The Delaware gazette. [volume] (Wilmington [Del.]) 1809-1810, 1809-12-13


neced with France, and SO subservient to her
DEGREES against neutral commerce.
II would not be improper on this occasion 10
observe, that this objection can he the less urged
by Great Britain, as she has herself never 10 her
alledged rctaliations adhered to the principle OH
which they were founded.
Thus She has from the date of them, until
very lately, directed them against the Americas
trade even TO Russia; although Russia had never
adopted the French DEGREES, otherwise vio-
lated her neutral trade With Great Britain. So
In her order of April last, she has Disseminated
not only between the countries devoted 10
France by the ties of blood, and other powers,
but between Holland, Westphalia and Naples,
in enforcing her prohib;tory order against the
first, aud not against the two last. Whilst
therefore she finds it expedent to make these
distinctions, she ought to prrsumc,lat we too
may perceive equal propristy in the distinctions
we have made.
But it may be Of more importance here to
compare the british order in council CT April
last with the arrangement of April, made BY
MIR. Elskine. II will thence be seen how iii.,c
is the real difference, and how trivial it is when
| compared to the extensive and serious conse-
| queuces Of the disavowal
Under the order in council Of April, all the
ports Of Eufope except France, Including the
| kingdoms of Italy and Holland with their de-
Tendencies, arc opened to our commerce.
| Under the arrangement of April, combined
| with our act of non-ntercourse, all the potts of
Europe, except France and her dependencies,
incudng the kingdom of Italy, would have
been opened to our commerce.
The difference then is reduced merely to tiol-
land, and that nation is reduced to the difference
lak.. L. el,o IN. Il
and an indirect trade to Holland, Though the
neighboring ports Of Tonnngen, Hamburger,
Bremen and Emden.
Now, as the iuiuring Of the enemies OF Great
Britain is the only avowed object OF her inter-
dieting order against our trade, eta computation
be made of the effect which this difference be-
| tween the order in neil and the arrangement
could possibly have in producing such All injn-
ry. And then let the question be candielly an
swered whether, laying aside all considerations
of right and justice, sufficient iuducemens
could have been found in that result for rejecting
the arrangement, ard for producing. the consc-
quent cmbarrassmcrts, as well TO Great Britain
as to the United States.
If it be necessary, as MIR. Jackson has stated,
to set bounds to a spirit Of encroachment and
universal dominion, which would bind all things
to its own standard, and to falsify by honorable
and manly resistance an annunclation that all
Europe is submitting by degrees, the effort must
be feeble indeed which rs to be found in the in
convenience accruing 20 the formidable Toe from
the operation of this order il council, and esIe.
cially when We combine with If the sttangt
phenomenon Of substituting for the lawful trade
of the United States, trade OF British sab ects,
contrary to the laws Of the adverse parry, and
amounting without speeia. license in the eye
of British law to high treason.
Thus much fer the orders in council. What
has taken place with respect to the case of the
Chesapeake will equally engage your attention
You will perceive that throughout, the early
stages Of the correspondence, this case was i'm
properly COMPOUNDED with, in others improperly
separated from, that of the orders in council
and particularly that pains had been taken by
Mr.. jackson to substitute verbal and vague oh.
servations on the disavswal Of this part Of thu
arrangement for an explicit and formal cSplana.
ton, such as was obviously due. 1t will bs
seen also that when finally brough; to the point
he referred for justification of the dsavowal &c
: the departure of Mr.. Erskne from his instruc.
tons withou. showing what those instructions
were, and to illusions to expression in tht
, arrangement without giving to his meaning tn,
distnctne:s prerequisite to Il just reply.
1t appears, however, that he lays great stress
on the proposal enclosed in his letter Of the 27tt
} October, at once indicating the departure o
} MIR. Erskne from his instructions, and as con
tanning the conditions on the basis If which hi
was ready to enter on an adjustment. Ans
from a note from the secretary OF the Hritsf
legation, /, appears that he has complained o
not having received an answer to this proposal
as he had before complained thai no answer hae
been given to his verbal disclosures Oh this heae
in his interviews with me.
} With respect to his inti'nations in conversa,i
on, as they were preceded by no proper assign
) nent of the reasons for not haviEg executed th
original Adjustment, it cannot be necessary IL
res1ark that 10 such notice, as he wished to OBJ
tain, could with any sort of propriety have bee,
taken of them.
With respect to his written projects, it will
suffice to remark:
i LIST. That beside his reluctant and indistnc
a explanation of the disavowal of the original ad
t iustment, he did not present his proposal unit