The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-12-07

! Gains. Fraases Such suspension 1'sl,l not
have given, in any point of view, more adj
vantage TO the United States, than was Civ
en- to Great Britain by the repeal, which had
taken place ON their part.
1T this reasonable course could not haze
been substituted for the disavowai, why was
not a FINAL disavewal suspended with pro.
position, that the arrangement would be cx-
ecuted by Great Britain, in the eyens OF a
compliance on the part of the United States
with the condition required as to France.
am not unaware, you may be told, that
the non-intercourse law OF the u. States did
not extend to Holland. though SO Intimately
connected with France, aud SO su5servien,
| TO her DEGREES against neutral commences.
! 1t would not be improper OH this occasion
to observe that this objection can be The less
urged by Great Britain, rs she has herself
never in her alledged retallations adhered
to the principle on which they were found.
cd.
Thus she has from the date oe them. nm
til very lately. directed them against the
| American trade even to Russia, although
Russia had never adopted the French de-
crees, nor otherwise violated Our neutral
trade with G.. Britain. SO, in her order of
April last, she has Disseminated, not only
between the countries devoted to France by
the ties ct blood, and other powers. bat be-
tween Holland, Westphaia and Naples in
enforcing her prohisitory order against the
first ard not against the two last Whilst,
therefore, she finds it expedcnt to make
these distinctions, She ough. to presume,
that we too may perceive equal propriety
in the distinctions we have made
But it may be of more importance here to
compare the British ordcrin council OF 4 pril
last, with the arrangement of April, made
by Mr.. Erskine. 1t will thence be seen
| how little is the real difference, and how
trivial 1t is when compared to the extensive
and serious consequences OF the disavowal
| Under the ordsr in council of April, all
! the ports OF Europe, except France. inclu-
ding the kingdom of Italy and Holland with
their dependencies, are opened to our com
merce.
Under the arrangement of April, combi.
ned with our act of non-intercourse, all the
ports OF Europe. except France and her de-
pendencies, including the Kingdom of Italy,
would have been opened to our commerce.
The difference then, is reduced merely to
Holland, and that again is reduced to the diff
ference between direct trade to the ports
OF Holland, and a.. indirect trade to Holland,
through the neighboring ports of Tenningen,
Hamburg, Bremen and Emtlen
Now, as the injuring of the enemies of G.
Britain, is the only avowed object of heri in
tcrdicting order against our trade, let a com
Pusation be made of the effect, which this
difference between the order in council and
the arrangement could possibly have i'm nro-
ducing such an injury. And then let the
question be cautlidly answered, whether.
laying aside all considerations &C right and
Justice, sufficient inducements could have
been found in that result for r, iectine the
arrangement, and for producing the conse
qnebt embarrasSments as we'll to Great
Britain, as to the u. States
III 1t be necessart, as Mr.. Jackson has
stated, to set bounds to a spirit of encroach-
ment and universal dominion, which would
Oiho all things to- its own standard, and to
tais,fy by honorable and manly resistance
an annunciation, that all Europe is submi,-
ting by degrees, the effort must be feeble.
indeed, which is to be found in the inconve-
nience accruing to the formidable foe from
the operation of this order in council, and es-
pec,aiy when we combine with It'll the strange
phenomenon of substituting for the lawful
trade of the United States, trade of Bri-
t'sh subjects, contrary to the laws of the
adverse party, and amounting, without
special licence, in the eye of British law, to
| high treason
Tins much for the orders in council What
mas taken place with respect to the case of
the Chesapeake, will equally engage your
attcntios.
~" "hi ti'tl throughout the ear
~ stages OF the correspondence, this case
was IN some respects improperly COMPOUNDED
Win IN others, improperly separated from
mat OF the orders in council and particu
larry, that pains had been taken bv MIR Jack
son to snbstlu verbal & vague observations
on the dlsavowal OF this part of the arrange
ment for an explicit & formal explanation,
such as was obviously due. 1t VIII be seen also
mat when finally brought to the point, he
referred for a justification OF the diEavowai
to the departure of MIR Ersline from his
Instructions without Shezving what those in
structons were, and to illusions to an ex
preston in the arrangement without giving
to his meaning the distinctness pre- requisite
to just reply
1t appears, however that he lays great
stress on the proposal enclosed in his letter
OF the 9th of October as at once indica-
ting the departure of Mr.. Erskne from his
instructions, and as containing the condti-
ons on the basis of which he was ready to
enter OH an adjustment And from note
from the Secretary of the British Legation.
1t appears, that he has complained of not
| having received an answer to this proposal.
as he had before complained, that no an
swer had been given to his verbal disclosures
on this head in his interviews with me-
| with respect to- his intimations in CONVEX
sation, as they were preceded by no prope'
assignment Of the reasons for not having ex-
ecuted the original adjustment, it Cannot he
| necessary to remark, that no such notice,
as he wished to obtain, could with any sort
OF Dropriety have been taken of them.
! With respect to his written project, il viii
1 20 uf