The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-06-13

ts.ls Ut war are subjected, viii, mere strict
ness than any other. Oh account of the ire
sr!arity OF their cruizips, and the different
vessels they visit, an entire and free commu-
nlcation with the port x city, is not refisetl TO
them, so long as they observe the rules esta-
biished in tins respect" which are,
"not to keep watch in the port, nor entlea-
sor to gain information OF the vessels Of their
enemy, which are expected to.arrive shere''
--nor "to lie i'm wait and be ready to CHASE
The vessels OF their enemy---ror inany man
ner hinder the approach of vessels of any
nation whatever. .tothe ports and shores Of
neutral powers" He;thcn Laws down, as his
opinion. that "the question CT asylum is to
be determined according to. tie motives
which induced vessels of war. to enter the
neutral port" According to him. there are
three causes. "a The first and most usual.
is the pressing wants Of the ship and crew;
that IS to say, in order to avoid the danger Of
violent winds and currents, in keeping too
near the land, for The sake of repair, to pro-
cure rigging, tn get provisions, To water and
to land the sick. The second is for the rrr-
pose ot joining other ships of the same ma
ton. in order to form sauadron, or to sail
IN company The third is, Ito avoid 'orescape
from the superior force of an enemy" The
brst and last. he admits to be adequate rea-
sons for an asylum-thcsecond he holds to be
untenable ground. -, -"
But whatever may have been the hsotipes
which have led foreis vessels into our ports,
IL is q fact, that they have abused the sane.
hty of the asylum to which they repaired
Little can be said against the French, who
have comparatively fewer vessels OH the
seas. and whose commanders have almost
always respected the territorial rights of the
y. D. They have at least done so, since
the arasof Genet. But of the vcsSels of c.
Britain. many complaints have been deserv-
edsy MADE. Who have g KEEP. watcirin port;
2ntleavorng to gain information of the vessels
Sot their enemy, which were expected to
arrive there ~, The British. WHO have
g lain in wait in bays o. CULTS, en- the look
out and ready to chase the vessels of the
enemy ?" Who have made .ehe hospitai-.
ties OF our ports subservient to the annoy ance
of our trade, both outward and inward?"
Consult Mr.. Madison s letter to Mr. Rose for
the answer. WHO, within the acknowledge,
cd limits of the U. s.. has impressed and
carried off number Of seamcn and passen-
gers into the service Of ships of war; The
British Who murdered Pierce-who burnt
the impetueux within our jurisdictional Ii
mits!, The British :
SUCH then being the evils; where is the re-
dress? 1t is we'll known that the British 90
yernment do not punish their ovu officers
for such aggressions.. Hence the u. States
are bound to grasp the means of coercion in
their own hands. Satns f,5ftuH est sutirema
leg. ltis for thi purpose that the Congress
OF the y. s. have given an authority to the
Executive to forbid by proclamation the en-.
trance OF any one offendingvessel or if it be ne
cessary, all The hubic ue8seis of that nation,
| which shall trample On our rights. As the non
| intercourse law is supposed to repeal these
discretionary laws, it is surely incumbent on
Congress to revive them, if they should not
be disposed to adopt Mr.. Giles's resolution.
But are there no grounds for adopting this
resolutions! Does not the uniform series OF
insults, which we have received particularly
from British vessels, impose the necesstv of
some more Coercive regulation, am not
for excluding these vessels altogether from
our uriSdiction-it will perhaps be better to
trust the provision on this subject to the
treaty making power, because that may
induce u. Is. to offer some new security for
| the good conduct of her cruisers-but at all
events, whether it be regulated by lazy or
| referred to treaty, DO not the circumstance
which have enumerated, point out the ne
cessity OF placing some additional check
upon that free ingress of foreign vessels into
| our ports, which they have hitherto enioved
Let them come in for the purposes of seek
| ing asylum from storms, enemies and for
obtaining urgent repairs-but let their nu,'-
Der be 'limitcd--let the heriod of remain
ing in our ports he limitcd-let these regu-
| lations apply rs well as to our marine league
| OF jurisdiction on our coasts, as TO our horts.
Is there not enough in these circumstances
at least, to excuse any man for thinking that
it is high time to adopt SONG additional re-
straint upon public ships : Must the
man who brings forward such a p+oDo
sition as Mr.. CHESS be necessarily charged,
as he has been by the Baltimore Federal
prints, with an attachment to France, an en-
mitv TO G.. b. ana desire to obstruct the
approaching negociation9 For shame. Let
the spirit of party blush, if such men as
MessrS. Livermore and Hanson can blush,
for the illiberality of their insinuations
But it surged, that this resolution is cal
culated solely for the good of France How
sos Have not the French armed ships as
much, nay, agreater occasion for the use of
our ports, than their rivals, They have not
single port OF their own on this continent TO
touch at, and reht. Whereas tile British
have Halifax. and Bermuda, both Of them
convenient to the u. States.-A gain so far
as respects the touching at our ports for the
purpose of lying in wait for the merchant
| ships of their enemy, the advantage is prn
cipaliy on the side OF France-The French
have few OF such ships afoat--but the British
have many merchant ships, coming into our
ports, which may be the ready victims Of
French priVateers.
But it is said that this resolution displays
not the proper degree of resistance to tic
French DEGREES. How sos The proclama-
ton of the President about British yeaseIs-