The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-04-17

wrong was ON OUR siDE-all would be
taught TO know, that our own law had only
been retorted upon us, and all must agree
that we had no right to complain We
should lose the high ground we now stand
on, that of opposition to the unjust and OPP
Ipressive measures of the belilgerents, and
be compelled to admit, thae we were the
aggressors, thus departing from the defend
crs of right, to become the wrong doors. =
And for what, Mr.. President? For the pal.
try consideration of preventing British ship
ping, to an amount not exceeding eight
thousand tons, from entering our ports, and
from becoming the carriers OF our produce
to that amount: for thati is the ONLY IN
JURY the bill proposes to infiict on the Bri,
fish government forALL HER spoLIkTI0Ns,
INSULTS ard INJURIES.
The 4th section. SAnfines the importation
Of Frehch and British goods, to our own yes :
sells. The Sd and 4th sections, term one
lgreat whole, the object of which is, TO coerce
Great Britain and France to do US Justice.
How by prohibiting all commerce with
them! No--by preventing them from
the carrying any of our produce. OF bringing
into our ports, any of their manufactures in
their shipss And this measure is to coarce
IL. Britain and France What are its CO
fercive powerss None, certainiy--none
nhon France, for she has no merchant ships
LOT course, it can have no coercive infia-
ence upon her. 1t certainly has no persua.
sive qualities. We throw out provocation
without motive, as it relates to France
already we have the whole CARRYING trads
between the United States and France and
her colonies--tHis 6iH could nor give US
more. But, Mr.. President, gentlemen who
have voted for this bill, may have thought
that it would operate powerfully agains,
g. Britain. Let us examine that point -
1t recoilect correctly, there did enter the
jports OF the United States, on the average
of the three years prior to the Embargo
about 5000 tons of British shipping. To
exclude the participation in the carrying
trade between Great Britain and the Unit
ed States, to that amount, is the great good
| that is to result to the United States from the
81 and 9Th sections, to obtain which, we are
to risk the retaliation Of c.. Britain. Should
she take the words Of our own law, and pro
hibit our vessels from her ports, what should
we suffer hereby. is question worthy of
consideration l have little doubt, that 8
to SOC. 900 tons of ships of the u. States, annu
ally enter the ports of Great Britain. We
would then RISK, by this law, the employ
mcnt OF 100000 tons OF shibpng--to 90
tain whatF The employment of 600 tons
NOW occupied by British ships--wLat OK
ltreme folly What madness! Would any
man run such RIsQun OH his private &C !.
lcount
1t is, Mr., President, the old story of the
goose with the golden eggs--In attempt
ing to seize on little, we ,Isgue the loss OF
"a great whole. Having taken this view of
the subjecta1 had believed. that imperious
duty compelled me to endeavor to avert such
lgreat evIi. Butt have been told, that if G.
Britain should retaliate, that her retsliation
would operate as a complete non intercourse,
or embargo between the two countries, and
in a way that would be effectual and that,
as had always approved those measures
this view OF the subject must meet my ap
: lprobaton that it would precisely create
that, which | have said, was a powerful
measure against Great Britain, to wit: an
embargo. never will agree, Mr.. President.
In this side way, to carry into execution q
great national measure. IF we could not
execute our law by our own means, / will
not, by subterfuge, attempt to call in the
aid of the nation, against which the measure
was directed. will not loose the right side
OF the question, and put myself in the wrong.
Inc people were impatient under the EN-.
} barge, and you repealed it. Yes, sir, it was
lrepcaled at the moment when G.. Britain
lsmarting under the effects, was modifying
her orders of council, and she would have
, done US complete justice, but for the wa
, vering, indecisive conduct, that she saw we
were pursuing. Seeing that, and encourag-
~ y tbS SupPoit hCI MEASURES IHCC III Tie
: y. States, she modified her orders, and sub
stituted her blockading order of April, 1909
Should this bill pass, and another embargo
. be created thereby between the two nations
how will the people then feel 7 When the
embargo was laid, to compel a redress Of
wrongs, it created uneasiness among many
, but was highly approved by most of the PEG.
|. lple-But should our commerce be agais
shut up through this bill, the veil will bs
seen through; the covering is too thin, and
all Will see that our own act was the leading
cause thar on the part of G.. Britain, it i.
fair retaliation, provoked by ourselves tina,
IN justice to her subjects, she could not dc
. less. You will, then, appear the aggressor
You will have left the high ground of being
the defender against acts Of injustice, and
, place yourselves before your fellow Citizen,
as the wrong doer. You will forfeit tina,
. character fer impartial justice to which
We have now just claim, and 1 fear, Mr.
; President, that it would deprive the admi.
A nlstration of their Well-earned popularity.
0 But believe, that the measure would hav.
very different tendency; that it woult
! throw the Carrying of our produce to G.. Bri
tain and her possessions, entirely into BRITISH
hands, which I shall try. before sit down
f. to show to the Senate.
r The 5th section is intended 10 operate IL
=, lthe expectation. that G.. Britain and Franc,
I, would retaliate. 1t prohibits tie impsrta
8 ton from those nations OF their goods. ex
r cept direct from the place where they az,
r