Portland gazette and Maine advertiser. (Portland, Me.) 1805-1818, 1810-02-05

- ID 6lNiiiltA III bi.-NN Xix Il dl1D dIe liz
furious to neutral rights and ought to
be opposed But then il should be
rccDliected that those issued i'll reta;ia-
ton OF the previous DEGREES Of Franz z,
which were designed to destroy the
commerce Of England. Overlooking
TINS circumstance, our rulers have law
lshed all their censures upon England,
and been ready 10 excuse in great
measure the arbitrary conduct of
| France
It IS not possible to account for the
Embargo and Non intercourse, except
upon the belief that these measures
were agreeable TO France and aided the
views of BOnaparte TO ruin the COM
merce of England. For the British
orders in council did not subject our
vessels 10 capture, unless gong to the
ports OF their enemies and those A
merlcan vessels which were abroad at
the time made great voyages unmolest-
ed by the English.
We might ask, (if our rulers were
truly DESTROYS Of peace with Eng land,)
why did they not continue the treaty
made by Washington In 1895, as the
British government proposed to them I?
Why did Mr.. Jefferson so hastily and
unconstitutionally reject the treaty sign
ed by Monroe and Pinkney, his own
Ministers, made too under the admins
tratlon OF the For party il England,
the great friend of America Why
refuse to treat with Mr.. Rose, respect
ing the attack on the Chesaheake ? This
was, IN truth, great Outrage-but BE-
ing done by an officer, without author
lty from his government, and being
dIsavowed and disapproved immediate
ly, our rulers ought tc have met the
pacific overtures made by the English
on the subject. Why complain so
much Of the disavowal of the English
OF Mr.. Erskint's agreement, when they
see that he had not authority to make
the arrangement on the conditions he
did Would not our government have
refused to raufya treaty made by its a
gents, If they exceeded their powers
Would they be bound by any agree
ment made beyond the instructions Civ
en- F! We all know they would not -
But Mr.. jackson insists upon inadmis-
slble conditions. and has moreover in
suited our government, il is said.-
Let any man read JackS0n's letters, and
he will be fully satisfied, (notwithstand-
ing democratic assertions to the con-
trary) that Mr.. Jackson does not insist
upon our giving up all trade with the
colonies OF France, nor upon our per-
hitting the British navy to capture our
vessels going TO France contrary 10 any
laws We might make. He expressly
gives these up, and says they are pro-
posed because thought TO be Agreeable
TO our government. Nor will he see
any charge OF falshood against our gov
eminent in Mr.. Jackson's letters. He
only vindicates his own government
from the Imputation OF abreach of faith !;
and implies, that our rulers could not
justly expect any other than disavow-
al Of Mr.. Erskine's agreement, as he
had not abided by his instructions. The
dismissal Of Mr.. Jackson, then, under
the circumstances Of the case, does go
to shew previous resolution in our ru-
lers not to negotiate with England !;
and this previous disposition is strength
ened by the declaration made in Paris
, last November, that IackSon would be
dismissed. Add one fact more MIR.
Jackson Showed his instructions TO Mr.
! Pinllney before he left England, and he
Observed, that SHE Could no! ho$iJly fail
9 aucccay IN his neg ,t,ati0,4y 7p5th his
cYAHn4." MAINE.