The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-04-15

INC iast war a-hcensed commercial inter
course prevailed between G.. Britain and her
enemies, France, Spain and Holland, be-
cause lit comprehended articles necessary for
her manufactures & agriculture, notwithstan-
ding the effect it had in opening a vent to the
surplus productions CT the others. In this
manner she assumes TO suspend their accus-
toned commercial restrictions i'm favor of
neutrais but the injustice and inconsistent
cy OF her attempt to press strict rule on
neutrals is more forcibly displayed by the
nature ofthc trade which is openly carried
on between the colonies of Great Britain and
Spain in the West-Indies. The mode of it
is detailed in the inclosed copy of letter,
wherein it will be seen thatA American vessels
and cargoes, after being condemned in Bril-
fish courts underpretence ofillicit commerce.
are sent on British account to the enemies
OF Great Britain, if not to the very port of des-
'ination interrupted when they were Amer-
can property. What respect can be claim
ed from others to doctrine not only of so
recent an origin and enforced with so little
uniformity, but which is so coaspicuously dis
regarded in practice by the nation itself
winch stands alone iii contending for it?
oiXthly, It's particularly worthy of atten-
ton, that the board of commissioners Jointly
constituted by the British and American go
vernments, under the 9TH article of the trea-
ty OF 1894, by reversing COMBINATIONS of the
British courts founded Ton the British in
structlons OF November, 1898, condemned
the principle that trade forbidden to neu-
trals IN time OF peace, could not be opened to
tnem IN time OF war, on which precise prin-
cipIe these instructions were founded. And
as the reversal could be justified by no other
authority than the law OF nations, by which
they were to be guided, the law of nations.
according to that joint tribunal, condemns
in a1,
BRUSH commissioners concurred in these
reversals, does not appear; but whether
they did or did not, the decision vas equally
binding, and affords a precedent which could
not be disrespected by like succeeding tri-
bunal, and ought not to be without great
weight with both nations in like questions
recurring between them
On these grounds the United States NAV
justly regard the British captures and CON
demnations of neutral trade with colonies
OF the enemies of Great-Britain, as violations
OF right; and it reason, consistency, or that
sound policy which cannot be at variance
with either, be allowed the weight which
they ought to have, the British government
Will feel sufficient motives to repair the
wrongs done in such cases by its cruizers
and courts.
But, apart from this general view of the
subject, refusal to indemnify the sufferers
In the particular case of the Aurora, is des-
tltute OF every preteXt because III the Sc
cond place the continuity of her voyage was
Clearly and palpably broken, and the trade
converted into new character.
1t has been already noted that the British
regulation of 1898, admits a direct trade in
time OF war, between belligerent COLONY
and neutral country, CARRYING OF the trade /;
and admits, consequently, the legality of the
importation by the Anrora from the Havan-
ma to Charleston. Nor has it ever been pre-
tended that neutral nation has not a right
to re-export to any belligerent country what
ever, foreign productions, not contraband of
war, which may have been duly incorpora-
ted and naturahzed, as a part of the COM
merclal stock of the country re-exportinp- If
The question then to be decided under the
British regulation itself, is, whether in lam
ding the cargo, paying the duties, and thus
as etectually qualifying the articles for the
legal consumption Of the country, as if they
had been its native productions, they were
not at the same time equally qualified with
native productions for transportation to =
foreign market. That such ought to be the
decision, results irresistibly from the follow
ing considerations.
First, from the respect which is due to
the internal regulations of every country
where they cannot be charged with TEN
porIzing Partially towards particular belli-
Serent parties, or with fraudulent views To-
wards all CT them. The regulations of the
United states OBJ this subject, must be free
from every possible imputation being not
only TAR on their appearance, but lust in
their principles, and having continued
the same during the periods of war.
as they were in those of peace 1t NAV be
added, that they probably correspond, in e.
very essential feature relating to re-exDor-
tatlons, with the laws of other commercial
countries, and particularly with those Of
Great-Britain. The annexed outlineIof thern
cy tire secretary of the treasury. will Il
once explain their character, and shew that
IN the case OF the Aurora, every Legal reo,i;.
site was duly complied with.
| I'd. From the impossibility Of sribsf;t,i+ino q
any other admissible criterion than that IF
landing the articles, and otherwise qualify
ing them for the use of the country. Ifthis
regular and customary proceeding be not a
barrier against further inquiries, where. If
may be asked, are the inquiries to ston 3
by what evidence are particular articles r.
be identified on the high seas, or before 70
reign tribunal IF identified, how is if to he
ascertained, whether they were imported
with view to the market at home. or to =
foreign market; or, as ought always to be
presumed, to the one or the other as it should
happen to invite /; or if to a foreign market
whether to one forbidden or permitted by the
British regulations; for it is to he re
collected, that among the notifications
which her policy has given to the general
principle asserted by her, a direct trade is
neTmItfg6 m