Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1811-11-12
FIR. MONROE TO MR.. FOSTER.
DEPARTMENT Of State, October /, 1911

FIR. MONROE TO MR.. FOSTER.
Deha,1ment Of State, October /, 1911.
SIR,
have had the honor to receive your letter
of the 26th Of July. and to submit 1t to the
view of the President.
In answering that letter, it is proper that |
should notice complaint that l had omitted
to reply in mine of the Esd of July, to your
remonstrance against the proclamation OF the
President of November last, and to the de-
mand which you had made, by the order OF
YOUR government, of tie repeal ct the nom
importation act of March I'd of the present
year.
My letter has certainly not merited this I'M
lputation.
Having shewn the injustice of the British
government in issuing the orders in council,
ON the pretext assigned, and its still greater
nfustice in adhering to them after that pre-
tent had failed, respect for Great Britain
as well as for the United States, prevented
my placing in the strong light in which the
subject naturally presented itself, the remon-
STRANGE alluded to, and the extraordinary de-
raard founded on it, that while your govern
ment accommodated in nothing, the United
State should relnquish the ground, which
by I,lst regard to the public rights and he-
nor, they had been compelled to take. Pro-
positions tending to degrade nation can ne
yer be rought into discussion by govern
ment nol prepared to submit to the degrade
ton. 1t was for this reason that co2hned
my reply to those passages IN your letter
which inv olved the claim of'the United States,
on the prl iclples Of justice, to the revocation
of the Ord 5rs in Council. Your demand, how
ever, was neither unnoticed or unanswered.
In la, ing b cfore you the complete, and as was
believed, il resistabe proof on which the y
Ststcs expo cted, and called for the revocation.
of the Orde is in Council, very explicit ans
wer was SUI posed to be given to that demand.
Equally U nfounded is your complaint that
misuudersto I'd that passage which claimed, as
a condition tf the revocation Of the Orders II.
Council, thar: the trade of Great Britain wit
the continent should be restored to the state
in which it y as before the Berlin and Miian
DEGREES weri 9 issued. As this pretension was
novel and ex ,raordinary, it Was necessary that
a distinct idea should be formed of it, & with
that view, | asked such an explanation a.
would enable me to form one.
In the explanation given, you do not insis:
on the right TO trade in British property, wiz:
British vess Els, directly with your enemes.--
Such claim, YOU admit, would be prepostc-
rous. Bat YOU do insist by necessary impiica-
ton, that France has no right to inliibit the
importation into her ports of British manufac-
lures, OF the produce of the British soil, whel:
the property OF neutrals S. that until France
removes that Inhibition, the United States are
to be cut off by Great D.t.in from all trade
whatever with her enemies.
Ga such pretension it is almost in,possi-
BILE to reason. There is, believe, no exam
pie of it in the history Of past wars. Great
Britain, the enemy of France, undertakes to
re gulate the trade Of France norris tia, all !;
she tells her that she must trade in British
goods. If France and Great Britain were a,
peace, his pretenson would not be set up
l nor even thought of. Has Great Britain then
acquired in this respect, by war, rights which
she has not in peace And does she announce
to neutral nations, that unless they consent to
become the instruments of this policy, their
commerce shall be annihilated, and their ves-
sells shall be shut up in their own ports
might ask whether French goods are adj
, mitted into Great Britain, even in peace. and
if they are, whether it be of right, or bv the
consent and policy of the British government!
That the property would be neutralized does
no, affect the question II the United States
|; have 10 right TO carry their own productions
| into France without the consent of the French
government, how can they undertake to carry
there those of Great Britain In all cases it
| must depend on the interest and the will OF
| the party.
Nor is it material to what extent, or by what
powers, the trade to the continent is prohibit
| ed. If the powers who prohibit it, are at wal
with Great Britain, the prohibition is neces.
sary consequence ofthat state. If at peace, i,
| is their own act and whether it be voluntary
or compulsive, they alone are answerable fol
it. 1t the act be taken at the instigation anc
under the influence Of France, the most thai