Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-02-03

not for ME 20 caqurie; but, If they were of
the nature, of which Inow cannot but con-
lecture they may have been; it the over
,ure. which you were authorised to
make to the British government, was 10 be
shaped and timed according to the result
OF any other overture, l am then at once
able to account for those appearances,
which mis,ed me into belief of the want
of precise authority on your part. This
consideration leads me to the other point,
on which alone there appears a difference
between US, upon any matter of fact, but
difference by no means so wide as it APP
pears.
Admitting the general correctness of my
statement of the expectation which i was
taught to entertain of written communi.
cation from you on the subject of the orders
OF council, you add that it was however on
iy in November last, aud Immediately af-
ter the publication OF the orders in councile
that you had directly announced to me
your intention OF opening a correspondence
upon them an intention from which yo.
afterwards desisted, "until you should re-
ceive the pleasure of your government :"
The correctness of this statement l do not
dispute; but you, l am sure, will agree
with me, sir, In recoilecting how many
times "more than once" since the period
OF that first intention ofyours being announ-
ced u withdrawn, my expectations that you
we're about to '.receive the pleasure of
your government" upon this subject, have
been excited, by The notification in Ameri-
Ca, and the destination hither, OF ships en-.
ployed by the United States, as it was ge-
morally supposed, for the special purpose
OF conveying representations or proposals,
from the American government, to the 60.
vernment OF France and G.. b. upon the
subject OF their respective maritime de-
Crees and orders.
Such was the universal belief, both in
America and in England, upon the arriv al
OF the Usage, upon that of the Hope, of the
81. Michael, and Of another vessel, nameti,
L think, the Union. l have certainly no
sht to Atm that you shared in the expec-
tatIon VIII CHI so universally prevailed.
have no right to say the COVE rnment of the
United States designed'y created that eX-
pectation. But that it did prevail, and
that L very sincerely believed it to be well
founded, You I think must do me the justice
to recollect; as, III one instance at least,
that OF the Usage, so strong was my FER.
suasion that YOU must have received in
strnctions from your government, that
look the liberty OF sending TO yeu to enquire
whether you had not some communication
10 make to me; and received for answer
that you had none.
L; was 10 these missions that particular
ly referred when | said that I had "more
than once expected you to open CORES
pondence with me upon the orders of coun-
Gill;" This expectation it was, that alone
prevented tne sending instructions to Mr..
Erskine to reply to the note addressed to
him by MIR. Madison on the 2Jth Of March,
in answer to that note of Mr.. Ersk mes in
which he communicated the orders in coun-
Gil, and in aIlusion To these missions, par.
t'cuiarly to that of.the Usage, and to the
expectation which had been founded here
upon the return here of that vessel, after
its voyage TO France, it was, .h4t made
that declaration in parliament wa,ch, see,
mas been the subject of some misapprehen-
sion, 1 will not say misreprehension, in
Americs, that "sInCe the termination OF
Mr.. Roses mission, the American govern.
ment had not T.ade any communication
here in the shape of remoBstrance, or in
tone OF irritation" | am not aware, sir.
that there is any other part of your letter
which requires that l should trouble you
With many observations. Your report of
your answer to the enquiry, which / took
Inc liberty OF making, " whether the orders
th SOuiosi vi lNpNSiBDCF WCtF Known TO the
government of the United States previous
ly to the message of the president proposin-
the embargo, so as to be a moving consi-
Iteration to that message )" does not appear
to differ, IN any material degree, from ray
statement of it. That your answer to such
an enquiry was official, or authorised oy
your government, l did not assert nor
presume. nave already said, that it vas
not till you had, in your official letter of the
23d OF August, referred to what passed in
conversation, that / should have thos ght
any such reference allowable on my part !;
* even then the generality of your reference
preciuded me from Judging correctly, how
much OF what you had stated in conversati-
on was from Official authority, how much
from your own personal information or OBI
Mon,
You inform me that your answer to this
question was OF the latter description only.
but, even IT It were only from our own in !.
d'vldual authority, it was very material,
and highly gratifying to learn, that the EN-.
barge, which had been times repre-
sented, both here and in America, as the
direct and Immediate consequence of the
orders IN council Of November, and as pro-
duced solely by them, was In your opinion
+" a measure % precIution against reasona-
bly, anticipated peril"
The purpose of this letter is not 60 re.
new the discussion upon the subject of YOUR
ufDuOgal. bnt merely m ciear ar, q M, ,,,'.,,,