The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-11-03

proposition. ---Hosv long are these restric
tons. OH our side, to last! Hhen may we
renew our trade with France and with Hol.
land !-"When the Frenchfdecrecs shall
have been rescinded." mis- gives rise
to another peculiarly difficult point.
lsit necessary, that these DEGREES should
be fn6Hcfy and formally recanted. i'm al
I their parts and provisions 7 !. And As Mr..
Canning laid down in his letter to Mr.. Pink
ney,.o November % 1903, are these de
crees to be 'unequivocally abandoned H'-
Mark the Importance of this distinction ~
! Ihe Berlin decree is of a ntired & various
character. 1T has fzvo distinct aspects -
| as Mr.. Madison correctly remarks i'm his
letter to Mr. Erskine of March goth, 1907 ;
zone clearly importing an intended operati
on within the tsrritoriai. limits, as a local
law; the other "a4hharentty importing an
| intended operation on the high seas -,
Now Does Mr.. Jack son mean to insist ep.
ON an "unequivocal Abandonment of both
these provisions! In that case, his propo.
| sitions will be clearly iDadmissible; Because,
under the first aspect, the decree, however
otherwise objectionable, cannot be said to
have Violated the neutrcity of the. United
States. II the governing powers ON the Con
tlnent OF Europe choose to erciuG>. Gorq
fhetr ports, British property Or. British pro-
auctions, or neutral vessels proceeding from
British ports"-(and Mr.. Madison might
have even added, neutral vessels which had
been searched or shoken by British cruizers
ON the seas, -" it is an oct IF souereikntu
which the U. States have no right to con-
trovert. The same sovereignty is exercis:
ed by G. Britain, at all times, in peace as
well as IN war, towards her friends as well
as her enemies. Her statute book presents
a thousand illustrations" See The same let
ter 10 Mr.. Erskine . =" ~
But should the British minister even de-
clare himself To be contented with the ga.
oandonment' of those pretensons only,
which violate the neutrality Of the u. S.
! there are new alterations which may sprine
up IN the way. Are certain decisions mere
n,umcifak regulations Of Francef Or dc
| they trench upon the neutrality of the u. S.
by their operation on the high Seas2 How
tar Is the neutrality of the ". $ affected
And to what point do their rights extend
On some or these very questions, there has
already been serious controversy between
| the U ). and Great Britain. The British
Cabinet at one time commended, that the Ber
ian Decree Fuas a violation of our neutrality
that 1t imposed on us the duty of resistance
and conferred on them the right of counter.
vaiilng Thy their infamous orders of Jan
ana NOV. 1907. The U. States, on the con-
trary, maintained that however this decree
was meant to operate, it had not vet operated
| Illegally Upon them until the case of the Ho
| rizon in Oct.--that we were to take the
meaning OF decree, only in the sense which
the enactlng government itself had put upon
| lt---and that therefore the French Decree
coiaerred no sort OF right of recrimination. ON
| the British government.
What has been done once, saw the law
yers, may be done again Even if the very
| same point does not hereafter occur. it is ca
| sy to conceive other and new cases of donb,
ana disputation. TO go no further than a
report at this time in circulation -Suhhose
mat Messrs Armstrong and Hauterieve a,
raris, hGUe actually signed a convention
wnicn opens the ports OF France to the YES
sells OF the y. ). "laden with the produce OF
the countries subject to the laws and autho-
rity OF the u States-bu excludes all Anne
rlcan vessels, that are laden with the pro.
auctions CT the colony of any other nation. or
the manufactures or products of any other
Country than the u. States'-in this case
would the British minister conceive the u. s
10 De at liberty to repeal those restrictions
which they should pledge themselves to i'm.
pose on their commerce to the ports of Hol
land and of France!
Ahese are some ct the difficulties which
attend this mode Of adjustment of our diff
terences with q. Britain-this curious mode
OF fiedStnS ourselves to the defence of our
own rlghts.-ln the meanwhile, it is plain
tnat II Mr.. Jackson has made such a propo-
st'"r' he is at least gaming time, as NO
move can be made in it till the meeting of
congress, who alone, by the constitution, can
regulate commensurate he will he rain
ing Hmc to take our vessels, to marshal his
party around him, to divide this nation bv
intrlgues, and to furnish arguments to his
paruzanS, who, like Mr. Coleman, will be
crying up nothing can be more fair and
iiOerai on the part of Great Britain''-s,
1t were to be wished, they could say "nothine
can be more capable of being made plain
ana explicit" On the other hand it is e.
qually plain, that Mr.. Jackson is losing time
for while he is pausiDs in his career, the
French may be advancing-whleh he is re
fusing to do us justice, they may be signing
convention, which secures our rights
winch may be pleasing to the people of the
y. otates--and may concentrate all our
national energie. against the insolent pre-.
tensions of his government. Perhaps This
may 8hur him on.
lMPORTANT-IF TRUE.
MI