Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-03-01

f''c S'tii''d cl entcIcU .NSo win the
French Governfhent, and which, we
| think, will be violated by the adnnis.
sion OF British productions into our
ports after the ri of February. But
before we go into an investigation Of
the question, let us brush away the
sophistry of Mr.. John Randolph. Mr..
Il. stated on the floor Of Congress,
that the law of May 1st, 1910, was
made solely for our own government
that it was rule to ourselves
AID that il was an impertinent med.
ding On. the part Of F-ance to take
it as q basis for the repeal Of her de.
crees. Ii any thing can be understood
from this reasoning, it is this that
the law of last MAY was only intended
TO direct the President what to do in
case France repealed her DEGREES
without any reference to that law.
We ere willing to meet Mr.. Randolph
on this point. And, first, we observe,
that the law of May was not secret
law but an act, openly passed, and
publicly promulged that the pro.
mitigation presented the intention of
this government to both France and
! Great Britain; and that if either of
those powers chose to make the act OF
I May /, q pretext for the repeal o.
their edicts, that could not alter the
4 intention OF thu law, which ONLY refer
red to the fact of repeal without re-
( curing to,the motive or inducement
The point to be considered therefore,
is, simply, the fact If repeal. The let
ter OF the 5th Of Auguse last consti,u-
ted thai fact. When that letter was
received by the President, the law of
May I, became imperativ, iy TIE rule
oil hi@conduct He could exercise no
opinion except as to the declaration of
the French government beng evil
dence of he revocation OF the DEGREES.
Here usage, common sense, and good
! policy, as well as necessity, combined
In favor OF the decl ration: ior, If the
declaration were not t. be accepted as
evidence OF the repeal, there could be
no positive evidence of revocation at
all. The Presi ent, of course, a.cep-
ted the declara ion for the fact, and
issued his proclaim ton as the law of
the first of May prescribed; and,
from the monenF Of issuing that pro-
clamation, we entered into conditions
with France, to oary which would be
/ 10 0folate them. However, therefore,
! the law OF May L, bcforc issuing the
4 proclsma ion, was merely rule to our
| selves independent Of the French go.
verDmept; yet, when that proclaim D.
ton was once issued, wewere bound
not to depart from the terms of the
agreement. he President, acting
under a law Of Congress, pledged the
Tar n OF the nation. What, then, was
this pledge?
Tbe law of May 1, says, From
and after the expiration of three
mouths from the date Of the frocIa-
nation aforesaid, the third, four h,
fifth, sixth, seventh, eight, ninth,
teuth, aud eighteenth sections OF the
act to lntsrdict the commercial inter.
course between the u. States and
G. Britain and France and their de.
Tendencies, and Tor other pupposes,
shell be revived and have fall force
!
and effect
What does the law of non. inter,
course say that is, the sec,ioAs of it
which are revived the fourth sec.
ton Lone of those revived Will an.
swer the enquiry as it respect, the
| question at issue 1t shall no, be
FlawiuI to import into the u. States
or the territories thereof, any goods,
wares, or merchandise whatever,
from any port or pisce situated in
Great Britain or IRELAND, or in any
c: the colonies or dependencies of
Great Britain &c.
The word SC import" signifies to
bring int. TIE fourth section las
quofcd prescribes that no British pro-
ductions shall be impaired into the II.
States the act OF May I, declares
that this section shall revive and have
"JHH" force and effect three months
.afser the date Of the Pre,ident's pro.
clamation +; that is, on and after the
second of February. Now, if cargoes
which lift Great iSritaiu before and
arrive in the u. States alter the I'd
OF February, are permitted to free
entry and sale, will not the contract
with France be violated /? We say,
~ 7pIU Because TIE r.roieeio, n