The Sun.
London, England, 1812-09-15 00:00:00

AN ADDRESS

•, - .
Nietnhers of the house of Representatives of the t0n-
..., izveiS of the united Stktes, to their Constituents, on the
Sd'Jject of the War *With Great; Britain:-

.
Republic has, for its IhaSiS the capacity and
.1;4;41 of the people to govern theinselves. .A main
principle of a representat.i.•;-e republic IS the .re-
sponsihili7 of the representatives .to their cousti=
titents. Iteedoin and. publkicity of debate are es-
sential to the preservation', of Such form's of go-
yernment. arbitraiy abridgment di the
Hula of speech in repreSent atives, is a direct
fringement of the liberty of the people. Every
unnecessary concealment of their proceedings an
approximation towards tyrailny. When by sys-
tetnatic.ruies, a majority tales.to itself the right,
at its pleasure,. of Jiiniting s:peecli, or denying it
altogether ; when secret-. set,sions multiply ; and
in proportion to the importaiice of a question, is
the studious concealment of &bate, a people may
be assured that such practices _obtaining, their
freedom is but short-lived. • .

Reflections, such as these, have been forced
upon the attention- of the 'undersigned Members
.House the .on9g of. Representatives of the United
States,_by_tlie" events of the present session 9f
Congress., , They have- wittmsSed a 'principle,
,adopted as the law of the House, by which, under
• a novel application of the previous question, a
power is assumed by the majority to deny the pri-
..vilege or speech, at-any state; itnd under any cir-
cumstances of debate. And recently, by an un-
precedented assumption, the_riglit to give reavons
an original motion, has been made to depend
upon- the swill of the majority,
Principles:more hogile than these to the' ex=
istence of rgsaresentative !iberty, (-alum:: easily be
,-.-9nceived. It i;; ?lo't„howeyer,.on thee accounts,,
weigiit'.7 as theiti.e., that the .undersigned have
undertalten.th::::slddres9. A snbject of iiig,her and
more immediate imc.orta3ce itnpels them to the.
present duty. ,
The momentous question of war with Great
Britain.is-decided. On this topic, so: vital to your
interests, the right of public deba,'e, in the face of
the world, and especially of their consr..tituents, has
been denied to your representatives. •
They have been, called into secret session,
this most interesting of all your public relations ,
althOtigil the circumstances of the times and of
the nation, afforded no one reason for secrecy,
unless it be fi3und Li the apprehension of the eifect
of public debate on public opinion.; or of public
opinion on the result of the vote.

