The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-03-13

our trade in dangerous and nnauthorifet
manner and we but return her blow.
aRidiculous as thefe pretexts are, we fhouit
not be aftoniihed to fee them ferioufly URGE
by O. Britain; and aligned as the BATS and
Junlhcation OF her attack upon our commerce
They are ridicuions for three rcafons:
Bec'ufe no nation is authorized 10 make fich
fetailaiions upon her enemy, as may iniure
the rights of other nations, though ihe bat
puriues the example of that enemy
Cd. Becaufe the French bloctading decree
does not violate our own rights, if it be
hut executed according to the profefied
OBJECTS OF France, as reprefented by Decres'
letter.
And 3dly Becaufe iii were even to have this
effect, G. Britain has no right to retaliate
upon our trade, until ihe has firit difcover.
cd tnat we intend tamely to fubmit to her
rivals encroachments.
This hrit principle flows from the very fiji
iements OF morality, and requires no proof
a nation is authorized to retaliate upon an enc
my but upon what principle of jutiCe can
me reta!Iate upon neutral the injuries which
The receives from her enemy or adduce her
ener'y's violation of neutral rights as any iuli-
ne, On OF her own
II neutral tamely fubmits 70 tkefe attacks {;
II there Is no remembrance employed, exer-
tons utcd to arreG fuch encroachmcnts, the
IN publication OF his own Entertainments. He
may lay to the neutral you futfer your rights
to lie lnfrInsed to annoyance. You fuffer
our enemies to attempt to Carve us, by permit
ing them to capture your veiitls laden with pro-
vihons. We will reiort to meafurcs of retalia.
ton"
Without fuch an exception, however, where
are the principles which can iufify the en-
croachments of belligerert upon neutral
trace Where are the principles which can
lnhify the preamble to the French decree !,
We NUT have remained Glent and fubmiiIivc
under the Britiih pro1'jfon Order of the 18th
june 1893 before France could have employ
ed theie orders to jnltify TO our government her
univeriai blockade of Britih ports had fuch
been the object of her decree.-And the late Or
der OF Great-Britain is founded upoa princi
Piles equally falfe and unjuf.
2. But @. Britain cannot even execute this mea I.
iure upon the principle of retaliation.
What is the object of the French decree?
The French mlnifter of Marine declares tba,
tits not in fact to place G.. B. in ilate of
blockade; and of courie is not intended to in
tercept neutral veilels bound 10 or from Britifh
ports.-Its only effect thea upon as will be to
exclude fuch of our veilels from bsy. ozvn ports,
as are laden with Britith merchandise, or coming
from Britlih ports. We contend that this is a
privilege of France, OF which we cannot iuitly
complain. 1t is certain that France has the alb
folute right to regulate her own trade; and to
exclude even every neutral vefrel from her own
ports,if the but impartiay extends the fameref-
friction TO every nations, and provided ihe
violates not the rights fecured to any of them
by treaty.
But what is fad to be the Object of the Britilh
decree! Not TO retaate the lame meafures
upon France; not to exclude vefels laden
with French merchandise or coming from
French ports not to regulate the trade of her
own ports; but to prefcribe what1hail be the
trade OF neutrals with her enemy'5 ports TO
violate an eitabilied principle OF National law
and one of the iolemn rights of Neutrals.
So ftriking is the difference between the French
and Engiih DEGREES
5. But !hould the French government even in
tend to execute this ambiguous decree accor-
ding to the tprlt of its frit Art. it will furnfh
no execute to Great Britain for her meditated
Entertainments upon our commerce. Surely we
are not reiponlble for every iniuifice, of which
France may be guilty. Surely Great Britain is
not authorized to employ any retaliation agaiaft
US, until The discovers that we permit France t.
wound bsr intereits, by the injuries which that
power iDfiicts upon ourtelves.
G. Britain ifoud have avoided any retalia-
ting meafures which would have affected
our own commerce, until experience had de-
cided how far the French decree would
have interrupted our rights of commerce,
and how far we ihoud have unrt litngly
fubmitted TO fuch an encroachment.
1t would Ebsn have been time enough for her
to have truck blow at our commerce and
to have trampled the facrcd principles Of neu-
trality under foot.
1t is no longer doubted, that the Britill
treaty has been rejected by the PRECEDENT, and
upon two mott fold objections
That it was perfectly fent on the impreH-
ment of our feanen
And that it contains only the conditional ra-
LITIGATION of the Britiih government the
condition being, that we fhall relilt what
ever Entertainments may be attempted up
on our neutral rights by the late decree of
France.
II hat he h., ,,,Jo -