The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-08-02
Gbf enquirer.
RIel..aoND, AUGUST ,. 1911
CONVERSATIONS STRONG AS PROOF Oh
~ HOLY WIT"

Il
|" CoNrIRMArIoN STRONG AS PROOF OF
HOLY WSIr."
TExT.-"Th- repeal Of the French De
crses. with The came formaHfv OF Mci,
original PRONUNCIATION, must now be insisted
on. p Federal Republican, Juiy 26.
We shall frcsum:, that these are the
terms which Mr.. Fns'er has laid down i'm
his late neg 'ria,ion with oir g,vernment-
and on his presumption. we have attempt
ed 20 show in our last nuo,ber, that the sc
were such terms as we had no, only no right
TO insist on, but such as our government had
ne0sr urgetl--SS tba, so far from it. The whole
course o. our government proved, that they
had never considered the,ns selves as hav
ing r.ghs IN demand the formal repeal of
the French DEGREES, but h ID merely ::onfin-
eel themselves To- that portion which trench
cd upon the neutral rights of the L. States.
We come forward, at this time, to hrope
this assertion from the face # the record
We come with the official documents incur
pockets, folded down for inspect,
shall prove that we have never lost sight Of
The distinction between those par,s Of the
Berlin decfse which France had a right to
enforce. and those which infringe OH the
rights OF the u. States. II hasbcen beam
OF light toguide our steps throughout
The Berlin Decree was issued the 2Ist
Nov 1906 On the ed Of May following.
whilst there existed some iir,ie doubt as t.
the sense in which ii would be interpreted.
Mr. Madison. then Secretary of State, adj
dressed himself in these terms. to General
Armstrong: yr
should it, contrary to expectation, turn out
chat the French decree was nee ant, and is to o.
peratc according tothe latitude of its terms YOU
will of coui Sc have made the proper represen
.'o"s, grounded ss well on tho principles Of pub
tN iaw,as on the express stipu!a,ions OF the con
We eli r
On February 18th. 1903. after the INTEL
lgence " as received ut the case of The Ho.
rzon, Mr. M. again writes Gen. A.thus -
Mr. Madison 70 Gen 4 Eej.,I8, 1907
+" Whether these intins,ions (from MIR. Frs
kine) have any reference tn the distinction be-
tween such parts OF tile French decree as ope
rate municipality shore, and such as opera, NO
on tue high seas Uioiate fhe rights of neu ydLs, or
to.a destination between the former restriction &
tue late extension of the decree with respect to
the u 81 Mr.. Erskine did not seem authorised
to say. The probability is, that neither OF these
distinctions entered into the views of The Bri-
ush. cabinet But il is certainly neither less The
duty nor the policy of the Emperor of the French
SO to vary his decree as to make it consistent
with the rights of ncutrals and the freedom of
the seas"--Ac
Toe sna'is TO Nr. Pnkney, FEB. 19, 1903.
/" Mr.. Erskine communicated few DAYS 4go.
the several late DEGREES OF his government with
expressions OF the regret felt by his Britannic
majesty at the necessity imposed on him for such
an interference with neutral commerce, and as
surances that his majesty would readily follow
| the expmpie, in case The Berlin decree should
he reseindsd, Svouid trocer1 ,,ayi bassu witt,
France, in relaxing the rigor of their me asures
Mr.. Z. WAS asked, whether his government dis.
tmguished between The operation ofthe French
Decree o,nrielpally on land, and its operation on
fhe hish seas On this point he was unable 10
| answer IS he also to enquiry, whether
the late British DEGREES had reference to I'M,
late extension of the French DEGREES with resDect
to the u S He seemed also, as is perhaps
the c-se with his goyernmsnt to have taken
very little into consideration the volati ons of
neutral commerce, and through them the vas
| injury to France aniecedent to the Berlin de-
| cree"
The same to Mr.. Erskine, March Is, 1908.
"N is nor true, that The u. S. haue &C
guessed IN an illegal eheration Of The
french decree; norfs IL eUen true, that at
The date Of The British orders Of .Nouen,
Ger IL, sing aI.tlicasion Of that decree
10 the commerce gfthe ihe u. STATES, on fhe
! high seas can be .fresumed to haze been
kpOz0n 10 the Brinsh government. The
French decree in 9uesston has 40 distinct
aspects one clearly imhorhng an intended
OPERATION within the territorial limits as a
local faw ne othe,, ahftarentiy IMPORTING
an intended otter alton on the high seas.
| Under he frstash the decree, hozv
euer otherauise Objectionable cannot be said
10 haze vioidrd he neutrality ofthe u S.
II me governing fozOers on The continent
u Eurof1e choose to exclude from their ports
British property or British productions or
Heutral vessels, proceeding from British
ports, II is an act of sovereignty which the
u. have n" right to controvert The
same sovereignty IS exercised by Great
6rsfa'n, a. all fines, IN heacc aveN as IN
7Uar towards her friends as qveN asher enc.
mics Her statute book presents a Thousand
illustrations. II is only. therefore, a,der
me other astiect Of ne decree. that IL can
haUe Vioia' ed neutral rightS.-Had, then,
me French decree been erecu:cd on, the high
seas agains. rte commerce ofMe u. Stales
aufh G. Brian? and haze tie y. States
acqWeSced an the unta7gfm and Injurious
ffOceedtnS 4 siate, sir on undenia6ie
authority, Mqf The first Instant in which
fhaf decree spas fut IN .(orce against the
neutral rights Of the u. ). 7uas Mat Of tie
Horizon This Judicial decision took mace
as Mte as ne 1874 day If Oct: 1907, e 7uaS
not oDicaNy knoson TO tie minister hleniho
fenhary offhe u Stairs at Paris, III sen,e-
ttme an WoUember.'.
The samrfo Mr.. Pinkney, Hjsth 80, 1905.
should the French government revoke
so much ut its DEGREES as violate our neu
frat rights, OF give explanations and assn
rdnccS having the like effect, and emitting
1t, there fore, tn a removal of the embarqo