Exeet the Message of the President, of the
United states, which is now before the public,
nothinv; confidential was communicated.—That
message contained no fact, not previofisly,known.
No one reason for war intimated but such psis was
of a nature publiC and notorious. The intention
to wage war-and invade Canada,' had. °been long
_since openly avowed: The' object of hostile me-
nace had been ostentatiously announced. 'The
inadequacy of both our army and navy v , for stic7
cessfni invasion;,a-nd-the insufficiency of the forti-
' fications , for the: security' of ,dur seabOard; were
every where known.
_Yet,the doors "of Congress
were shut upon therpe9ple. They have.been care-
fully kepi in • i.gnoranee of the progress of
..ineasures,• until the- purposes of administration
were consummated, .and the fate of the coun-,
try ,sealed: 'ln a situation. so extraordinarY
the underSigned•have (teethed it their duty by no
act of theirs to sanction a proceeding ,S(,) new and
arbitrary. On the contrary, thet wade every at-
tempt, in-their power, to attain publicity for their
proceedings, so new and arbitrary. All such
attempts were vain. When this momentous sub-
ject was- stated. as for debate, they demanded that
the doors should be opened.
This being refused, th'ey: declined discussion ;
lic.ing perfectly convinced', froin , indications, too
plain to he misunderitood; that, in the House, all
argument,with closed, doors Was, hopeless.; and.
'that., any act; .giving 'implied Validity to so )fia-
grant an abuse of power, would be little less than
treachery to the essential rights of a free people]
In the situation to Which 'the undersigned , have
thus been reduced; they are compelled, reluc-
tantly, to resort to this public declaration of such
views of thestate and relations of the country, as
determined their judgment and vote upon the
question of war. A measure of this kind.has ap-
peared to the undersigned to be More imperiously
demanded by the circumstance of a message and
manifesto being prepared mid circulated at public
expense, in.which the 'causes for war were enu-
merated, and the motives:f6l it concentrated in
a manner suited' to agitate' and inflhence the pub-
lic mind: In executing tltis task, it will be. the
study of the 'undersigned to reconcile'tbe great
duty they owe- to the peOple,
,constitu-
tional respect which is ''due to the administrators
Of public- concerns.• , ' .
In commencing this vieW ofjour affairs; the un-
dersigned would fail in duty to themselves did they
refrain from recurring to the. course, in relation
to public measureS; Ayhieh they a.dopted,Ahd have
undeviatingly pitrSued.„ from eothMeneement
of this loin; and eventail .session; in 'which' they
deliberatedly ''.Saerificid, every • minor cOnsiciera
tion to That they deemed: the, best interests of
the country. ,
For a succession of years the nndersigned have'
from principle_ disapproved a series of restrictions
upon commerce,' according to their estimation,
inefficient as respected foreign nations, aid inju-
rious chiefly to ourselves: Success in the system,
had become identified with the-pride, the character,
and the hope of, our Cabinet._ As is natural with
men who have ,a great stake depending on .the
success of favourite' theory, ``pertinacity. seemed
to increase,as its 'hopelessness: became apparent.
As the inefficiency of this system• could not be
admitted, by its' advoea.tes, without ensuring its
abandonment, ill success 'vas` carefully attributed
to the influence of oppOsition.
To this cause the people were taught to charge
its successive failures; and' not to its intrinsic im-
becility. In this state of things the Undersigned
deemed it proper to take away all apology for ad-
herence to this oppressive system. " They were
desirous, at a period so critical in public affairs,
as far as was consistent with the independence of
opinion, to contribute to the restoration of har-
niony in the public councils, and concord among
the people.- And if. any advantage could -be
thus obtained in our foreign relations, the under-

,
signed, being engaged in no purpose bf
or party advancement, would rejoice in such ati
occurrence.

The course (if public mea.,:nres alsb, at the open:
ing of the session, gave hope that an enlarged arid
' enlightened system of defence; with provision for
the security of our maritime rights; was aboitt
• be cominenecd; a purpose, which; wherever
found,- they deemed it their duty to foster, by
giving, to any system of measures thus bompre-
irensive, as unobstructed a course as was consis-
tent with their general. sense of public duty.---
After a course of policy, thus liberal and conci-
liatory, it was .cause of regret that a commnnica
• tion should have been purchased by an unprece;-
dented-estpenditure of secret service money; and
„used;. by the Chief Magistrate, to disseminate
suspicion and jealousy ; and to excite resertment;
among the citizens, by suggesting imputations
against a portion of them, as unmerited' by their
patriotism,- as unwarranted by evidence.
It has a'iways been the opinion of the under-
signed, that a system of peace was the policy;
which most comported with the character, concli.:.
,tion, and, interest of the :United States ; that their
remoteness from the theatre of contest, in Europe,
was their peculiar felicity; and that nothing but
a necessity, . absolutely imperious should. induct
them to enter as parties into wars, in which et ery
consideration of virtue and policy seems to he tor:
gotten, under the overbearing sway of rapacity
and ambition. There is a new era in human
fairs. The European _world is convulsed. The
advantages of our,own situation are peculiar.
-=--
f ',Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground ?
Why; by interweaving our destiny with that of
any part of Europe, entangle our peace and pros-
perity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship,
interest, -honour,. or. caprice.?"
In addition to the many moral and prtidential
considerations, which should deter thoughtful
men from hastening into tne perils of such a war;
there were,some peculiar to the United States, rei
suiting cram the texture of the Government and
the politieal. relations of the people. A form of
government, in no small degree experimental;
composed -olpowerful and independent sovereigils
ties associated in relations, some of whjcli are
tical, Well as novel, should not be hastily pre-
cipitated into situations calculated to put to trial
the strength of tie moral bond; by which they
are united. Of all, states, that of war is most
likely to call into activity the passions, which are
hostile and dangerous' to such a forM of govern-
ment. Time' is, yet important for the nation to
settle and mature its: recent institutions. Above
all, it appeared to the undersigned, from signs,not
to be mis,tati'efi, that if we entered upon this war;
we did it a 441 divided people.), not only from a
sense of inadequacy of our means to success, but
from moral and political objections of great weight
and very general influence.

