Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1809-05-23
Fran The North Anqeyican.
FREE SHIPS FREE @

&&1SM ~ GtA y y - - $500 $500
her wiles. Their present object IS by the
suggestion Of claims without color Of right,
TO agitate the public mind, If possible, 70.
oppose itself against an approaching accom-
mediation or compromise with Great Britain,
upon fam and honorable principles. lhe
instrument which they now lay hold OF is
the most Intellectual they could WELD. Eve
nv American statesman, who has beer
clothed with power IN the general govern
ment has abandoned it and Mr.. Jefferson
more explicitly than any other.
When Holland was a commercial nation
that is, before she persisted inthe embrace
of France, she s~tudiously procured the
maxim to be stipulated in the treaties she
made but never, VIC believe, till the armed
neutrality claimed it as a right derived from
the law of nations. Whenever she could
give an equivalent or furnish an inducement
TO Others, and particularly to the nations
most powerful at sea and most frequently
involved in war, to yield 1t to her as the
conventional rule, she never failed to aim
at. The reason of her policy Is obvious.
With commerce she was attached 50 peace,
and whilst the Ships of belligerents were
unsafe vehicles for their own merchandise,
the asylum afforded by Dutch vessels would
be eagerly sought after and purchased at
high rates.
Denmark and Sweden, two feeb}espowers,
also eager for the carrying trade, have bold
w laid claim to an exemption OF their yes
sells from examination, and occasionally
leagued Russia in theirlpretension. France,
IN her own practice, constantly prostrates
syhe rule Of free ships making the cargoes
free, although 1t is to procure safety to the
transportation of her own merchandise, that
the other powers are alIured into a situation
which embroAs them with Great Britain
This circumstance has presented a singular
conflict between self-interest and the expe-
dients resorted to for ~arousing the carrying
nations to contend with England on the one
hand, and an inYincible propensity to rapa-
city on the oFlaer.
Great Britain has herself sometimes sti-
pulated il, and particularly in her last com
mescial treatywith France; but as no con
siderable malAime war was likely to hap
pen in which those two powers would not
be engaged and opposed, it was perhaps
though that the agreement would remain a
dead letter from4the force OF circumstances
Its very remarkable, and ought to be called
70 mind upon the present occasion, that IN
the Publications which a few years ago
teenaed from the English press in order to
explain the grounds upon which Great Br-
tain resisted the Inst combination Of Russia,
Denmark and Sweden, TO enforce her &C
quiescenee ia the novel doctrines of the
armed neutrality, eopious and decisive *
tracts were drawn from the writings and
public acts of American ministers of ali
parties.
The amazing exteEt given 70 our carry
ing trade for some time before the embargo
was imposed, was beyond doubt the cause
of adopting the judicial maxim in the Bri-
tish courts of admiralty, which suddenly
curtailed it, and which produced SO much
irritation on this side Of the Atlantic. This
recent occurrence must nave rendered the
minds ofthe British ministers alive to the
consequences Of agreeing to the principle of
tree ships making free goods. If our carry
ing trade, orif you please, our trade in TO-
reign productions, was swelled to such an
unparalleled and unexpected magnitude jan
der the operation Of the contrary rule, what
would they not have to apprehcnd, If every
restraint were removed, and we were allow
ed TO carry avowed belIigerent property for
belligerent account? This observation is
made In order TO show that there is not the
remotest probability of obtaining from the
British government the concession of a point
about which she is now more than common
Iy Jealous, aud the adherence to which has