Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1810-07-12
From the FEDERAL Republican.
a R IN1Us,
No, x.

ASO. <hs
Much as has been said on the grossness
of the attempt to represent the belligerents
as equally hostile to the United States, and
thereby still longer TO preserve those false
impressions, which have already blastedour
best interests, and now endaneer cur liberty,
and our safety, the subject is. far from Being
exhausted.
The reader Of the National Inteiiigencer
would suppose, that England maintained
the principle efproclamatien blockades, and
that the requisition of France on this sub
ject was confined TO bioekades of this dos
criptios. He would also suppose that the
propositions Of France and OF England were
of the same character.
These are the ideas, which the National
insellisencer incucates, bu, these ideas are
in total opposition to the fact.
Erglandhas never maintained the rrinci-
PIC OF proclamation blotkades, elder in
iheory or procticc. She neither claims ter
h,rself, nor allows to others, right TO in
| novate on the established law of nations
The present orders of council are not in
iact teuudvd, nor are they progressed to tie
founded, on right to bloc kade ports by
proclamation. They are founded on the
rights of a bslligerent to retaliate on his C.
| ntmy those measures, which that enemy
employs. Although this right is not exer-
ciscdto Its full extent although the retail
ationis infinitely short of the measure which
produced it, still this and this alone is the
principle On which those orders rest for
their vindication. Of this truth the Nation.
al lnteiligencer cannot be ignorant, for cur
administrator, mas itself avowed, that the
orders Of council, when cesnmunic ate d were
accompanied with an assurance. that they
should be revoked the instantthe Berlin de
cree WAS revoked, and that England would
proceed bori passu With France in mitieat-
ing the rlgor Of these DEGREES and orders
against neutral commerce with brlIjeerent
potts.
Tits not believed THAT a single instance
can be adduc,d Of mere proclamation
blockade, during the present war sanction
ed by the government or CO urts of England,
prior 10 the orders of, November, 1907.
That " hieh mos, resembles it is the order
communicate By Mr.. Foxto colonel Men.
roe, in his letter OF the 10Th of May, 1906.
This was not IN fact blockade. /; was
only prohibition Of the coasting trade, and
was founded on previous extension of the
rights of war made by France.
The insinuat.on then that England main.
sains The right TO blockade by proclamation,
lis contrary to truth. 1t is not less untrue
than the rtquisi.ion of Franceis limited to
a resistance of such blockades.
Ina letter not long since addressed by
Mr.. Chsmpagny to general Armstrong, the
unalterable views of the emperor are stated.
He requires that blockades not real. should
be resisted, and explains what he-n1eans bv
the term. No blockades, he SAYS, shalfbe
considered as real, unless the place j. invest
ed BY land as we'll as BY sea.
q his being the meaning, which the empe.
ror ayows to be that which he annexed 10
the term : real blockade it is Of course the
sense IN which thar term is used by the, Due
dc Galore.
The r,quisition of France .henis not .,
IS more thaninsinualtd in the National. In.
telbgt eer.thatAmeriea should +, sis, bloek.
adsa WhsEs the place is no, invested by1land