It appears to the undersigned, that the wrongs,
of which the United States have to complain al.;
though, in some aspects, .very grievous to our in-
terests, and in many humiliating to our pride;
were _yet of a nature which -in the present state of
the world, either would not justify war, or which
war would not remedy. _ Thus,-. for instance, the
hovering of British vessels upon our coasts, and the
.occasional insults. to 'our ports, imperiously de-
manded such a systematic.application of 'harbour
and sea-coast .defence, as would repel such aggres-
sions,,.but in no light, can they be considered as
makinga resort to war, at the present time, bri
the pkirt.ofthe.United States, either necessary or
expedient: . So, also, with-respect to the Indian
war, of the origin of which,: but very imperfect
information:WS as yet been given to the public.
Without any,eNpress act of Congress an expedi-
tion was last year,set on foot and prosecuted into
the Indian territory,
„which had been relinquished
by treaty, on the part of the United States. And
now we are told about the agency of British try:-
ders,
,as to Indian hostilities.. It deserves consi.
deration, whether there has been such provident
attention as would have been proper to remove
any 'cause .of complaint, either real or imaginary,
which the Indians might allege, and to secure,
their friendship. With all the sympathy and
anxiety.excited -by the state of that frontier; im,
portant as it may:be to 'apply adequate. means of
protection, against-the -Indians; how is its safety
ensured.by a declaration of war, which adds the
British to the number of enemies ?

As a decentrespect to the opinions of mankind
has not induced the two. Houses of Congress to
concur in the declaring the' reasons, .ot motives,
fOr their enacting'a declaration of war, the under-
signed,.and the public are left to search elsewhere,
for causes either real or ostensible. • If ;we are to
consider the President of the United States, and.
the Committee of the House of Representatives,
'on Foreign Relations, as'speakini; on this solemn
occasion,. for Congress; the United States have
three principal topics of complaints against Great
Britain. impressnients,--Blockadeand Orders
in Council.

Concerning the subject of impressment, the unL
dersigned sywpathiae with our unfortunate sea-
men, the victims of this abuse of power, and par-
licipate• in the national sensibility on' rh'eir ac-
count. They do not _conceal from thenselves,
both its importance and its difficulty ; and 'they
are well aware how stubborn is the will and how
blind the vision of powerful nations When great
interests grow into controversy.
But,-before a resort to a var for such interests,
a moral nation will consider what is' just, and a
wise nation what is expedient.' If the exercise
of any right to the, full .extent of its abstract na-
ture be inconsistent With the.safety of another na,
tion, morality seems to require that in practice,
its exercise, in this respect:should be modified—lf
it be'proposed to vindicate - any right by war, wis-
donr demands that it should be of a nature by war
to he obtained .—The interests connected with the
subject of impressment are unquestionably great
to both nations ; and ,in the full- -extent of ab-
stract right as asserted by each, perharis irrecOn-
citable.

