Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-12-26
VIRGINIA ARGUS.
X L c II M o W D,
THURSDAY. DECEMBER %, 1911.
FOR rms ANGUS
CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS

FOR THs ARGUS.
CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS
Col MoNROE'S CORRESPONDENCE,
Communicate! 70 Congress by tie President on
the 5th N>osmber, 1911.
NO. III.
Inc Rnie u SO was very ably contested
by Mr.. Madison, who, whilst Secretary of
State, in pamphlet, written especially for
that purpose, demonstrated that the rule was
an innovation on the established law of natl
ons 1; and that not only according tor that law.
oue asreeably to right reason and common
sense, the citizens of the United States, be-
ing neutral, were justified in trading. in the
produce OF any colony to the ports of which
| they might be admitted, provideif such pro-
duee was their own property purchased with
their own capital. The arguments OF Mr.
| Madison were unanswerablc, and never have
been answered. Mr. Monroe's treaty with
England, which Mr.. jefferson rejected, went
mainly to settle this point of. dispute: But at
the moment the articles of it were commit
ted to paper, BoHaparte retaliatcd on the
the Rule by the Berlin decree, and the Brit
ish. resolving not to be outt one in the career
of injustice, tackled to the treaty that fatal
ryder. which bound US to her fortunes or rem
dcred the treaty a nullity.
| The RHLe Of SO, then, was the original
| scToHg, which has been followed, in success
SION, by all the other wrongs of the two lead
ing belligercnt powers; and, in the negocia-
tons between the United States and Great
Britain, the American diplomatic writer's
ought never to have lost Sight of that original
| 7oronS. As sooH as the orders in council
were issued, however, the opposition party
| i'll America, aided by the British ministry,
very adroitly started question of Priority in
| ISSlIiDpr tb~ a.,
ses or the country, on either side, labored in
cessantly, to establish that France or Great
Britain was the first offender
The American government, although it
would not permit itselfto enter, formally, in
to this question OF flriorify, vet, nevertheless,
thd enter into 1t UirtnGiky, compelled thereto
lii some measure by the course the discussi-
ons took in the body of the community. And
there we may mark the ff7-st error offaoLicv
in our statesmen; for, abandoning the con-
testation of the gYrong itself they went, in
directly, into controversy about a mode of
the wrong. All the orders in council and the
French DEGREES, operating against American
commerce, and which have been issued Since
the British set up the Rule of SO are no.
thing more than modes of that original zwonr,
and ought SO to have been considered,
The American administration did not suf-
ter itself to continue long in this error; and
putting out of view altogether tile queelion Of
| who 6egan first, presented friendly alter
native to the beiligerent power that woald
quit first. This alternative, which England
was the first to embrace, through Mr.. Ersk.
inc, she was also the first to relinquish by
dIsavowing that minister and finding that
our non-intercourse laws were fcebly enfsr-
ed, preferred Drawing our resentment and
enjoying clandestine trade with our citizens,
to an honorable adjustment OF differences and
| an open commerce. II is, notwithstanding,
certain that Great Britain had no intention
OF pressing the United States to actual war
tor she exerted herself with great energy to
conquer the colonies of France, and had ac-
1 tually conquered the whole of them in the
West-lndies when Mr.. Jackson was sent hi
ther on his mission. This minister. who. n
considerable talents united much effronterv
made use OF that circumstance to Justify his
own government in opposing the American
Claim TO fl ee commerce in colonial articles
thinking thereby to disspate our complaints
on that score but he was successfully parri-
cd by the executive, WHO asserted with creat
force and truth that an inability to pursue the
trade practically did not impair the RIGHT Of
pursuing 1t. In relation to the traffic in our
own productions altho' the hindrances to it
were attempted to be concealed under the
plea of retaliation, Mr. Jackson partly lifted
the veil which had before iii some degree CON
cealed the doctrine of maritime supremacy
which Great Britain in substance but not form
maintained. But he muffietl the doctrine. al
SO, IN an attempt to confuse the subject Of
the rupture of MIR. Erskine's arranesment.
which brought on a MISUNDERSTANDING (inten-
tional on his part) that. drove him from tie
country. ...F. -
The United States, not dispirited BIZ the
bad faith Of Great Britain in the case Of Mr..
Erskine's convention, still offered the alterna-
tive to the belligerent power that would FIRST
qut It's obnoxious Edicts IN favor Of the Uni
ted States. France, next, accepted the pro-
position, annulled her dccrees as far as they
| affected neutral trade, and claimed from the
United States the fulflmcnt Of the condition
70 which they had pledged themselves. The
United States, true to their plighted faith, did
tulfll II; and Great Britain, who, to cover her
real designs, had held out the appearance of
a willingness 20 recall her orders when
! France should relinquish her DEGREES, faisif-
cd her promise, and in the face Of accumu-
iatng facts, attempted 70 Justify herself I'M
der the preteEt that Bonaparte had not, 6o-
| nc .fde, repealed his DEGREES. Affairs we're
IN this situation when Mr.. Foster arrived
from London. We shall soon see how this
minister acquitted himself of mis- charge.
I'M Occasional IIJf.cr.
|
4