The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-06-23


some articles. the only material one Of
which to our trade. was cotton, and With
out any transit duty on, the rest; and the
same trade IN tie colonial produce Of the
enemy from the u. States to any port OF
Europe, through British port, OH the.
payment of certain duties.
These several pcrnissions were consider
ed as notifications of the broad principle,
asserted in the first six paragraphs of the
orders of the 18th of November; and it is
worthy of observation, that Mr. Erskime, i'm
his letter TO the Secretary of State of the oSth
Iof February, 1905, communicating the ex-
istence of these orders. notices them as a
proof of the sentiments of moderation, by
which his majesty's conduct had been uni
formly governed, and of the motives of con-
sideratioh which actuated him for the parti-
cular interests of America"
| Let US now examine whether his majesty
had the same consideration for the "parti-
cular interests of America" when the order
OF the sSth of April was made.
BY this order the kingdom of Holland, as
far horh as the river Ems, and all ports and
placesof France, together soith the colonies,
&c. a. the Possession Of those governments.
and all ports and places in the northern part
of Italy, to the ports of Orbitelo and Pesa-
no, are subjected to the same restrictions,
in pont of trade, as if they gvere actually
| 6focAaded an the most rigorous manner :;
and every vessel trading from and to the
said countries or colonies, with all goods on
board, is subject to capture and condcmnati-
Ion.
| Under this order the branches of trade,
(which Mr.. +. noticed as qualifications of
| the general principle. and as peculiarly
favorable to the interests OF the u. States,'
are entirely prohibited.
l FV>t,< Al
i and the colonies of the enemy-from the u.
States to Europe, through a British port
and the transportation OF American produce
with the exception of cotton, through Bri-
hsh port into those of the enemy, without
the payment of 4 transit duty, no longer eX.
lists
How then can the order of April be consi-
ildered as a proof Of the friendly disposition
iof Great Britain, or as a relaxation of for
mer orders, extremely favorable to Ame-
rican interestss Is it because the ports to
the north of the Ems, or to the south of Or
osfeHc and Pesaro, are open to American
enterprise! The most important of the
northern ports, Emden, Hamburgh aud Bre-
men, are under the power of Bonaparte,
and it is said, that all trade to and from them.
isalready strictly interdicted.* The ports of
the Baltic. through which Great Britain
would obtain naval stores in American bot
toms, it is probable would not long remain
| open to our vessels, and if they were, very
little of our produce would find a market in
those ports. Besides which, the articles we
should receive in return, such as lumber.
timber, tar. pitch and naval stores, so far
from adding any thing to our national wealth,
would but come IN competition, in British
ports, with articles OF the same nature of
our own production, and sink their price.
i fha In f.aki 60, -.
and intended to produce it, is not tobe doubt
! ed
/ The northern part of Italy, interdicted to
our trade by these orders. includes the two
important ports of Gem. and Leghorn, the
principal markets for our productions.
! he southern part of it, comprehendin,,
some part OF what was termed the States OF
the Church, and the kingdom of Naples un
der Murat, is not sufficiently important to
merit serious consideration, and the policy
by which 1T is governed would probably
soon exclude even the small part of our pro-
duce, for which there would be a.demand.
! Thus the advantages to be derived to our
commerce, from somewhat greater extent
of territory and few additional markets
under the late orders, would probably be
more than counterbalanced by those restric-
tions from which, under the previous orders
it was exempt.
| The idea, that the orders were intend.
ed to come in aid of our non intercourse law.
is too preposterous to need serious refrtation
Besides the obvious policy, that seems to have
dictated them, the very exception of so large
and important country to our trade as Hol-
land, noticedby one of our Editors, is a suf-
ticient proof to the contrary, unless he would
contend, that eUcef tio fro6at reSuiam Spain
| and Portugal too are made exceptions by
MIR. Gallatin, upon the same principle, pre-
sumo, that Holland is one but by the or
ders OF April, such ports of these countries,
as are in the possession of France, are inclu.
ded in the restrictions thereby established
So that under our non-ntercourse law. we
might have traded to Holland, Spain & Por-
|tugal-but under the orders of April, to nei
Their, except to the ports of the twolast named
countries, not in the possession of France
Yet why do advance these proofs. Forh
who can coolly advance such an opinion
without Indignantly exclaiming against the
arrogance of any governments aiding in the
execution of our own laws, has not the soul
of Free Born American.
HARMODIUS.
OF this, however, we have no certQi,
Iaccounts.--From the two following slips
from two London papers, it would seem, that
Some or al OF those ports are or will be open
ed to the u. S. in Tohoic or in hart. 1t is
SAID, that tor greater certainty of the mar.
ket, our merchants are about to send their
ships to the riper Jude, sc.
by agentleman just arrived from Hamburger