The government of the United States asserts
the broad pijnciple that ths: pag of their merchant
vessels shall protect the mariners. %This privilege
is claimed, although every person on board, ex-

-
cept the captain., may be an alien,
- The British governinent asserts that the fille-
aiance of their subjects is inalienable) in time o;'

n•ar, their seanaen,found on the sea, the comnann

highway of nations, shall not be protected by the
flag of private merchant vessels., '•
The widersigned deem it rumececsary here to
discuss the question of.the American claim,.for the
immunity of their flag. But. ttley cannot refrain
from vie Wing it as a principle, of a nature very
broad and comprehensive, to the abuse of which
the tempations are sliong..and numerous. And
they do maintain that, before the calamities of
-war, in vindication -61-such'a principle be ilrcur-
red, all the theanS of negotiation should be e:-
hausted, and that also every practicable attempt
should ,be made to: regulate the exercise of the,
right.; so that the acknowledgedinjury, resulting

to other nations, should be checkel, if not pre-
.. vented. They are clearly of opinion that the peace
of thishappy and rising community sh.ould not be
abandoned, for the sake of affording facilities to.
cover French property ; or to employ British sea-

men.
The claim of Great-Britain to the-services. of
her seamen is neither novel nor peculiar. The
doctrine
.0 allegiance,%for which she contends, is
common to all the governments of &trope.—
France, as well -as England, has maintained it for
centuries. Both nations claim, in time of war;
the services of their subjects. Both, by decrees,
forbid. their .entering into foreign employ. Both
zsica.ll them by proclamation.
No man can doubt that, in the present state of
the French marine, if American merchant vessels
were met at sea, having French seamen on board,
France would take them. Will any man believe
that the United States would go to wax against
France, on this account ?
For very obvious reasons, this principle occa.
sions- little collision with France, or with any
other nation, except England.- With the English
nation, the people of the United States are closely
assimilated, in blood, language, intercourse,. ha-
bits, dress, manners, and character. When Bri-
tain is at war and the United States neutral, the
merchant service of, the United States holds out
to:British seamen, temptations almost irresistible ;
high -,waes and peaceful employ, instead of low
wages and war service; e•-afety, in lieu .of ha-
zard ; entire independence -in the place of qualified
That Er..gicanti, Whose situation is insubr, who
is .engaged in a war apparently for e'F.'.'sience,
whose. seamen are her bulwark, should-look upon
the effect of our principle -Upon her safety with
jealimsy is inevitable; and that she will not ha-
zard the practical consequences of its Unregulated
exercise is certain. .The question; therefore, pre-,
stilted, directly, for the dcc;sion of the thoughtful
and "virtuous mind, in this country„.is—whether
war, -for such an abstract right 'be •justifiable,
before attempting to guard against its- inju-
rious tendency by legislative regulations; in failure
of treaty.
A dubious right should he advanced with hesi-
tation. An extreme right should be asserted with
discretion. Moral duty requires that a nation,
'before it appeals to arms, should have been not
only true to itself, but that ft should not have
failed in duty to others. If the exercise of a right,
in an unregulated manner, •bein effect a standing
invitation to the subjects of a foreign power to
become deserters and traitors, is it no injury 'to
that power ?
Certainly moral obligation demands that the
right of a flag, like all other human rights; should
be so used, as that, while it protects what is our
own, it 11ould not injure what is another'S.-
:In
a pl'actical view, and 'so long as the right of a flag
is restrained, by no regard to tbe undeniable
interests of oth€rs, a war, on account of itia
Tressments, is only a war for the right of em-
ploying British seamen on board Ainerican mer-
chant vessels.
The eland-of Great Britain pretends to no fut.-
ther extent than to take British seamen from pri-
vate merchant vessels. In' the exercise of this
claim, her officers take American seamen, and fo-
eign seamen• in the American service; and al-
though she disclaims such abuses, and proffers re
dress, when known, yet undoubtedly grievous in-
juries have resulted to the seamen of 'the-United
,States. But the question is can. war be proper for
such cause, before all trope of reasonable accom-
modation has' failed ? Even after the extinguish-
ment of such hope, Can' it be proper until oiw own
practice:be so regulated as to removes in such fo-
reign nation, any reasonable apprehension of in-
, jary ?
The undersigned are clearly of opinion that_the
employment of British -seamen, in the merchants -
service of the United States, is 'as little recon-
cilable with the permanent as the present interests
of the United States. The: encouragement of fO-
reign seamen is the discouragement of the native
American.

