Portland gazette and Maine advertiser., 1808-01-25

patches from rance, brought dispatch
IS also from England bu, they were
only duplicates of what had been re-
ceived several weeks before.
From the language OF the support
ers Of the administration, in private
conversation, in debate on the floor of
congress and in the government prints,
we are led TO conclude that the onlv
object Of the embargo is " bring Eng
land to terms. We NJ E tile Of moth
ing of French aggression and insult.
Their sensibilities are never reused at
the outragcs ola FrenChman Of Span
lard.
The embargo then is aimed at Eng
land; and yet occasioned by dispatch
IS from France. Perhaps Mr.. Arm
strong has been consulting the magma
nimious emperor on the subject Of our
quarrel with England, or perhaps Bon
aParte has very kindly offered bis adj
vice without being asked. WHY did
Mr.. Jefferson ask a return of tie let
tiers OF Armstrong and Champairny ?
Why was it improper that they should
DO made public ? If they related mere
ly to the construction of the imperial
decree, there would be no improperly
In publishing them. The letter III
Regnier, the grand Judge was publish
ed, and for aught that appears, without
any objection indeed, none could have
been made.
II the embargo is wise and pru-
dent measure, why was ii not adonted
month ago The ostensibIe object IS
to secure our resources, by detainine
our property I'D seamen in our own
country. Wl,hin month, hundredsef
vessels and millions Of property have
lett our ports for foreign countries
Nothing new has occurred within that
time TO render measure Of this kind
advisable, e-rcftt ne receipt eT1tshatrh-
catrom France. Yetno man can tell
what influence this fact has had, unless
BonaParte has recommended the mea-
sure.
The letters Of Mr.. Armstrong, II
our own government were not, il seems.
communicated to congress. WHY
not Mr.. Jefferson was afraid TO tr,st
the letters Of Armstrong and Campaa--
ny. n Is, said he, introter " make
them fR6Hc- But the letters Of Arm
strong y our own government, he dare
not trust even to the inspection of con-
gress even in conclave. WHY not ?
II Mr.. Armstrong does his duty, and !
presume he does in this respect at least.
he regularly transmits to the secreta-
ry OF state an account not only OF all
ms official correspondence, but Of his
private and public political conversa-
tons with Bonaparte, Talleyrand, and
other persons Of influence about the
court. Mr. Armstrong; communica-
tons must disclose the nature of onr
relations at this time with the French
government and their views and de-
signs toward rs. Had they been trans
mtted to congress, they would have de-
termLhtd at once the question 50 much
agItated m secret session, whether the
embargo was or was not recommended
IN compliance with demand from the
emperor Of France.
We find that motion was made n
concIave by Mr. Gardner, a gentleman
who has proved himself an able, intre-
pid, and eloquent champion of the
honor and welfare of his country, to
request the president to communicate
TO the house copies Of the letters which
he received from Mr.. Armstrong by
the late arrival from France, relative to
the imperial decree. This was refused
without debate. If they could have
borne the light without impeachine the
conduct OF Armstrong, or Of our own
administration, no imaginable reason
can be assigned for Withholding them
from congress.
There are some other circumstances
not unworthy Of notice.
A letter bearing date the 10Th De-
cember, and purporting to come from
amember Of congress, was published
in the n. Y. Evening Post, in which
the charge of French influence Is direct
ly and explicitly avowed. Whether
this opinion was founded on something
contained in the letters of Arrnstrong
and ChamPagny, does not appear but
the opinion was founded on the knowl-
edge of some circumstances which
could not be impaired. What are we
to think Of this T? member of con-
gress pledging himself that the house
was acting under the secret influence Of