The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-07-24
: bs GaQu1rer.
RICHMOND. JULY "a 1910
TIE NEW BRITISH ORDERS
OF MAY, 1910.

In scanning these orders, there are too Sc :
Para'e points OF view, which peculiarly
strike the attention Fhe first is, that whe-
ther they were directly AIMED at the u. S
or not, they are such stretches OF power. on
the part OF g. b., as must excite the fearsof
every neutral nation. For power. that
moves on such principles, is the enemy of the
whole human race. And the second IS. thar
these orders zpere really & originally aimed
at the u. 5.
AS tn the FIRST POINT, what is their
scope! !" That all vessels which shall have
cleared our from any port, so far uisler the
control OF France Or her allies as that Bri
tish vessels may not freely trade thereat
"and which are employed at the Whale
FISHERY, or the Fishery of any description.
and are returning, or destined to return,
either to the porc from whence they clear.
cd or TO any Other fort or place at which
the British htg may not freely trade
why, such vessels are to be bon hrize to the
captors
In the lst place then, they strike at
Drancn OF commerce, which has hitherto
| scaped the fangs OF their blockading orders.
Inc flsherles have yet escaped them no won
der. indeed, for by the usages of nations the
fisheries of ali countries are held as sacred
and intangible property. The seas are the
common property of all the world; whate
yer Is IN them is OF course an appurtenance
OF that which belongs TO all. Their use con
sists IN their community. Appropriation is
the very death OF this property-and there
lore, he that attempts II, is hostis huniani
/ Sener1S-the enemy of all the world be
sides. q may as we'll have said, that
we shall not breathe the air, or till orr
SOIL, as that we shall not draw our nets or
Weld the narpoon, on the ocean Why does
she not proclaim a blockade OF our ozpn
ports as that of our fisheries Why not
say, that " all vessels clearing out from these
ports at which her owe vessels may not
freely trade" shall De condemned, as we'll as
/ those which clear out from such ports but
are confined to the fisheries! Why not pro.
claim, that such vessels as are laden with
Hour or rice, snail be as liable to Capture as
those which are laden with cod fish or,w hale
OH The prlncipls would indeed have 4
wide scope, but Mat hYincihle Is s!iu The
same.
But IN the Sd place is the hkca
which she sets up Tor this usurpation! This
plea is not fairly & boldly set out before the
"orid---itis Couched i'll implication and is
| to be gathered only by inference 1t is.
that she has right TO confiScate all FISHING.
vessels clearing ou' from ports /" SO far under
the control of France on her allies, as that
brush vessels may notfreey trade there
at. What an impudent perversion of
facts Is it true, that French influence. and
the exclusion of British ships, are synony
nous expressionsl Is it true, that every
port which shuts out the British ships, is
therefore under the control of France! Is
there no other reason for such an exc fusion
NO motives OF pohCy--no municipal views
no disposition to resist her own aggressiens
by such a measure What does G Is saw
OF China, from whose ports her own flag is
at this time excluded, IN consequence of its
own abuses Is the court of Pekin, there
lore, under the Influence of France, Were
the ports of the u > under this same infu.
ence at tie Time when our non-interCourse
laws were n force, and the flags OF both
Countries Of France as well as of G. r. were
excluded! This would be really paying very
civii compliment 10 the u 5 * the British
Cabinet would have Cast off its polteness as
well as ITS principles. But ifitwere indeed any
proof OF French influence, that the British flag
were interdIcted from our harbors the very
same circumstance would prove that we were
at the same time under the influence of BrI
tain---of Course under two opposite infu
euCes at the same moment-This would be
really blowing hot and cold with the very
same breath The fact is not therefore a.
the British cabinet have pleased to assume it,
and the usurpation, which they choose to
build upon 1t, necessarily falls to the ground
Blu in tie Sd htace, there is another fea-
ture in these orders, which strikes us with
the utmost indignation. Fishing vessels
bound ~ any port at which the Brilish
flag may not freely trade" are to he con
dcmned as good prizes. What wonderful
stretch ct power is this! The old plea of
IrefaHaHoh is now therefore relinquished, *
a new one is to be set up in its piace. Yes
seis that a~e bound to SPAN or Italy, are 10
be swept off, not it was formerly preten
ded because the enemy will not suffer them
to enter the British ports, but because they
will not suffer the British vessels to enter
their oUR PORTS. This is Indeed, to swal
low up the right of neutrals in the pretens
ons OF beligerents. The rights of bellige.
rents are co extensive with those of neutrals
The latter are to go no where, whence the
| British are excluded lit is vain that the
municipal laws Of Sp IN or Italy, laws which
they are privileged to enact, confer or us the
right of entering their ports, whilst they de
ny them to the English 1t is vain that
! the English are at war with them, and
we at peace; that we may freely enter their
ports, whereas the English are excluded
all 1hsss distinctions arc to be Vs.riooked--