The duty of government towards this valuable
class of men is iiot only to protect but to patron-
ize them. And this cannot be done inre effectui
ally than by securing t& American citizens .the pri-
vileges of American navigation.
The question of impressment, nice every other
question relative to•ctimmerce, has been < treat-
ed in such a manner,. that what was possessed'
;s lost-withoutl obtaining what was sought. Pre-
tensions, right in.theory, and important in inte-;.
rest; urged, without due consideration-of-our re-
lative power, have eventuated in a practical elan-
dOnment, both.ofwhat we hoped andwhat we en-
joyed. In attempting' to spread our flag over fo-
reigners, its distinctive character has been lost to
our own citizens. •
The American seaman, whose interests it is to
have no 'competitorS in his employment., is saeri-•
fired, that. British seamen "may have equal privi:
leges with himself.
Ever since the United:States'have been a na-
tion; this subiect has been a matter of complaint
and negotiation ; andsevery former adminisuation
have treated it; according to its obvious nature,
as a subject rather for arrangement than for war.
I't' exi'sted. in 'the time of Washington ; yet this
father of his country reconiniended,no such reSort;
It existed in the time of Adams, yet notwitlistandink
the zeallh, 'support of our maritime rights Isiiich
distinguishedhis administration,war was never sng-
gested, by him as. the remedy. During the eight
years-Mr. Jefferson stood at the haw of affairs, it
still continued a subject of 'controversy and nego-

tiation ;. but it was nevf:r made a cane for war.
It was reserved for the present administration to
press, this topic to the extreme and nu*t dreadful
rescrt of nations ; although England has otiicially
disavowed the right of Impressment, as it respects
native citizens,ana an arrangement might well be
made consistent with the fair pretensions of such
as are naturalized.

'nit the real state o F this question might be
understood, the undersigned recur to the following
facts as supported by (Oficial documents.
iNtr. King, when iViirlisterin England, obtained a
disavowal of the Britis h Government of the right
to impress American t,eamen, naturalized as well
as native, on the high seas. An arrangement had
advanced nearly to a conclusion' upon this basis,
and was broken off only because Great Britain in-
sisted to retain the right on the narrow seas.
What, however, was the opinion of the American
Minister on the probirbility of an arrangement ap-
pears from the public documents communicated to
Congress in the ,Set,sion of 1808, stated by Mr.
Madison in these words :—" At the moment the
articles were expected to be signed, an exception
of the narrow seas' was urged and insisted' on
by Lord St. Viracent., end.. being utterly inad-
missible on our part,. the negociation was aban-
doned." , ,

