The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-07-22
Notes b The Editor.
ITO be eontinued.)

Notes ~ The Editor.
ID The treaty Of Pre,burg, which arofe out of
the battle of Au1erlitz. But whatever change that
may have made in the fate of England, did it alter
orr rights In all cafes the rights Of neut-as are in
dependent of the vicifiudes of the beligerents I'M
lefs indeed the maxim of uee.as en- ls,esra lex. be as
correct in its principle it is certain in its application
~ The Examination of the Britiih doctrine,
which ubjeets to capture neutral trade not open in
tine OF Peace; the pamphlet acribed to the pen of
Mr. Madiion and which in fpte Of the Rriaures
aimed at by Mr.. R. will delerve the gratitude of
all neutral nations. Should formal compila-
ton be produced " On the Rights of Neu,rals," in
place of ,hoe fort chapters uluay devoted to them
IN the large Law of nations" the eIay of Schle-
gel on TIE right Of sareb, and Madfon's examin atien
will not be forgotten.
81 The Edinburgh Review is not vet in our pof-
ieiion-The 1" American Antagonist" is the author of
the pamphlet publihed in New.York, and afcribed
by Tome to Rufus King, by others Governor Nor
ris; pan,pher by the Gde of which Mr.. Madfon's
will mine SieHt lima inter Interfere, Iares.
~ MIR. Randolphs firi fpeceh on Mr.. Gregy's
Refolutien.
(5) The trueit faniard for predicting the mea.
lures OF the government was nor the fpeech of MIR.
r. but the votes of the Houfc of Reprefenta.ives-
But bty had already decided againI any immediate
rupture"
(6) The author completely initiate, the faa. The
queltion that was ever acted on was the one for TAX
ing up the farther confederation of this refoution
tobb was decided in the negative by the ahove-ment-
oned vote OF 20 TO Al. But ~by was it 70 decided
Not 10 much becauCe the Houfe were oppoled 70 the
principle OF Gregg refolu,on becaufe they were
iwayed by the "very powerful and eloquent argu-
ments" of Mr.. r. but becaufe they preferred fome
other propoG,ion, which was more likely TO un;t.
them. What would have been the fate of MIR.
Gregg reiolution had it been the only propofiton
before the Houe, it is impolhble to CONFERENCE.-The
where was the force of Mr.. arguments, when they
were arrayed againit the Reitriaon Bill
% The author will confels that he had milf
taken the iprit of our government This bill has
not only pailed the Houte of R. but obtained the an
probation of the Senate and the PRECEDENT. VIVA,
ITS mpre;iion upon the Brl, cabinet may be, is vet
to be known But one thing Teens TO be certain that
II ITS npreton Is not fuch we had anticipated the
lame iprlt which has borne thus far, may impel
us fU further III reiifancc to Briti!h enctoacb
nlents
tSl What complete ignorance is here difplayed of
the tate of the parties in this country ceugant as
is the communication between the u, States and Eng
land, BY travellers by letters and the public prints
There IS no French party among us, and there never
was one Some years Psit, when the republicans
OF America were attached to the French revolution.
this iulpeion had little more the asssayouee of
truth but now it has not the fainteh colourug
ROW many advocates has Bonaparre among us n
During the laf congrefs when Mr. R. poured opt
his jun Indignation againn the French government
we ak how many of this Freneh zSon lept forth to
ihieid their favourite fyRen Not one member
though according this authors rea(onng there mutt
have been many of them in the large majority who
carried the Restriction Bill.-Fortunate would If
be Tor US 1t there was no tronger indication of Byia6
f1@,'1 among u.s. But commercial connections too often
produce political bias sc There all the error lies"
(D) Peace ffe ipte 6 o.
Scarce any acrfces great to be made for its
Preiervaioniave national independence and national
honour. NE would therefore fhun war-JFe wouId
consequently, enter into 4" deliberate or eyel te-
dious dilcuaion," where it promifed an honorable
accommodation. But the aYhor exceedingly under
rates our pirit, when he fuppoles, that in eafe of
fr0ng and acknowledged provocation, war with his
country " would be mot powerfully oppofed" Let
Britain continue to refufe rerbuton for our great
and aeiao7OLgod wrongs let find that our leeifla
tive artillery is of avail-ihe would foon d;lcover
whether war with her would meet with powerful
opPoftion. MIR. Macdonald, the late Brti(h CONF
miloner under Jays treaty, sEii according to the
Citizen, to be the author of War in DfguiCe. -
This gentleman ought to know Us better He was
long enough with difcover the degree of eflpa
tion in which we hold the meafures of his govern
ment.
Oo) What are on the fame ids with Britain Mr.
Randolph's fen,mentsl Unfortunately they bear too
much that way! Or does he mean the true i,,teren
oil our feow-ctizens Still more unfortunately, per-
haPs, Bcy are, on this queaon at Leaf, on different
fldes with the lentiments of Mr. r.
(1D This is but way compliment We pre
fume it would have been far more pleafing to Mr. R
with the addition of d1ti-asgiieaa No man can be pa
triot, who does not re the entertainments of aay TO
reign nation upon the rights of his country.
Q2) But how much grofIer woudnot have beenthe
impolicy of Impending our mealures at the very mo-
ment when they were mot likely to prove efeGaual
at the very moment, when the rnnh idotical ffateC
men of Europe would have laughed us to fcorn, had
we not even taken advantage of the increafed enba
ra0ments Of the Engih to prcfs more rieorouny our
demands for uGce? This is indeed ftrange IanpIe
of the very benevolent nlfrutfons which this Rnoh
author would read the maxius of policy, And
to what does his reafoning amount WHY, Bona
p1re IS strengthened by the late changes in Europe
BonaParte my attempt the nvaf6n of England. Bo.
naparte may iueceed in running England; and then
BOnaparte may come here to devour us And for all
thee diitant probabilities we are TO fuer Britain q,
impress our ieamen ,conffeate our hps, and convert
our own eargoes into means for fighting this for
midable foe. We miiit amputate n toe for fear of
Tome future govt or gangrene in the foot. But to
what extent may not this argument be pufhed !
Why has no. this model author propofed TO us
treaty Of alliance ofenlve or defenlive with Great,
Britain loan at leaf, of few millions of dollars
cut of our public treaury, in aid Of the contributions
which they levy upon merchantmen. When
this author can prove s, that il is not our intereG
TO ieek an accommodation of differences with q
b. and France by playing of the one againn the
other; why lien let him preach upon national poll.
eyl