The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-02-15

should have given that other a fair and rea-
sonaoie time to know whether she would a.
ban,ion her system or not. II she did not, IT
would then appear that that power, suppo-
sing II to be G.. Britain, was most seriously
intent on injuring us. Therefore in that
vent there would have been but one voice
IN the naion. For this reason, although l
had no agency in it l was always pleased
win this feature OF the law.
But must say, sir, that it does appear to
me that the course pursued has not produce ed
the state of things which must have been
the object of the law and of Congress; for,
instead of dating the proclamation from the
Tune when these edicts had ceased 10 violate
the commerce OF the u. States, it was dated
from the time when F ance had promised
that they should so Cease; and. as between
France and US, ] have no objection 10 the
proposition But, as between l1s ant Great
Britain. to take the 81 of November, when
France was to withdraw her DEGREES es the
time from which 20 count three o;onths in
terval. was irregular; because it was no,
and could no. possibly be known whe;he'
she had actually revoked them. Whatever
France had promised the fact of revoca
tion could not have been known to the Pre-
sident.
But IT. to carry into effect the purpose and
what l deem the Legitimate object OF IA o.
bill, twas proper to take this promise of
france at the last summer, and because
such promise was made it was right TO
inter that such an act was done; tor the
purpose of dea ing fairy wi n both nations.
ask why the pr clamation was not issued
as 20 buth Did not q. Britain also promise
II France UTILIZED her engagements. sat
she would also revoke her edicts, aeclar-
ing that sh would wait until that fact
f,,,
promise. 1t the pfomise O. Que To rescind
oe taken as resembling, SO tbs promise OF he
other 10 r. send Is % be taken ia the sane
way. In this Part cf the arg ment, 1 LIN
bound Consider bulh NATIONS a. inrendi x
to Keep sner word with US The fac un
douotediy is, Ii r ance IN pvlnt OF lac n.s
Ceased to vi lale our neutr. commerce, G.
Britain must have ceased TO vio.ate it TO !;
because this state OF yhrnss tuen existed. -
BOZ n power condit'' Mi, EGG ged rtvpke
sheir illeg' edlc,s-F, amce did so, It 3e .ng
understood that the u. STATES cats, G. Bri-
tam 10 revokr her urci,fs amt blUt AIDES :;
Sreat biltain olloW Ell her example, it being
Understood ma France k, cps her word.
la this posture of uur fairs It does strike
me we cannot .thout par iaiit, evident aud
paipaoie Re move ali restrictions against one
ana Cor. inue them agsinSI h,. othei -
Wh'ie approve the Courl Csy with which
the Executive receiveu the Gecl r. ion of
France tha, her edICts would Ire recinded, I
Cannot advocate the uisbeie wing a deLlara-
ton precisely similar ia substance frcm the
Hher DelIgerent Il nay we'll be q .bted.
d, TO the operation of the nom m e Course
law. whe her that state OF things existed IN
which the President could say that the -
diets of France had been modified He has
not said so {: and he could not say 80, sir,
because he could not know it. All he could
say he has said, to VIII, that it was official
~ made known to him (not that he knew
It OF his owe knowiehge) hat the DEGREES
were 70 nave ceased ON a certain day
Have we really given TO Great Britain the
three months required by the law? From
the time OF promise we have, but not from
the TINE OF actual cessation TO violate our
neutral rights. Have the edicts of France
been so revoked as that they cease on the
ISL OF November 10 violate our neutral
rights! Assuredly, whatever reason there
may nave been to suppose they mad been 80
modihed, every gentleman must now be
convinced they were not SO modified. because
new seizures look place in December. In
what situation then, sir, do we stand? l.
this law OF May last be a pledge in one
view. II Is pledge in another. We have
gwen pledge to G. Britain, If she cease 20
violate her edcts within three mon his after
France shall do so, we will have no nom
intercourse act as TO her. Well--if on the
9TH OF December France had not ceased
land That she certainly had notl to iniure
our neutral rights, / ask whether it be fir
to count time from the LIST of November -
should we not al least commence with the
9TH OF december, because then France nao
not ceased her violations? 1t does appear
tu me, SIR, that there Can be but one answer
10 this question G.. Britain was not bound
to- believe France. but to put an end to he r
etlicts when France should Cease to violate
our commerce. The original policy of thi.
la do not hesitate to say. is Departed
from. II you begin to calculate time from the
hrst Uf November. We are now in a state
OF non-iniercourse with G.. Britain, and |
know not how we are to get out OF il uDes.
10y repeal of the law. 1t surely cannot be
imputed to- q. Britain as wrong that shc
did not believe the bellgerent opposed to
her. Now the actual state of fittings is, tina
neither mas revoked It's edicts as far AS we
know any thing about it. IL nei,her has csa-
sed her violations, the fact required by the
law has not existed. Nov, though the Pre-
sident may have executed his power fairly :
yet, 1t this act is TO be our guide, we are
nos yet IN a condition to ascertain the result
OF our experiment. and therefore ought NOT
tobe IN state of non-intercourse. Is il the
intention OF the House, after what has &C.
Cured, that the Presidents proclamation
growing out of this should take effect-,hat
we are to be on friendly terms . it'll France
alone, when nR single instance has oc