The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-12-24

| I.NN><NN hOt NHS uCI OTUcTS iii COifnCl
The gentleman from Massachusetts define
submission TO be the doing that which yo
are commanded to do, and resistance in tin
ooing that which you are commanded not t
tn. 1 thank him, he is perfectly correct
VIII use his definition, and apply his owl
principles to this case. What said the Ber
lin decrees You shall not go to Great Rri
itain, if you do, Frauce will seize and CENTS
cate your property. What was our con,luc.
we did go TO Great Britain, and our ship
lments were nevertheless as great as befors
the decree, we did carry on the forbidden
trade; and therefore by the gentleman ;.
own dehnition, resisted. Let US take another
view OF this subject. In the note of lords
Holland. and Auckland, attached to the re-
Jected British treaty they tell us among O.
ther things, thati the enemy should carry
| these threats INFO execution, and the United
otates should acquiesce, they should proba-
| bly, be compelled To retaiiite In the same
way but disclaim the right to retaliate, i,
the French government formally abandons
! or faczfly reGngniShes them. What is tac,t
REIMBURSEMENT ! was there a single case in
which 1t was executed, and known to us pre-
vious to the orders in council Not one, and
does not the fact, shat American vessels went
from England to France as before, prove a
tacit :ei:ni:.:s::;acss Ccrt;;;IIy Indeed /.
! SO tar trom its being tacit REIMBURSEMENT
! 1t was a formal abandonment, amounting to a
positive and express acknowledgement, tn at
the decree was not i'm force against the com
mercc of the United States have already
shewn. England received no injury from the
operation OF that decree, because we trad
ed with her as we had done before, & the T.,
taliating orders, admitting the right of g.
Britain to retaiiate On her enemy through
neutra trade, could not exist until we had
received nd 10 ., H..
so tar from its being known we had acquies-
ced, the execution of the Berlin decree, and
the orders of 11th of November, reached
this country nearly at the same time. IF
our commerce had been vitaily assaulted by
TINS monstrous decree, and we had not eff
1ectually resisted, i am not prepai ed to say
how far it would have been a departu re
from our neutrality, and would have justfl :.
ed the measures adopted. Sir, / never
wenld have submitted to it. You must re-
member d.. Jared would vote against a
general embargo, but that | anticipated
from the British measures quite similar to
those of France. We did our duty, resisted
when attacked by it, and scout all idea
that the people would have submitted, or
that any man would have proposed such
submission. You hear no apology for France :;
you hear no palliaticn of her outrages, or
disguise other views, ard you sec every man
ready to exert the energies of the nation to
avense the wrongs of the country. Take
tho orders Of council in another point Of view !;
they frofesS to retalia,e On France through
us, because we have permitted her to attack
our rights Why then were they not con-
fined in their operation to France why did
they comprehend nations with whom We
were in amity, and from whom we had re-
ceived no injury Will any person say we
ought to have gone TO war with Russia,
Denmark, and Sweden You are bound to
consider these nations independent, and
treat them as such /; while they manifest no
disposition to change the subsisting relations
between US, & refrain from hostile acts. The
unlimited scope given to the orders in council,
manitestiy shews the retaliation on France.
was mere preteXt. But if the object of G.
Britain was realty retaliation on France, how
could she get over the proposition made by
the government of the u. State. to continue
the embargo as to France, and remove it as
to England, provided she would withdra W
her orders lis councils This would have
been compliance with her requisition for
resistance to the Berlin decree, and des-
troyed all the ground for the continuance of
the orders. But here we are told that our
government has offered to comply with that,
which il they had done in the first instance.
would have saved US from difficulties. This
ID H'ueCu d strange inference That England
would have acCeded to the proposition for
merly, because she now rejects it. Sir, the u.
States can never consent 20 give authority.
TO that unlimited right Of retaliation which
she Claims. And so far from this offer beine.
a compliance with that demand, it was an
honest aud fair ayowal of the conduct which
the government would pursue towards
france, il eft to itself. it was honorable,
sir, ana the rejection of chat favorable pro-
position, connected with the obvious causes
OF that rejection, convinces my mind She
does not want to be on good terms with U.s.
She thinks more may be made in another
way.
lthas been urged in the course of this de-
bate that the embargo destroys all our reve-
nue., and that 1t we rcmovc il our treasury
wouldb be again filed. What IL the fact on
this subject, taking it upon their own ground ?
| You inevitably lose upwards of q million of
fallars collected by way Of drawback, on ar
ticles rc-e%porfed from the ". States, for
consumption III foreign markets the obsta-
cles interposed by the orders, and the i'm.
position of transit duty by act of Parliament
equivalent To the duties RENTED In this
country, cut off at once this amount it IS
pockcted elsewhere. Again, we have here
toiore derived revenue from all that part
OF our importatiOns which is from the CONT
Bent Of Europe and every other part of the
worldnot included in the orders ofcouncil:
the inipost derived from this trade, and the
means which it afforded of paving rcvcni,e
INTO the trea sury are at an end nor could il