. .
Mr..; King seems to be of opinion, however,
that `` With more titne:than waS'ieft. for the
periment, the objection might:have been 'over-
come." . What time. was left Mr. King for the ex-,
periment, or Whether any was ever made;bas not
been disclosed -6 the' public. ; Mr, ling soon
after returned to 'America, It is manifest front
Mr. King's . expression that -he was limited in
point of time, and': it is equally.clear,,that
Ilion was,, that, an ...adjustment. t4e,
That Mr., Madison Was also' of saiwopinion is
demonstrated by Lis' letters. to it o`ure,._
and Pinckney,,thited the .3d of F,o3ruary,
which he uses these, express,O•ris j. tale., it f„,.
granted. hat you have not: failed to make dilelise
of the arrangement CO-Dr,esttd by Mr J.ja , with
Lord Hawkesbury year 192, for set die the
question of inlin'estrent. Ota that occasion, and
tiqder tltcct 4dn2i:tstration, the British principe a. as
fairlyrenounc,,d in favour of the right qf our flag,
Lord Ikr';ftesbury hatii77g-agreed.eo pre hifiit i rnp; • esi-
In ell tf. -6.1 the high seas,' and, Lord St. Vincent re-
quiring nothing more than the exception of the
narrow,scas, an exception resting on the absolute
claim of Great Britain, 'fo,some,peculiaf dominiim
over them." .Here then we
.have a full aclinoW7,
%edgment that Great Britain ii7v..§ to re-
' nounee the right of impressMent on the high seas
in favour of our flag, that she was anxious-to ar-
41.nge the subject.
It further appears that the British MI aistrycall,
ed for an Interview with Messrs., Munroe and
Pinckney, on this topic; that they stated the-na-
ture of the claim, the King's prerogative ; that
they had consulted' the CroWn Officers and the
Board'of Admiralty, who all concurred in:s.enti-
meat, that under the circumstances of the nation,
the relinquishment of the right was a measure
which the Government could not adopt, without
taking on itselfaresponsibility, which no Ministry
would be willing to meet, hdwever pressing the
exigency might be. They offered, howeNer, on
•the part of Great -Britain, to pass laws making it
penal for British Commanders to impress. Ameri-
ceii citizens; .on board of American..vessels, on the
sigh sea's;--iE America would pass a law,,making
it penal for the'Officers of the United States to
p-ant certificates of citizenship to, British sub-
jects. This will be found in the same documents,
in it letter from Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney to
Mr:Madison, dated the 11th of November, 1,805.
Under their peremptory instructions,. this 'propo-
sition, on the part of Great Britain, could- not he
acceded to,by our-Ministers,,
Such, however, was the temper and; anxiety of
England, and such:the candour and good' sense of
our Ministers, that an honourable and advantageous
arrangement did take
,place. The authority.of Mr.
Monroe, then Minister at the Court of Great Bri-
tain, now Secretary of State, and °nevi' the pi e-
sent Agrninitration, who has, recomMentied,war
, with tingland, and assigned impiessments as a
cause, supports the niidersigned in as.sert. ing, that
it was honourable and advantageous in a let-
ter fromßichmond, dated the. 28th of. February,
1808, to Mr. Madison, the following expressions
are Used by Mr. Monroe., " I have. on the con-
trary always believed, and Ao: believe, that
the ground on which that interest. {impressment]
was placed by-the paper of the British Commis-
sionersolthe Bth November,- 1806, and the ex-
planation which accompanied it, was both honour-
ab,4€, and advantageous to the,United- States, that it
contained a :cOnceSsionin theirfavouron the part of
Great Biltain; on the great principle in contesta
tion never before made hy a formal and obligatory
act of their Government, •which was highly fa-
vourable to their interest."

With the opinion of Mr. King so decidedly ex-
pressed with the official admission of Mr. Madison,
with the explicit declaration of Mr. Monroe, All
concurring that Great Britain was ready to aban-
don impressment on the high seas, and with an
himourablc and adtantageons- arrangement 'actu-
ally made by Mr. Monroe, how can, it be pretend-
ed that all hope of, settlement, by treaty, .has fail-
ed how can this subject furnish a proper cause
of war ?

(To be continued.)

One of the Dublin Papers received on Saturday,
contains the following paragraph; dated Wednes-
day, evening The Painter COFFEE, is just'ar:
arrived in our harbour, from Messina. He saw
an American vessel with a flag of trtice, off Kin-
sale. As many of the public as have thought
with us, that there was, since the revocation of
the Orders in Council, the strongest probability
of an adjustment of our differences with America,
will augur sornething faVourable from this cir-
cumstance."—(l,reenian's Journal). ,
So great is 'lie scarcity of silver in Dublin, that
it is common to pay ten-pence for the change of a
pound note.
There is now on board the flag-ship at Spithead,
a seaman, who has been sent home from Lisbon,
suspected to have • begin accessary to the horrible
murders at Ratcliff-highway.