Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-04-13
len be os use in your discus ssoas
tf nI British government,
,,,rRcIAL RESTRICTIONS.

! cosusRcIAL RESTRICTIONS,
FxpLANATIes OF THE I.EeaLITY
). nsS = Nv LATE BaIrIsH ORpERs OF
Or CoUSeIL.
+ a,lrs Usekiy Messenger, ct Fec. II
svstem which the present minis
Y 70 pursue with respect to re
n = .;oos upon neutral commerce, Is marked
fs' ss,racter OF daring novelty which inn
mon Is, at first sight, with the quail
prs' I,slo;a and bol,sncss-But this system
p Z, !. found, upon examination, not less IL,
w : - ourselves than unjust to others to
! s,yersiye OF many sound prinslries OF
~ law and municipal justice; and. consi-
P.J as a measure OF discretion, detrimental
ga ~ highest degree TO that very commerce
srb il is its protested purpose to pro-
THAT the late orders are violation of the
.,hIisbed principles of the laws of nations
be proved without difficulty. No belli-
,.ot can have right to seize neutral
lin unless such ship be found carrying
.onIraband of war, or attempting to violate,
- ,presuned and constructive, but an actual
uoeksde. In no other c,ise Can we pretend
,dght to harrass the commerce Of neu-
rsl
But the orders of council do not pretend to
,,ovidc new facilities forthe detection of con-
i.bana or to augment the penalties Of Illicit
,ade-They interdict ali trade with the cox
tiOsnt of Europe except upon conditions with
which no independent nep;ral can comply
They threaten, In the language and tone OF a
municipal court Of judicature, independent
states who acknowledge no binding authority
bat tie equal obligation of national law
81 They describe blockade by the circles of
81 longitude aud latitude, and put every power
that presumes to trade uuder the ban of our
courts Of admiralty Y.
What is the Justification which is pre-
tended
II France, they say, has declared generally
that the British isles are in a state OF block
sde She prohibits the intercourse between
England and neutrals, by or,'.ring that no
vessel fom an English port shall enter
4 French port. Is bis prohibition illegal? Let
= usbe Just to an enemy. 1t is not Illegal
q Every nation has authority 10 determine what
vessel she will exclude or admit into her
q ports; 1t follows from common sense that she
should have this power
Whsre then is this pretended usurpation of
4 France which calls down the vengeance of orr
orders Of council Is it that we will permit
aneutral ship that clears out of a British port
Denter her port! Why, do not we Go the
same thing by our navigation act {? Is it not
exactly In the spirit and tendency Of our navi-
CATION act-Do not we determine what vessel
VIC Will admit orexcIude Do VIC admit an
American trading from the East or West
INDIES Have we not always supported this
language TO the trading nations OF Europe, on
such and such conditions only shall you trade
Win US. Comply with our navigation laws,
and keep clear of our harbors.
he French blockade consists OF two parts
IA seizure OF neutrals entering French ports
Aler clearing out from English ports: and a
seizure of neutrals upon their voyage 10 or
fOm England.
ne former part France could execute,
winch she had right to do by the law of ma
uOhS' he latter she could not enforce in
siJ way but what was sure to become trining;
HiOSaL' II H0S lor Tue most part
nusatory.
nut is oontended that the true purport of
@ese orders of council is to retaliate upon
VIC ehemy-To fight him with lis own wet
p0nS-- 10 reFel injury with injury and not
~succunb to him in the zeal of wrong, and
the competition of injustice.
lne misfortune of this argument is that
We profess to do one thing, whilst we 10
TACT do ano,her-We do cot retsiate opoo
france If France, as The party with
Rnom the Injury originates, were likewise
'ne oOly party 10 bearing the brunt of the
Htal'aliou if she AID her allies, as COM
hsnclng he attack of injustice upon Us,
were to become the sole sufferers 10 the
sort ct TIE INJURY on Our pa... there