The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-11-22

letter OF the 10th OF Dec. Intimately
WITH ITS principal subject, ana fairly used 20 Illustrate
and explain i aud consequently, that il they had
not the good fortune to be acceptable to your lori
ship, the fault was not mine.
II was scarcely possible TO speak with more mode-
ration than my paper exhibits OF that portion OF a
long !ist oil nvasions OF the rights OF the u States
which It necessarily reviewed, and OF the apparent
reluctance OF the British government to torbear
those nvasions in future. DO not know that coald
more carefully have abstaincd from whatever might
tend to disturb the spirit which Your Io,rlsl,ip az
cribes to his majesty government, it, instead Of be-
ing utterly barren and unproductiyc, had occasion
any been visible IN some practicable result, in some
concession either to friendship justice. 1t would
not have been very surprising. nor very culpabe per
maps, II had wholly forgotten address myself to
spnat OF eoncilation, which had the most equi-
uao!e e;ums with steady and unccasing repulson
which had yielded nothing that could be denied and
had answered complaints OF injury by multiplying
their causes. With this forgctfulness however am
not charseahie for, against all the discourasemens
suggested by the past, have acted still upon pre-
sumption, that the disposition conciliate so often
protesset would finally be proved by some better C.
violence than perseverance, in oppressive novelties
rs obviously incompatible with such a disposition IN
those who enforce them, rs in those whos. ,,ieucc
they continue to exercise.
Upon the commencement of the second paraerap,
must obs rye, that the forbearance which il announ
ces, might have afforded grat6cation il il had
been followed by such admissions as my govern
ment rs entitled to expect, instead OF further mani
estaton OF that disregard OF its demands by which il
has so long been wearied. II has never been INV
practice to seek discussions of which the tendency is
merely to irrtate; but beg your Lor,ship to be as
sured that feel no desire to avoid them whatever
may be their tendency, when the rights OF my coun-
try require to be indicated against pretcnsions that
deny and conduct that infringes them.
comprehend the other parts of your Iorxlsbip's
letter, they declare in effect that the British govern
ment Will repeal nothing but the Orders a, Coun-
CHS and that IT cannot at present repeal even them
because, IN the first place, the French government
IN Tho I.fta IS vN..I--
General Armstrong of the 5th of August not only
that o. b. shall revoke those ORDERS but that she shall
renouncc certain principles OF blockade (supposed to
De explained in the preamble to the Berlin decree)
whch France alledges to be new and i'm the second
place, because the American government has as YOU
conclude) demanded the revocation of the British ,
der OF blockade OF May, 1906, practical instance
oi tnat same remuneration, or, in other words has
maze itself party, not openly, indeed but Indirect
~ and coverty, to the entire requisition of France
as you understand that requisition.
IL is certainly true, that the American government
required as indispensable in the view of its acts
OF intercourse and nonntercourse, the annument of
the British blockade of May, 1906, and further that
II has, through me, declared its confident expecfat;on
that other bockades of similar character (ncutline
inat OF the Island OF Zeaiand) will be discontinued
nt ny what process OF reasoning your Lordship has
arrived at the conclusion, that the government of the
United States, intended by this requsition to become
tire champion of the edct of Berlin, to fashion II,
principles by those OF France, while it affected to adj
doctrines, which it would fain induce you to acknow-
ledge, but could not prevail upon itself to avow am
not able to conjecture. The frank and honorable
Character OF the American government, justfes me
IN saying that, NJ had meant to demand of Great
britain AN abluration of all such principles as the
French government may think 6t to disapprove. Il
would not have put your Loryiship to the trouble of
discovering that meaning by the aid OF combinations
an inerences discounenanced by the language Of its
minister, but would have told YOU SO in explicit ter,
What have to request of your Lortship therefore
IS that you will take views and principles from
our own mouths, and that neither the Berlin de-
cree nor any other act Of any foreign state NAV be
made to speak for us what we have not spoken for
ourselves.
The principles of Blockade which the American
government processes, and upon the foundation of
which has repeatedly protested against the order of
May 1906, aad the other kindred innovations of the
extraordinary times have already been so clearly ex.
planned to your Lordshp, in my letter of the aist of
Sepember that it is hardly possible To READ fb.t t
ter, and misunderstood them. Recommended Inv the
Pimnest considerations of universal equity YOU will
md them supported with strength of argument.
ana weight OF authority, of which they scarcely
stand IN need, in the papers, which viii accountant
this letter, were transmitted in in that of Septem
Der, will not recapitulate what cannot improve
but must avamysef of this opportunity to call YOUR
Lordsfips attention second time, in particular
manner, to one OF the papers to which INV letter of
September refers. alludc to the copy Of an Official
note, of the 18th of April, 1901 from Mr.. Merry to
MI Madison, respecting pretended blockade of
martinique ana SuadaIoupe. No comment can add
10 the value OF that manly and perspicuous exposition
of the law of blockade, as made by England herself
In maintenance OF rules, which have been respected
and upheld in all and on all occasions. Inv the
government Of the United States will leave r.
therefore, to your Lordships consideration with onIy
this remark, that, while that paper exists IL will he
superfluous to seek in any French document for tbe
opinions OF the American government on the matter
of it. nv '''"''ei
The steady fidelity of the government of the Unit.
ed states to Its opinions that interesting subject is
kno s 20 every body. The same principles, which
are found in the letter of Mr.. Madison to Mr. Thorn
n OF the 9th Of October, 1S03 already before you
were asserted IN 1899, by the American minister at
inns court III hJs correspondence with Lord GrenyiIle
respecting the blockade of some of the ports of Hol
land, were sanctioned, in letter of the Goth of Sem,
ISOO, from the Secretary of State of the United
states to Mr. King, of which extract is enclosed
were insisted upon in repeated instructions to Mr..
Monroe, and the special mission of 1906 have been
maintained by the u S. against others, as well AS A.
gainst England, as will appear by the enclosed copy
OF instructions, dated the 21st of October 1901 from
Mr. Secretary Madison to Mr.. Charles Pinkney then
American Minister at Madrid and finally, were adj
hercd to by the United States when bellocrent. in
the case of the blockade of Tripo.i.
"A few words will give summary of those princi-
pies and when recalled to your RENE mbrauce. am
not without hopes that the strong grounds of law and
right on which they stand, will be as apparent "a
your Lort!sllp as they are to me.
1t is by no means clear that it NAV not fairly he
eontended, on principle and early usage that mari
tune blockade is incomplete with regard to states at
peace, unless the place which it would affect is invest
ca by land as well as by sea. The United States
however, have called for the recognition of no such
rule They appear to have contented themselves
WIN urging IN substance, that ports not actually