The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-12-15
CONGRESS.
SENATE oF7AK UNITED s7.s7xs
TUESDAY, Nov. %.
EMBARGO DEBATE-CONTINUED.
(Mr. Crazpfard,s aheeca concluded

| @N'' N'uryV'U SIfccCH CONCtNucQ.
We are told by the gentleman from Con-
nectcut, not tobe sure, in language equally
strong with that of the Esse5; resolutions, that
he repeal of the embargo will not involve
us IN war, unless indeed Bonaparte makes
war on US; that we are not driven to that al :
Tentative; that VIC have yet an honorable and
lucrative trade open to us. The same gen-
tieman has said that he will not consent TO go
| to war for rights not we'll established, bat
THAR ne will never abandon a neutral right
which is clearly established. From this it
would appear that the gentleman thinks that
the British orders in council are no infringe
nent on the rights of neutral nations rMr.
tiilihouse said he did not say SOL did not
say that the Gentleman said so f; but draw
the inference from the gentleman's position.
Nir. 1iihouse observed that he had said
that he was doubtful whether the nation
+, sh c!. 80 GouD,iuI rights: but for
| rights clearly indisputable he would permit
the armlng OF our merchant vessels The
gentieman's explanations Mr.. Crawford said.
did not change the Inference he had before
stated. He admits that he said that a re,,eal
OF the embargo would not involve the nation
III war; and that in supper. of rights not
Clearly established, he is not prepared to saw
whether he woaid go to war or not. / here
understood the gentleman to allude to that
portion OF the trade Carried on by exporting
the produce ut enemies colonies to foreipn
countries. Ihad thought that the right cf an
I. independent nation to trade with the whole
world except IN ports absolutely blockaded.
| or In articles contraband Of war was q right
which could not be denied, a right in which
no nation had heretofore attempted to control
another The gentleman from Connecticut
says he will'not go to war for doubtful rights
and that he viii not go TO war against the
orders in council. / can draw no other in
terence from these observations, than that
the gentleman conceives that the orders in
Councii do not infringe our neutral rights or,
that all our rights are doubtful.
| How are these orders and DEGREES r. bs
opposed by war, EXCEPT we keep without
their reach! II the embargo produces a re-
peal OF these edicts, we effect it without eo
ing TO war Whenever we repeal the en-
oarSo, we are at war, or we abandon our neu-
trai rights. 1t is impossible TO take the mid
die ground, and say that we do abandon
them by trading with G. Britain alone. Yeu
must submit or oppose force to force. Can
{arming our merchant vessels by resisting the
whole navy of G. Britain oppose force to
force! 1t is impossible. The idea is alb
surd
BY way of ridiculing the EMBARGO. the
gentleman from Connecticut i'm his familiar
way, has attempted to expose this measure
ne eiuc dated 1t by one of those familiar ex-
amples by which he generally exemplifies
MS precepts. He says yonr neighbor tells
you that you shall not trade with another
neighbor, and you say YOU will not trade at
all Now this, he says, is very r1rapnauimous.
but 1t is a kind of magnanimitv with which
he is not acquainted Now let us see the
magnanimity OF that gentleman and see if it
sa'ors more OF true magnanimity than our
course. Great Britain and France each say
that we shall not trade with the other. We
say we will not trade with either of them
because we believe our trade to he imnorta nt
toboth of them. The gentleman saws it is a
| poor way OF defending the national rights
ouppose we pursue his course. G. Britain
| SAYS we shall not trade to France we say we
VIII not, but will obey her. We will TIRE de
upon such terms as she may impose" This
will be magnanimity indeed this will be lie :
fending commerce with witness" 1t will
be bowing the neck to the yoke The Cd
| position to taxation against our consent at the
commencement of the revolution, was not
more merltorIous than the opposition to pay
tribute and Imposition at the resent dav.-I
cannot Tor my soul see the difference between
tribute and tacit acquiescence in the Bri-
fish orders in council. True, every gentle
man revolts against paying tribute. But,
where is the difference between that and
suffering yourself to be controlled bv the ar
bitrary act OF another nationI If YOU raise
the embargo, you mu8t carry your produce
OF. Britain and pay an arbitrary sum be-
tore you can carry it elsewhere If it re
mann there, the markets will be gutted,
and, a. 7wI/trodNce nothing. For it appears
/ from the very evidence to which have be-
lore alluded, that at least four ffths of our
whole exports of tobacco must go to England,
ana pay tax before we could look for a
market elsewhere; and that out of Is, 900
hotTheads raised in this country not more
than 5000 are consumed in Great Britain.
| Where docs the remainder usually go!-
| Why, to the ports of the continent. / ask
then, the whole consumption Of Great Bri-
tain be but Is 900 hogsheads, if an annual
addition OF 60,000 hogsheads be thrown into
that markell would it sell for the costs of the
freight! Certainly not The same would be
the situation of our other produce.
Bit the gentleman says that he is not pre-
pare:;to so to war for doubtful rights! WHAT
are these doubtful rightsP Has the law of
notions ever intcrdictcd The trade with enc
mics colonies, against the interruption of
winch the American merchants lately re
nonstrated with so much force and, uerspi-
cuity' For the information of tha senate I
| VIII read part Of the memorial presented
| by t.: merchants OF Poston. For my own
part have never considered il a natter OF
| much importance Whcfbe,. we have crrr.-,,,