The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-03-01

ton for the French revocation turns on no con-
dtion precedent, is absoluse, precise and une-
quivocal.
What construction Of the document which
declares that revocation might be made by de-
termined suspicion and distrust, have no wish
and am not bound to enquire Such Interpreters
would not be satisfied by any form orwords, and
would be likely to draw the same conclusion
from perfect expiicitness and studied obscurity.
1t enough for me that the fair and natural
and necessary import of the paper affords
color for the Interpretation AN about 10 exam
inc.
The French declaration "that the DEGREES Of
Berlin and Ifan are revoked, and that from the
LIST oi November they will cease to have any eff
feet" is precision itself. But they are followed
by these words -" oien entendu QUEEN conse.
Quence de ceue declaration les anglais yevogue.
ront ieurs arrets de Consell, ct renoncersnt aux
nouveaux principles de blocus qu'is ont ,oulu
etablis, on 6ien que les Etats Unis, co3or'ne-
''teHt IL Idcte que Cons ueHez DE conl,1unfqneT,
fe,ont respecter leurs Droits par les anglsis."
IT these words state any condition, they state
tuo, the first depending upon Great Britain, the
last upon the Un'.cd States and, AS they are
pu, in the distinctive, it would be extrsvagant
to hold hat the non-performance of one of them
is equivalent to the non performance Of BOTH
shall take for granted therefore that the argyll
ment against my construction OF the Duke of
Cadore's letter must be moulded into a new
of one; and, considering them equally as con-
ditions. precedent, to be performed Obstructive
ly) before the day limited for the operative com.
mencement of the French repeal, must maintain
that, if nei.heY OF them should be performed be-
fore that day, the DEGREES were not to be revok-
ed, and consequently that, as neither of them
has been so performed, the DEGREES are still in
force. i.,s:+
If this hypothesis nf previous conditions, thus
reduced to the only shape it can assume, be pr
we'd to be unsound, my construction is at once
established since itis only upon that hypothe-
sis that any doubt can be raised against the ex.
&C; and perspicuous assurance that the DEGREES
were actually repealed, and that the repeal
would become effectual on the first of No.
vember THIS hypothesis is proved to be UNI
sound by the following considerations.
1t has clearly no foundation in the phraseolo-
gy OF the paper, which does not contain a syl-
liable to put any condition before the repeal.-~->
The repeal is represented as a step already ta-
ken, to have effect on day specified. Certain
consequences are indeed declared to be expect
ed from this proceeding /; but no day is given.
either expressly or by implication, within which
they are to happen. 1t is not said " 6ien enfenda
que les anglais auyont reOoque, G,c" but que les
dngldis yeVoqueront, Cc." indefinitely as to
time.
The notion Of conditions precedent is there
fore, to say the least of it, perfectly gratuitous
But it is also absurd. 1t drives us to the con-
cIusion that q palpable and notorious impos-
sibility was intended to be prescribed as con-
dition, IN paper, which they, who think it
meant to deceive, must admit was meant to be
| plausible.
1t was palpable and notorious impossibty
that the United States should, before the lst of
November, execute any condition, no matter
what the nature of it, the performance of which
was to follow the ascertained failure of a condi-
ton, to be executed by Great Britain, at any
tsx,,a HaE IS 1har
the act expected from the United States was
to be consequent upon the failure of the other
is apparent. 1t IS also apparent that upon any
Interpretation, which would make the act of G..
Britain a condition precedent to the French re-
p al, and consequently precedent to the LIST OF
November, (when the repeal was, IT ever, 10
take effect) that condition could not be said to
have failed before the whole period, from the
! 5th of August to the LIST of November, had e.
lapsed. But if Great Britain had the whole
time, within which to elect the course which
she would pursue, what opportunity would be
left to the United States equally bound, upon
this idea of conditions precedent, to act their
part within the same period) to become acquain-
ted with that election, and to decide upon and
take their own course m consequence /; TO say
nothing of the Transmission of such intelligence
of it to Europe as would be indispensable to the
efficacy of the conditional revocation.
This general view would alone be sufficient to
discredit the a. oitrary construction under con-
sideration. But it will be more completely ex-
posed by an explanation ofthe nature OF the act
which the letter processes to expect from the
u. S. in case G. B. should omit to revoke
This act is the revival of the non-intercourse law
against England, France remaining exempt from
it, as well as from the provisions of the suisse
quent law, commonly called the non-ntercourse
act. Now it is too plain upon the face Of the last
mentioned law ito which the letter expressly re-
| fers) to escape the most negligent and un>kful
observer, that the revival could not by any indus
try or chance be accomplished before the time
fixed for the cessation ofthe French DEGREES, or
| even for a considerable time afterwards, it GER
tainly cannot be allowable to assume, that the
vival was required by the letter (whatever was
| the object the writer or his government) to
precede the cessation. And, II this was not re-
| CURED, it is iDcontrovertbe that the cessation
would, by the term of the letter, take place on
the appointed day, whether any of the events dis
junctively specified had interviewed or not.
Tie FIRST step towards a revival of the non-in'
| terconrse against England would be the procla-
nation of the President, that France had so re-
voked or modified her edcts as that they ceas-
ed to violate the neutral commerce of the u. s.
But.the letter of Monsieur Champagny left the
decrees as it found them up to the 1st Of Novem-
Der, and consequently up to thar day it could not,
for any thing contained in that letter, be said that
the rights of American commerce were no lon.
ger infringed by them A prospective procama-
ton, that they tuOsd to violate those rights
might perhaps be issued ; but it could scarcely
have any substantial operation either in favor Of
France or to the prejudice Of England, until the
epoch to which it looked had arrived.