The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-06-16


to be carried into effect is admitted by G..
britain in It's broatlest extent, & will not be
disputed by Mr.. Canning at the present mo-
mens. This.will appear from Mr.. Canning's
declaratou in the debates of the last session
OF parliament.' He. said he did not know
whether it,,was correct to read newspapers
IN evidence, to ascertain the opinions and
expressions of the speaker, but if the senate
would be Content with this species of evidence
contained; III a;ministerial paper, he would
read it for their information. Mr.. G.. then
read the following extract, of Mr.. Cummings
speech, taken from British minister ial pa
per: Ft"
Extract from Mr.. Cummings saeech in Par
PSI, =. =, iiament. H..
"At the time the application for com
promise had been made by the American
government, there was an order in force ex-
Guiding british ships of war from the Ame-
rican ports, whilst French ships of war
were admitted into them; and consequent
ly III the terms offered by America had been
accepted, our commerce would have been
permitted to America without ship of
war to protect it, whilst the French com
MERGE would be excluded, at the same time
that French ships of war would be admit
ted 1t they could succeed in getting there.
he ports. OF America would become nests
for French privateers against British com
merce. AS to the tendency Of the measures
IN agitation in America, he could afford
the right honorable gentleman some conso-
!atlon, by assuring him, that they would not
have all the i'll consequences he seemed
: TO apprehend. A circumstance appeared
by the report of the committee of Congress
though clothed in hostile language, which,
# made known to his majesty's government
amlCaIola irrbt lad IL
acceptance of the terms proposed. The
circumstance he alluded to-, was the resnlu
ton TOR excluding from American ports,
the ships OF wai>not of G. Britain, but of the
: Deiiigerents. The Americans, in their
: Character of neutrals, had unguestionably
a right to exclude the ships OF war of both
Delilgerents from their ports, but could not
contine them exclusively to those of one of
the beiliserents without violation of that
impartiality which is the essence of the
: neutral character. Yet when that PROPOSE
ton should be disposed of, the whole of the
difficulty would not be surmounted, as much
would still remain to be accommodated
Another point, in which fault had been
: charged upon his conduct with respect to
: America, was, his having stated, that the
: system would not be given up whilst the
: smallest link of the confederation against
G. Britain existed"
1t VIII be observedthat tw o important con-
clusions may be deduced from these observa-
lions. L. That the exercise of this munich
pal right is unquestionable. 2. That Mr..
Cannihg's objection to it's former exercise
by proclamation was to its limitation, not to
its extension.
His objection is to its exercise against G..
Britain, exclusively and not against her en-
emies. AT the time of making this speech,
Mr.. Canning thought the inderdiction was
extended to all the belligerents; in which
case SO tar from complaining of its exercise
he says, it would furnish an inducement to
an accommodation, and his instructions to
Mr.. Erskine were no doubt given under this
expectation. This was the ground taken by
the report of the committee of the house of
representatives, in the last session, and the
senate went further BIZ extending the inter
diction to the public armed ships of all TO-
reign nations Those of peace as we'll as
those of war-This gave the transaction
more strongly the character OF mere mu-
nicipal regulation. This principle was af-
forwards narrowed down in this bill, to APP
ply merely to Great Britain and France,
and lett out altogether the other bellgcrept
powers. Mr.. Canning will probably be much
at this limitation and conceive
the hostility more pointed than he had anti
cipated some of the points may. however,
be little blunted by including France, the
most operating and unmanageable of her EN-
emes. He said he did not wish to go one
atom beyond Mr.. Canning's opinion upon this
occasion. He took great pleasure in concur
ring with Mr.. Canning upon this poiR. 1t
was the first instance in which he had ever
concurred iii opinion with that gentleman
but hoped it would not be the last--especi-
ally when the opinion favored the rights,
and promoted the interests of the United
States.
Mr.. Canning must have acted under this
impression, when he agreed TO make the ho-
norable PREPARATION he had done for the un-
authorised attack upon the Chesapeake,
without requiringa previous revocation of the
of British ships. AS this revocati-
OH was not demanded nor promised, the ar
rangement now ought to be made on general
principles ofjustice. He said, without feeling
or expressing any regret, at any thing he had
said or proposed, at the last session, h. was
now as willing as any gentleman to recipro-
cate the temper lately manifested by the
British government, soopposite in its charac-
ter and tendency from that manifested by
the cabinet for several years preceding
lie sad, that no gentleman had yet init
mated an intention Of removing the inter
diction upon British armed ships, until she
had actually executed her promise of repa-
ration; and If the execution of the promise
were to precede the revocation of the inter
d'ctloB, the mode of revocation by treaty, as
pointed out by his proposition, would be
nearly contemporaneous with that proposed
by gentlemen, if now enacted into law,
aud 1t would have an evident advantage as
it respected the feelings Of Great Britain
The mode recommended nv eentlemen is