Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-09-13

efhmeht, as sac having no end>to gain, losi
nothing by it.
Further, says Mr.. Canning" The re-
paration was not accepted by America, be
cause America would not fulfil the coadit
on ON which alone il was rendered, namely
the revocation of that proclaim ton by
which the British ships were not allowed
to enter the harbors of America, while
those OF the enemy visited them at plea
sure"
ms is certainly, to say no more of it,
most uncandid representation of the fact,
America, SO far from refusing to rescind
the proclamation in case a satisfac-
tory PREPARATION was arranged, proposed
that the act of reparation and the revocati-
on OF the proclamation should be co-tem-
iporaneOus.
The ground on which Mr. Rose urged
the revoc ition ofthe proclamation, was the
abstract tender of PREPARATION by his gov
ernmen'. He did not say what spec fic re-
parat,on would he mad.; he only said that Il
would be satisfactory. But of this who
Was to be the judge! Surely America, as
well as Britain, the aggrieved as well as
ne agsress'ng party. Is it not manifest
that what Brltaia might consider as ample
PREPARATION, might be rejected by America
as insufhcient; and that consequently the
CLAIM to the revocation of the proclamati-
depended, not the abstract tender of repa-
r3tion, but on the actual terms offered
| suppose cur government had crouched to
the dictation of Britain. and had rescinied
the proclaim alton before the terms OF repa-
| ration had been arranged, and il should
nIve afterwards appeared that those terms
We're hollow and insufficient, would it MT
nave rendered itself the object of uolversal
ridicule and contempt! Would no., in
1 ok A..
ldisSraced us even in the eyes ofihe British
hegpciator, as to have induced him TO have
'ffered Us a PREPARATION altogether unwor
thy OF The enornity of the original offence
Would It not have been fair inference
that the gpvefhmen-, tina. could 81 far for
get its ligntyas on such mad quite cause
20 revoke the proclamation. would agree,
from tae same AFFECT spirit, to the most
frivolous repArat..n.
| L AXE another view of the subject. Ii
! Britain sincerely desired TO heal the wound
lnhictedby the outrage on the Chesapeake,
would she have torfeited an atom of ho-
nor, or have renounced any OF her rights,
oy agreeing to the proposition Of Mr.. Ma
olson The same instrument that render
! cd reparat on would have rescInded- the
Proclamation, and every thing would i'm
M dlately have been re-instated on the same
footing, IN which it stood before the out
rag
| Mr.. Canning adds
I But. SIR, the manner in which the Bri-
tish repdratIon was rendered to America
by sps cial mission, was, 10 all the feelings
OF nice honor, effective reparation, a.
though Mt accepted and SO IN fact We have
every reason to believe that II was consi
dered ny the American govern nsp,. %
| we have here the climax of Mr.. Can
ning's rhetorical ghts. He his grasp d
ptInied Cloud, and would cleat as with
! u as d so!id realHy. If he man in which
| rep ration was rendered Was TO. al the feel.
inss OF nee honor an effective PREPARATION,
why It nor accepted? Do's vi r Can
ains, wniie he is thus processing amity to
the american government, q re 10 insinu
ate that they were devoid of all the feelings
Ut nice honor, and, therefore, d d not ac-
cept the promise of reparat on! Does Mr.
cam ng mink that the nice feelings of no
nor OF tnc A aericln government would be
sa-iSned oy his mere prOmIs of re parati-
OH, while the outrage OF their rights was
continued by retaining tn men torn from
.heir tanilies, and taken from a national
vessel! The inference would seem to be
irresistiblef
"And so we have every reason to be-
lieVe ina II was considered by the A aerl-
can government"
Does M Gaming deceive hims IF, or
would he deceive others! What reason,
we demand has he for such a belief? Has
! the American government ever made an ac-
knowledgment to this efectl Have they
uttered word tojustify T.? Have the COM
mumcations of the President to Congress Or
their measures of defence. this appearance |!
DO they, or the nation, view the affiir of
the Chesapeake as trough it had never oc
Cured! DC does M. Canning make this
nonstrous declaration from the rupture o.
Mr. Roses mission having been followed by
no remonstraRce on our purt Would he
nave US drain the cup OF humiliation TO is
dregs, and sink from the manly languag
OF demand 10 the mean attitude ofsupplica
tionl Does not he know, does not Ameri-
Ca know, does not the world know, that we
nave demanded separation in the only terms
IN winch an independent government can
demand il, and that in pref rring the claim
we have exhausted all the conciliatory
terms IN our power; that no more remains
tor US to do through the organ of remon.
STRANGE; aud that every remaining duty
rests with the aggressorl
NEW YORK, Sep. s.