The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-12-29
,, THE, ENQUIRER.
RICHMOND, DECEMBER 90, 1907.
w, OIINE1WOISN ~, 1SU7.
LETTER THE FOURTH.
TO JOHN RANDOLPH, ESQ.

! oAn-I nave attempted to demonstrate
that the Non-1mportation Act was not in re-
alty a 7var-measure, and that it could not be
considered as just cause of zvar, as YOU have
attempted to persuade Great-Britain. Let
us take rapid view of some of the remain
ing objections, which you have expressed A.
Slinst this measure.
| Could this with propriety be considered as
a wa1-measure? Was it nor the most pacific as
well as the most effectaal system, which or,.
mutual relations would permit us to adopt /,
nc U. States were far fsom adopting this
measure IN the most odious form, winch it
Gould assume. DESTROYS Of allowing to Grsat
Britain every opportunity of reircssinp orr
grievances, they suspended the operation OF
TINS restriction bill for several months. They
invested the President with the d:scretio,,a-
| ry power OF suspending it for Il much longer
period. They determined that Ct. Britain
should possess suthc ear time fo,slicfocia,i.
OH. Ii she expressed no disposition to listen
10 ourJust complaints, was she to expect that
the spirit of Amcrcca was to sleep forever,
was she not To apprchcnd, that her ini;,s-
tice would probably provoke some detcrn,in-
ed expression of this nations wrongs?
| The United States were determined to :.
uopt policy which had been so fatally re
Jected IN 1894. Similar resolutions had Das-
seq the House Of Representative at that
time: they were lost in the Senate bv the
casting vote ofthc Vice President, Mr.. ADAMS,
You nave heard OF the impression Which the
mere rumonrs of these rcSo utions produced
upon the British Ration. The merchants and
hanutanturers o. the kingdom were about
to petition the Throne for Justice to us and
mercy to themselves. Unfortunately how.
ever the measure was rejected Mr.. Jaw
was dispatched as special Envoy to
the Court ct st. Jamcs's; and the British
reaty closed the consistent Catalogue. Were
you willing, SIR, that system which had
proved so emiaently fatal in "a, should once
more be repeatedf Did YOU. not suppose that
an American minister would hay6 more eff
hcientiy approached the throne OF G. D. with
a treaty OF indemnihcation in one hand and
anon-lmportation act in the others =? :
| Ii this" miserable" law has really retard
cd the accommodation of our differences, rs
you have pretended, whence arose the OBJ
structlons to this accommodation, before the
Noh-lhPortatlon act was passed. What
prevented this accommodation. when the
temporary suspension of this law at the re-
quest OF the British government must not
only nave removed this obstruction to the
negotiation, but according to yeur own rea-
sonings from the wounded pride Of the Brit
lsh government, must have tended TO DroDi-
tiate that government
You have repeatedly threatened your conn
try with the sufcrance of British hostilities.
should the Non-importation Act be adopted
You declare that " thisproposition will subject
O. b. to all the evils of an American war
without any Of the Concomltant advantapes''
and you ask lean (wc) expect tame ac-
quicscence on her part?" For once it would
appear, Dir, that you have "appiauded her
intelligence and spirit" without any ADEQUATE
cause. Eighteen months have elapsed since
the passage Of the Ncn-Importation Act. and
why have not your predictions been fulfilled !.
Twice within this period has the act gone in
to operation; during aiithis period has it re-
NAMED upon our statute-book without bein.
repealed; and yet Great Britain has not pos
sesscd the intelligence and spirit" to, CON
slider 1t as proclamation of war lin point
Oh TACT, therefore, you must be considered as
at least as unfortunate prophet, as the most
sanguine or your opponents
HAD u. Britain occn governed by q virtu-
Gus and enlightened ministry /; had her az
gressions upon our rights been few in number.
or stationary in their duration ] will admit
with you that this proposition might have
unnecessarily provoked her resentment, with
out producing any other feeling in our favour.
But neither OF these circumstances are CON-
sistent with facts.
Her ministers were indisputably the most
Corrupt SUBJECTS OF her empire: it was Pitt
and DundaS, who ruled over her destinies-
4 NJ oyStShJ WHICH lhSy pursued, was CON-
genial with no settled law of nations, with
none of the acknowledged rights of neutral
ity. The interest OF their own government
was the only end Of their administration irs
power was their oniy guide. 1t would have
been ridiculous appeal, to have depended
on the Judgement or lbcrality of such men
tor the redress OK our grievances The most
successful appeal laid directly to the. interest
of G. Britain The non-imporsation act was
not considered by ourselves as a wdr-mea-
sIre nor was it the interest Of Great-B ri-
tain to consider it in that light. Rather than
endure all the consequences of being depriv-
ed OF the American market for many OF her
i manufactures, it was reasonable to SUPPOSE
that G.. Britain would feel a more conciliato-
ry disposition to do us justice.
II the non-inporta:ion act sbouLd excite
her resentment, 1t was also to be presumed
that il would still more cfiuctually excite hc,.
fears it might create some little solicitude
in her cabinet, lest her acqucscence in our
demands should be attributed to the direlic-
ton of her honour, but This was NOT the first
time when a sense OF her interest has over
powered such ascrupuous sentiment in her
councils. It may be bad policy to threaten
an honest and enlightened debtor with the
Ir6ours Of the law; but it is no unfrequent
lpnenomeIon for the Conscience of kntyc Ia
be miraculousiy awakened by the terrors Of
\ eaagr cF. Il r.r.