The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-08-01
THE ENQUIRER.
RICHMOND, AUGUS /. 1909.
MIR. ERsKlNE,s 1NsrRuC1IoNs.

III REVIEWING tue ictler WHICH Mr. Gan
ming has laid before the Houst of Commons,
as a copy OF his instructions to Mr.. Erskine,
the first question which naturally seizes upon
the mind, is, :" Here THESE The INSTRUCT
oas tnder rchich Mr.. Erskine acted ?"
Much as an answer i'll the negative would
rebound to the infaniy of the British minis
ters-thns proving an almost unparalleled
complication of vices and wrongs, beginning
with force aud hypocrisy, and terminating
in ferfdy and .forSery--yet are the cha
racters and measures of the present minis
try sufficient guarantees against such a pre-
sumption 1--WE appeal to the circumstances
OF the case itself----hnd we ask, whether
there are not in these very circumstances
the strongest reasons for suspectne, that
some OF the papers and instructions under
which Mr.. Erskine has acted have been sup
pressed by the ministry
Let these circumstances be duly weighed I:
These Instructions bear date ON the esd
OF January-Mr. Oakley left England about
the Goth OF 2lst of February.-Why was he
nearly four weeks detained after the COM
position OF this paper-in that long interval.
was there no new turn of events which might
have dictated rather new view of their re-
lations with the u. States.
1t was late in the night of the very day
on which this Paper seems to have been pen
ned, that the dispatch of Lieutenant, General
Hope arrived-announciBg the battle of Co.
runha, the death and defeat of Moore, the
gloomy state of the British arms and effort.
IN Spain. For the London Gazette Extra
ordinary" of January 24th. thus introduces
the Dispatch" The Hon. Capt Hope ar.
rived late last night with dispatch, &c.
&c. WAS not this intelligence calculated
to have ar least some effect on the mind of
Mr. Canning?
The course Of negotiation. which took
place at Washington on the 18th and 18th of
April, seems to have been Of so close and
systematic nature, as 10 nave been chaNed
ont 6y the ministry to Mr. Erskine. The
hrSt point which he seems instructed to bring
forward is the infamous affair of the Chesa
aPeake. ''lt having been, says he, repre-
sented to his majesty, that the Congress Of
the u. States, &c."--in this 7bay ohenfnp
the negotiation, as Mr.. Canning's letter Of
January %, directs him--"I have accord
ingiy received his uajesty'S commands, i'm
the event OF such stalking place, to offer
on the part of his Majesty, an honorable
| repatriation for the aggression. committed by
BRITISH naval officer, in the attack on the
u. States frigate Chesapeake" He then
goes on to submit, " eonforma5kJ 10 tnStrue.
mons" these "term of satisfaction and repa-
ration But qYhere, in the note of the Esd
January, is this point once touched upon -
Not word is said about the order, in W, oh
the disputed points were to be ddjusted--not
one about the Chesapeake.-Where then.
we demand, is the copy of the instrucrions
| which he received on this jointly with the o.
Their subjects III is Suhhressed
10 suppose besides, that Mr.. Erskine
would have made such propositions, in the
very teeth OF such instruc.ions-is really r.
! stagger crcdulity itself Where could have
| been the understanding or the faith of the
son of Lord Erskine An idiot might have
seen the difference between these instruct
oDs and his propositions. We'll indeed
might Mr. Canning have said that ono mi
Mister ever went wider of his powers. -
| tIoHld Mr.. Erskine have gone So wide OF
ms mStructions-when lie was dependant
tor his post upon party who were in elirecl
opposition to his oWn--wliose eyes were for
ever upon him, eager TO detect some mu1
fns III his Conduct as an apology for driviur
him from his Office! Could he have so ex
pncitly assured our government, that lie wa
authorised" to take these steps; that he wa
only actlng IN obedience to his 1Zajestv.
| Commands z" Not only once-ghen tn,
first blush OF the adjustment was on him
but some weeks afterwards, when he ha,
had all the lights of mature deliberation g
Of subsequent dispatches.
The failure to lay Mr.. Erskine's letter O
"J"stfcahon," with the other papers befor
Parliament, is besides another circumstanc
calculated 20 raise suspicion.--Mr. Canninl
might call it justification to please him
selt-but perhaps we might be disposed t
give it a different name.
But eUeH admitting that Mr.. Erskihe ha
thus hagrantly flown from his powers--tha
these were the oniy Instructions ande
which he has acted--let us think whar w
please Of him-sphat are ave 10 think of m
} British ministry?