Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-02-14

~ W'uvtSHI tifS EDtS Important contract.
winch was ma-ualiy signed on the 25th of
March, l7S3, must have been originated in
the summer Of 1792, by the empress and
the British king. In all the correspondence
between our secretary of state and Mr..
Pmckney, and in the conferences and notes
between the British secretary of state and
our minister in London, we do not perceive
the least suggestion OF the influence of the
example of the French decree of the 9th
OF May, 1898. Such plea could not nos
sbly pc made by lord Grenvi,le who knew
and avowed, that Great Britain had bound
herself toy a solemn compact with Russia,
to observe the very conduct of which the
neutral powers complained. Lord Gren-
vile, aud the British minister here (Mr.
Hammond) have, in their written commu-
nications, uniformly maintained, that it was
regular and right, under the law ofnations
The British government, no doubt, gave
their hrst orders 10 the commanders of their
ships, as soon as the convention with Rus
STA was signed, that is, in March 1898: &
1t is to be presumed, that the known de-
tentions of neutral vessels in the British
ports, so early as the autumn Of 1879, and
the captures OF neutral vessels, which the
French government assign as the justifying
reasons of their act of Nav 1898, were
made in consequence of the negotiation and
completion of tnat convention and Of those
first ordcrst."
Towards the conclusion Of this conperies
of disaffection, inconsistency, and mistate.
ment, it is observed, chad our rulers after
the PRONUNCIATION of the decree of Berlin fol-
lowed the example o. their predecessors, the
English orders would not have been issued,
nor should we now have to deplore the dis
trcss that aifiicts the country" What was
this wise measure which was adopted by
their predecessors In the language of this
re port, IL consisted I" in inhibitinp ali
commercial intercourse with the French
ldominions and providing for the equipment
of a naval force. for the defence of our Just
rights" The most ample and indeed Of
fetal Illustrate. as to the effect of the Ber-
I'm decree, has been too frequently given
to the public, TO admit Of any repetition.
But we are at a loss to know how this course
OF conduct would have prevented the Bri-
tish DEGREES. If opposition to the Berlin
decree in 1906 would have produced such
wonderful operation, why did it not in
1908 1t is evident that this committee
must have been under some intellectual de-
fusion, or that they must have been infatu-
ated with British attachment. tits impos-
sible that any impartial and independent
mind can be impressed with this view of
the subject. They proceed to observe that
! II all commercial intercourse is forbidden
with the French dominions & our public &
lprivate ships are suffered TO arm, that the
English orders would cease TO oherate.
| The character and tendency of this COM
position, is calculated to encourage the
British depredations, to feed the hope which
they have so long entertained of stirring up
ldivisions in our country, and to produce the
melancholy impression, that our eastern
brethren have forgotten how to love their
country. In THIS unexampled state of things,
when our own citizeAs are violating the
laws of their Country when some of our
state legislatures are raising their impious
lyoice against the union when we find that
our maritime rights are denied and insult
ted, and that we cannot establish them upon
tany basisby nesociation--we again repeat
ha the only way through this tn icket of ca.
Iiamitiesi--is the sword.
We deprccate war-we dread the evils
which it may engenger and entail u, on US
bur DIT the same time, whilst the alternative
of foreign or civil war is presented tous-
we cannot hesitate to declare in favor of
the former.
aThe British minister. at Washington,
or the British governor at Canada.
The French minister, Mr. Chauveln,
in London, strongly demonstrated, in No"
vember 1892, against the detention of neu-
trail vessels in the British ports, laden with
grain, contrary to the law of nations, and
TO the existing treaty of 1886; nay, even
as contrary to the laws of England /: for the
ministry actually applied for an indemnity
to parliament. These facts, followed by
the captures of neutral vessels, after the
French minister was ordered from London
Oath January 1889 and prior both to the
Russian convention (March 25th, 1881 and
to the French decree (of May 1899 with
the avowed design and meaning of the con-
vention between England and Russia, man
fest and establish system, on the part
Of Great Britain, long premeditated, deli
berately begun and continued, and ulti-
mately confirmed by sole mn engagement
with the powerful court of Russia, all pri-
or to the French decree of May 1898.
1t is expected the legislature will adjourn
on Thursday or Friday next,
In our next we shall endeavor to pre-
sent TO our readers the new Judiciary law
together with the supplemental act.
eTrIINNfAG L r.,