The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-06-23

Il
friend" Burr, appear even to Mr.. L. Martin I!
IA few months since, this man wrote a
long essay to prove that no one could be q
citizen of the u. S. before the year ,'16, be-
cause at that time there were no u. S.------no
republic, of which he could be a citzen---
| but that every man necessarily became such,
who was in this country during the revelation,
aud adhered to the cause of America, and
contributed his efforts to achieve her indie
|pendence.--In whata despicable light then,
must such renegade as A. Burr, appear
even to such a man AS Mr.. Martin I! -
/ The Earl of Liverpool declared in The
House of Peers ON the 2Sth April, that. "ths
PRINCIPLE, upon which the orders in conn-
Gil were issued, was STILL RETAINED
and should circumstances render I necessary,
that principle would again be full y enforced"
What. was this principle. RETALIArIoN
----a resolution toREToRT upon the enemy
=. the evils Of his own Injustice"
This principle would therefore 20 to, the
extent of preserving the Orders in Council,
lsuntil the DEGREES of France were rescind-
| ed. The whole course of documents, pub
lished on this subject, is in strict concurrence
with this idea.
| 1t is true, that neutral nations might rid
themselves Of the operation of these Orders,
| by due resistance to the DEGREES of the enc
my AS in the note annexed to the treaty,
where the idea is held out, that IF the enc
my should carry these threats into execution,
| and ifneutral nations, contrary to all expec-
tation, should acquiesce in such usurpations,"
such orders would probably be ,issued--or
as in MIR. Erskine''s letter of Feb. 23. 1903.
where his majesty harps upon the disappoint-
ment of his just expectation. * the alledged
| submission of neutral nations--or as in the
preamble to the orders of November, where
tits said that those of January, chad not an
swered the desired purpose, either of compelf
ling the enemy to recall those orders, or Of
inducing neutral nations to interpose, with
effect, to obain their revocation" But it is
not less true, that the find * degree of resist
ance we're not prescribed, nor whether any
thing short of war would answer their expect
alton. But what is more to the point, it is like
wise true that this miserable requisition Of re-
sistance on the part of neutrals, has been
lately dropt, & that the only ground, on which
for several months, they have avewed their
Intention OF resembling their rctaliatory Or
ders,w was the previous recall ofthe enemy's
DEGREES. In his reply to Mr.. Pinkney of Sept.
p, wherein he rejects the late proposition of
Mr.. Jefferson, Mr., Canning is most explicit
ON this subject. He avows his determination
to adhere to these orders, 90 SO long as the
smallest link of the confederacy remains
nndissolved." These considerations, says
he, compel his majesty to adhere to the prin-
ciples on which the orders in council of the
9TH of JAM. and the 11th of Nov are founded,
so long as as France adheres to that system.
by which his majesty's retaliatory measures
we're accustomed and justified" And yet
in the very teeth of all these professions,
have the British ministry lately rescinded
their orders, as it respects the U. States.
VIII the Earl of Liverpool then repeat that
the ."principle of these ordersis still retain
edm
The British ministry say, that their late or
ders are adopted in consequence of divers
events, which have taken place since the date
| OF the aforementioned orders, affecting the
relation between Great Britain and the ter
ritories of other powers" How shallow is
this pretext! Where are those new eventsa
Is not the British flag still excluded from
the ports of Russia, Prussia and Denmark
The ports of the German ocean are not o.
| pen to them--neither are the Italian ports
to the south of Orbitello and Pisaro. -.
The probability is, that these new orders
have arisen, partly from wish to, relieve
the pressure upon their commerce, in case
our non-intercourse law was kept in force;
and partly to save the credit of the ministry.
They had pledged themselves not to rescind
their orders, so long as the French DEGREES
remained. -; -,
| There is nothing said Of this condition in the
new orders. They have shifted theground
1t seems as if they thought it better to have
it believed, that they had changed these or
ders. and the ground On which they had
stood, a. If they had been moved to it of
themselves and from choice of their own
interests, than that they had done il as the
condition of their contract with this country.
| We presume, that the new British Envoy will
not leave Great Britain, for the UStates, until
she has heard of heaadiustment at Washington
We may of course expect him in a few. weeks.
| The terms of the treaty, which he will be in.
structed TO form, win depend upon the tone of
Great Britain. Thai tone will depend to Ger.
tain degree only upon the success or defeat of
| the Ausariahs.
The design Of cur government, in stationing the
Enterprise off the ports of the Texel, seems To
be wise one. Should the views of France shift
for the worse, Instructions. may be sent by our
| government or agents in Holland and France
and she may be on the spot to warn our vessels
not to enter the Dutch ports.
| We hear, that it is understood among the
members at Washington, though no formal
resolution has been passed ON the subject,
that Congress will adjourn ON M ondas
next.
" The luminous Essay on the last page is |
recommended to the attention Of our rea-
ders.