Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1809-06-30
[coNTINUED.l
( 1J1-. GARDENERS Speech concMded.]

7Nr. GARDENERS Speech concAded]
But it is said that the proposal made by
s MIR. Pinkney last summer embraced the
same terms Aud how! What did MIR.
Pinkney offer at that time? After taking
about and about the subject, Mr.. Canning
not understanding him, desired him to COM
nit his ideas to paper. He wrote 1t. : |
have the honor to state (says Mr.. p that
it 7ras the intention" zucs (not 1t Isl The
Intention of the president of the ~. 5. to
:. suspend the embargo as to Great Britain In
case she should withdraw skei orders IN
council, &c. And Mr.. Pinkneysthen makes
mo pledge that the embargo shall be continu-
ed as to France, but goes into an argument
on the subject. Was this the. pledge re-
Quired by the British government? No, SIR
we Gnd till that demand was complied
with she never would come to settlement.
Now if the orders in council had been then
repealed, would it have produced those
consequences subsequently, produced by~her
perseverance? No, sir. In the first place
there was then no pledge on record that we
would resist the French DEGREES; our go
vernment having studieusly avoided such
pledge. The government was not pledged
by Mr.. Pinkney even to+keep the embargo
in operation in relation to France. They
were not vet willing to pledge themselves to
resist France. They would not tact man
IL part even then. 1t was not enough that
France disregarded, all neutral rights and
the obliqatinns of "a sacred treaty. We
{ would not then give intimation that we
would resist France, but all we SAID, was,
that if France persisted IN her DEGREES, we
would continue the embargo as to Ter. 4On
this erouad the orders in council were ask
ed to be withdrawn. British vessels would
still have been excluded, whilst French
were admitted. But at last that state OF
things has arrived, as to the pledge that this
country will not. submit to the French de-
errees, and as to both nations being placed
on ausequality in relation to armed ships, in
whiclIs w bought. first to have placed our
selves. The proclamation being removed
is no impeachment to that adjustment. 1t ne
yer would have been an ilnpediment,if this
! government had beenwilling to do original
II What it at last consented to do. !
The third, last and only impeachment was
the existence of the embargo. AS long as
that remained in force, the British govern
ment stood pledged not to withdraw tha
orders in council. The embargo is given
MP. But the address and adroitness OF the
government is distinguishable. there too
for while they killed the life and soul of the
embargothey held up the lifeless corpse as
though. ingfull life and vigor. The great
argumentin favor of the embargo was, thai
il would starve our adversary. Now we
had repealed the embargo, except as to o.
Britain and France we had come down or
oar knees, and thus broke our fall. 1t was
said to our merchants, you shall not so tc
Great Britain; but you Shall go to ST. Bar
tholomews, and thence Great Britain may
pet your produce. As soon as you sale
that, sir, you abandoned that principle OF
which the embargo went. 1t was no longel
an embargo that purpose for which it wa
designed. But 1t was betse- for our owr
interests to have permitted direct impoyta
ton, as ! shall prove; for 1t is materia
consideration with Great Britain to have
her shipping employed. If we had export
ed our produce Immediately from this coun
try 10 Grcat britain. see very pialuiy tiia
British shipping would not have been EN-
ployed but as it was, in striving to affect
nnd perhaps injure Great Britain, we gav'
employment to her seamen and ships which
abe would not otherwise have had. But ]
saw that the principle of the embargo wa
completely abandoned as soon as Congress
consented to give vent to the productions o
Che country by partial repeal of the embar