Portland gazette and Maine advertiser. (Portland, Me.) 1805-1818, 1811-01-07
General Armstrong to the Duke Of
Galore.
PaY,s, March 10, 1910.

Galore.
PaY,s, March 10, 1910. /,
Sir, had yesterday the honor Of receiving
Vernal message rom your excellency.
stating, that his majesty had decided. that
tie American property, seized in the ports
Of Spain, should be sold, but that the mon
ey arising therefrom should remain in de-
pot"
On receiving this information, two ques-
tons suggested themselves
LIST. Whether this decision was, or was
not, extended to ships,as well as to cargoes
And,
I'd. Whether the money arising from
sales which might be under IT, would, or
would net, be subject 10 the issue Of Tue
pending negotiation.
The gentleman charged with the delivery
e your message, not having been instruct
ed &c, answer these questions, il becomes
my duty 10 present them to your eXceliency,
and to request solution CT them. Nor ID
Il less duty, on my part, to examine the
ground, on which his majesty has been
pleased to take this decision, which UNDER
stand to be that Of 1tprlsaI, suggested tor the
first time, il the note you did me the honor
to write TO noe OIL the 18th ultimo. In the
fourth paragraph Of this note ii IL said, that
4" his majesty could not have calculated on
the measures taken by the United States,
whoi having no grounds OF complaint against
France, have comprised hePin their acts OF
exclusion, and since the month Of Nag last
have prohibited The entry into LheirpOrta Of
French vessels, by subjecting them TO CON-
fiscatiOn." 1t - true, that the United
States have, siac0 the Goth of May last, fOl-
hidden the entry of French vessels into their
harbors and it is also true, that the penalty
Of confscation attaches TO the violation CT
this law. But, in what respect does this
offend France VIII she refuse to Us the
right Of regulating commerce within our
own ports Or, will she deny, that the law
in question is ! regulation merely munich
pal Examine il, both as TO object and
means. What does K more, than forbid
American ships from going into The porls
Of France, and French ships from coming
into those Of the United Statssl And why
this prohibition To avoid injury and ia
suit to escape that lawlessness, which is
declared to be a forced consequence ct
the DEGREES of the British councii' Ifthen,
its object be purely defensive, what are It's
means Simply Lazv, previously and gem
orally promulgated, operating solely within
Tic lNIAAlOlJ Va AhC 0hAtSS, 0hd pun
ishng alike the infractors OF it, whether
citizens of the said states, or others. And
what il this, but the exercise OF right
common to all nations of excluding, at their
will, foreign commerce, and OF enforcing
that exclusion Can this be deemed q
wrong to France Can this be regarded ~
Legitimate cause OF reprisals on the part
of power, who makes it the first duty of
nations TO defend their sovereignty, anu WHO
even denstionslize the ships Of those who
will not subscribe TO the opinion
But it has been said, that the United
States have nothing to complain Of against
France" Was the capture and condemns
ton of q ship, driven on the shores # Francs
BY stress Of weather and the perlls Of the
sea, nsthing Was the seizure aud sequess
tration Of many cargoes, brought 70 France.
in ships violating no law, and admitted %
regular entry at the imperial custom housess
nothing Was the yiolation ot our maritime
rights, consecrated, as they have been, by
the solemn forms Of public treaty, moth
ing In word, was ii nothing; that cur
ships were burnt on the nigh seas, without
other ofience, than that of belonging 10 Tie
United States, Or other apology than WAS TO
be found IN the enhanced safety OF the per-
petrators Surely, fit be the duty vt the
United States 10 te7esf the theoretical usur-
pations of the British orders of November,
1907, it cahnot be less their dusy TO coMplEa
OF the daily and practical outrases Ga the
part of France. 1t IS indeed true, that
were the United States destitute OF policy,
of honor, and OF energy, (as has been insta-
uated) they might have adopted system
Of discrimination between the two grese
helliSerents. 1hey might have dIa'yA in'-
agmary lines betwecn the FIRST aud second
sggressor. They might have resented n
the one, q conduct, TO wntch they gsne
submitted IN the other ant IL th!s way
have patched VI compromise between
honor and interest, equ-ly mean and dis
. raceful Bat such VAS no. the course
they pursued aud !. ~, perhaps 8 nee
sary consequence Of lie Justi Y OF theE
measures, .Hat thSy are. ST THIS day. an IN
dependent I4ion. Bar will hOL press
this part 81 ny subject. il wuoid be a.
ftonLful to yyur "a .etlency, (knu~ing as
vJu d. tilst ttleFe arc nol less than one nun-
ured American SHIPS wIthin MS haJesiys
j o. ess.on, or ihst Ut his SHES 10 multiply
proofs, ta11 the Uattea SfG.e. E.9Se S'e4la3 u
cam t.a...t 1gGsh.l IrGzSs.
nv attention Is necessarily called 70
q othep al Of tie same paragraph, ~ian
.lAmeuia.e l, tJiVms tie quo.Ai.u.. already
u.4dc. "As svon,' sags yoAs eAcolts4tty
!. 49, his ul4l1s.y ,s4s it.Io. si-l VI 49, An-N1-