility in •!><;
administration to an amicable setttlemei'f
with G. Britain.
Sir, I am well aware,'hat upon this ques
tion I may appear to sum- in an auknar<l
situation, because I dislike the resolution,
nmlain not dissatisfied v>jih *he conduc; of
the executive towards Mr. J ickson. He it
as it may, so long as I have u seat in this
House. I never will give a vote which my
judgment does not approve. There is iuV
| view of tiiis resolution that, pleases me,;
j if it he meant us a new fashioned answer to
| the message of the President, I object t»H ;
I because lam unwilling to answer it in any
i 'Vi.*y.‘ lu 1301, when *he change in the ad
ministration tor.lt place, all were so tirrd of
answers, that no on* made a.motion to an
swer the message. If it be meant for a de
claration of war. I object to it, because it
docs not mention our greatest causes of com
plaint; it seems to le ive then nut, merely
to bring Mr Madison ami M • Jackson into
view If war he mfcar.t. let gnnternen come
out baldly and say so ; give us a project for
it in plain terms, that all can understand.
I have lu ’ eved, (and 1 hope in God I am
mistaken, for no man is more desirous of
peace than I am.) from the time of the at
tack on the Chesapeake, that before our
differences are settled . with England, w«
should he compelled to goto wav with her;
for one. I w add put it ofTas long as possible.
It will be remembered, that the embargo
•as supported as the only means to keep
us out of 'his *v.ar. ami as a sure means to
fifing G Britain to fair terms; and I still r
believe -.s much as I dot’.iat we shall all die,
it it had beeu continued tlive# months long
er, wc should have set led every dispute
with the English government.
1 he conversations < f Mr. Pinkney and Mr.
Canning, comniui icate l by the President to
the House, at their retju- hav** been
brought into the debite Unfortunately for
'he gentleman from N. York. (Mr ';>'d.)
who n.e .tinned the embargo, he read a ’»art
ot them. , 1 au. willing 'o rest the police of
that measure on th it communication, and on
.VI'-. Canning’s conversation ah <ut it Eve
ry time he ta^Ks wi h M- Pink ev, 'heetn
burg- :s mentioned ; in tact, it seems to be
i lie first and the las. word with him Though.
good authority on the laws of nation*, noone
can d<wtbt, that lie is no*, good authorky. that
the embargo pinched Eng and verv sorely,
ll there be a man clear of party feeling,
let him read the conversation* between Mr.
Pinkney ant! Mr Canning, and if he d«>e*
not decide, that the embargo was a bitter
pill tc Mr. Canning, f am greatly mistaken.
That •?e Suffered a little under the embar
go, was never denied ; bu* ■v'. vjt wa it mea
sure you will, th'at.will have ba'i the ?.ct
on England that that had and we Sildil : ’1 -
fer twice as much .under it as -e .‘.id under
that—in truth, our little suit •■in*- it
were over, and it had begun t. ax
Gres* Britain, when it w.ts repea. A.
1 .trie persevarance would have brought the
British miuisliy to terms.
Tin-gentlemen wli with me, not a*
to the vatu ou the r» ‘ in' hut in the con
duct of the execu‘ . '. ill declared,
that they woul I not .sojiiik to the 1'. itish
orders in council, nor would ’.hey tre .t on
the terms proposed by the British govern
ment; not one of them, except the gentle
man from Rhode Island. (Mr. P liter,) . dic
ed like fighting, md none of them t- d us
what lie v.is willing t<>do They will not sub
mit to the orders in c >uncil, nor treat on the
terms pr..po$rd Worn the abominable
‘ rartsil duty was attemp etl to be put on us,
the same declarations were made, and i be
lieved them. I m ver have believed, that
an American would be base enough to pay
that duty There is nog'eat change froth
that plan now Almost all the <*. .unifies
with which we carried on a commercial
intercomse, and by wnich we were enabled
to pay Great Britain for her manufactures,
are now blockaded. It is true, yon may
trade to England, Bonaparte’s decrees to the
contrary notwithstanding; but you cannot
go any where else without the consent of G.
Britain.
Au have said they would not submit, as
well as those who opposed the embargo from
the first, thote who repealed it. I have
heard so much said about not submitting,
that 1 am really anxious that the gentlemen
should come boldly out and fell ns what they
will do; if they will not do tnia, they might
to quit talking about the embargo. When
the ship is in danger, every man night to be
at (he pump, and it is no enquiry how she
got into danger, bin together out of danger.
Suppose your house re i n fire, will vou ask
for help to discover who did it? Or will
you endeavor to put it out o soon asposai ile,
and then enquirj who di. it? That the na
tion has many d'lEc ' -a to struggle withr
cannot be denied; n il "■» one ill agree
that he had any hand in prod tit: in a single
one of them. Is ii tiiigh foi us
have aided in producing the .) ? To me it
neeiiisnot. It is the eas es* tn'ir in nature
to say what you will not do, h i; it isq j.t*
•liiTeient lo say what you will do.
Before I sit dowo, I must ask the gentle
men for the proof, that the Executive is
unwilling to se'tle our disputes with Great
Britain by friendly negociutinn. The asser
tion has astonished me. 1 Iis message of
the 29th November, is to my mind complei t
uroof to t)ie contrary ; his Hot treating with,
J'ckmn is no proof, became the gtiiMeiuen
therqsclvss would no*, have treated with hint
on the terms proposed ; Ids sciuhiig hima
way is no pr>yi<, because lie Ims declated
niiiiMil ready to treat with any other agent
that the Brridi government may appoint —
Jacks'll. I beli< \e came, like Rose, to settle
io dispute whatever, and If no on* v ,id
consent to treat with him on the ground o
posicd by Mr. Cannmg. what use Could ..:t- w
»e in his st tying here* I < anwnit conce ve
any at all. Fw one 1 sincerely W.sh, t iat