The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-10-31

rubbifh with which the folly of fome, and the
artibce of Others, have loaded this huHnefs !:
he will then fee that the convention, having
(ike every other inftrument of the fame kind)
rules for its own execution, thefc were, to the
tunctionarics acting under it, laws Of as much
obligation, as thofe underwhich the Judges o.
our courts daily decide queftions nf right ard
wrong between man and man he will then Zee,
that If a claim could be brought within the
principles eftablithed by the convention, and
was at the fame time fupported by vouchers of
regular character, the miniffers were, as far as
it depended upon them.s obliged to ADM. it !:
and that, on the other hand, if it could not he
brought within thofe principles, nor be lur.
ported by proof of the prefcribed forsn, they
were Obliged to reject 1t. Now among thole
principles, are to be found the following:
Firit, that the claim fhall have been American
IN Its origin, and of the fame character at the
date of the treaty:
And fecond, that it !hall have been made by
the perfon to whom it OF right belonged, or by
his or her Representative.
The 6rt of thefe would neceTarily have ex-
Guided an Engliihman, Hoander, or Dane,
who ihould have claimed in his own right, or il,
that of an American, derived before the 10th
of April lsoo.
had they prefented themfelves TO receive, in their
own right, what belonged to and D..
Let us apply thefe doctrines, about which there
can be no difpute, to the prefent cafe
claim is preferred in the names of Nicklin
and Griffith ; in their names a decree is obtain
ed from the council of prizes; in their names
the claim is admitted by the American commit.
hon and in their names it paiies to the council
general of liquidation.
In this body, a twofoId doubt arifcs viz.
whether Nicklin and Griffith were not partners
in an EngFfh houfe ? And whether, as the
hip was in all probability injured, they (Nick.
In and Grifhth) were not claiming, under the
convention of 1908, for lofts which had been
already compensated in 1899.
To iolvc thefe doubts, MIR. Marbois writes
letter to general Armttrong, and bcss from him
all fuch information on the fubject as he poi.
" fefied, or could obtain.'
What courfe would Meflis. Nicklin and
Griffith themielvcs have prefcribcd for the mi
niffers here? Should he have refufcd to an.
liver the letter? Certainly not. And if not,
how was he to aniwer it !-hy admitting or re,
Ijecting the doubts? Both thefe courfes reeuir.
ed evidence, and none within his reach ena
bicd him to choofe between them for it was
ImPoilible for him to forefee, in the month of
December, that, in that of January, the agents
OF Meiirs. Nicklin and Griffith would 6roq,,
that one of thefe doubts was III founded, and
that the otbsr was zveH fsuudeH. What, under
which every conicientious man would have
done-that which every confcientious man will
approve He attended all the information
he could he carefully diltinguifhed between
what was certain, and might be contided in,
and what was only brefy,s,bt;r,- and Of cnrrre
fabje6t for farther enquiry and he took this
ground with circumfpe6tion, which feemcd
10 let both folly and wickednefs at defiance =
tor befidcs employing inverted commas or marks
n n nj ~
omitted as ufelefs or impertineut, he both be-
gan and ended his detail of the preilmbtize proof
with declaration that the information he gave,
had been reeeizea verbally, and without the
fanction of an OATH
Let us now fee what is the preyifusbtire broac
which he is thus cautious in putting awav from
himfef :--if we do not miftake, it includes all
thoie paiiages on which the tooth of malignant
calumny has faitened,-al thofe J;zlfJ and ooini-
ans which folly and fallhood have charged up-
on him: it is as follows:
The circumstances which render the firR
e" of thefe facts probable, are, that " one of
" the partners of this houfe was recently, be.
fore the fitting out of the flip New Jerfey,
p" the clerk or carrier of pattern cards far ma
" nufa6turing houfes in Great Britain that
e." both have been notoriouhy the commfiion a.
" gents OF fuch houfes fnce ; that they were
" not IN condition to fit out 4 fhip of the va.
iuC VI tue NcW Jcrley with their own means;
" and that if they had aiIiftance, it mutt have
" been derived from BritiE )ourceJ, as it has
" not been even pretended they have had any
" American fupport."
The circumstances rendering the fecond
fact PrsbabLe, is in the knowledge Of all men ac-
quainted with commerce as conducted in the
United States, viz. That much proDerty
" committed to the fea, on long voyages, and
" IN fate of war, is always injured. -
Whence the Probability that the prefent claim
IS purified, not on account of the ohenfble
owners, but of the iniurers--Ifthefe infiIrers
are American, they have been amply paid in
their profits, which in 1917, were equal to 500
per cent. per annum on their capital and if
EngIifh, they cannot come within the proyif-
ons of the treaty"
The Lar part Of this quotation has been feiz-
ed with equal maleyoence and art, to raile the
recruitment of underwriters from north to ronth
and many of thefe respectable men have been
the dupes of the artifce. They have been made
tn believe, that the principle here laid down
was not prefented as maffer of information. as
a qHefion ofd9abf, as a point for insniry, bat a,
the [fffif6 and Acknowledged Doctrine of the min
liter.
To this belief we oppofe the following facts
]. That on no iimilar occaiion was fuch
opinion given or maintained by general Arm
itrong:
?. That neither the French minter, nor the
French council of liquidation conGdered this as