Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-07-18
IA dollars per annum.1

=
CLAIMS, especially if negotiations were pens
Ding, as we suppose, and as MIR. Smith tiC ubt-
less Knew! Was it to be presumed that,
Whatever answerh he might give, it would be
permitted by Congress 10 interfere with the
non-importation act with which il had no
stipulated relation?
Suppose MIR. Serrurier had said that no
indemnity Tor the past would be made;
would 1t have been consistent with the terms
and object OF the compact for us to Violate
1t on that account Would il have been
consistent with the conduct Of the United
otates III their arrangement with Mr. Frs
xlne Would il have been prudent, by
SUCH an example, to obiee Jhe United
ctates either to require Great Britain to do
the !iAe, IN addition to the repeal Of her or
ders, ii She should offer to rei,e d them or
to forfeit our national charactci, FOR equal a q
fair dealing with the two bei.s ercnts In
ADDITION to ali these things take INTO view the
approach Of the Sd 6f March WHICH ,Ys,s TO
Close the session, then distant about n'ne
days Deduct from these nine days the time
Tor Mr.. Serrurier's answer, which might be
fastened or retarded according t. has own
views and then say whether any adeantaee
was hSeiy to arise from th1ustine the new
matter OF the correspondence, whatever
might be its result, into Congress, in the last
busting moments Of the session; say whe-
thsr It would have been most likeiv to aid
the majority in deciding on the important
business before them, or to augment the
means OF the minority, or of a small portion
or 1t, tor frustrating the business altogether,
as was evidently their intention.
What must have been the condition Of the
President with such Secretary of State "a
valiing himseifof HIS official station. particle
lariy OF his agency between him and foreign
minister's, Co teaze and perpsexs No won
der that the most amiabie and placid temper,
such as Mr.. Madison is known 10 possess.
should sometimes be disturbed We NAV
readily admit in this respect the account Of
Mr.. Smith, that fretfulness WIS observed
and we must as readily excuse it, Whether
the conduct exciting it be resolved into the
folly Ct weak assistant, or, as now seems
to have been the case, the workings Of a SCI
cret and insidious foe, watching ana hcardline
every little incident, every word and look,
Tor the future purposes Of ambition or re-
yenge.
.4r4icie 5. Here transferred from the ut.
methodical place into which it was thrust be-
tween two articles closely connected in their
subjects. 1t takes notice Of the act making
some regulations as to ministers and Barba-
ry consuls; and, OF all the articles of this
wretcned pamphlet, 1t is the most pitifu &
insignificant. 1t does not rise even 20 the d;o-
pudent, or even false. 1t seems introduced
tor no purpose but to mark the meagerress
Oh the general subject and the authors int =
lect. He says this law was a bad one he
says the President did not give it his neea-
tive; he says the President did not in The
subsequent session recommend bv a MESSAGE
It's repeal; he says that he, Mr.. Smith, re-
fused to speak to any of the members Of the
legislature about it as he thought it an impro-
NOR int sf.a.ssv a.
legislative business.
Having collected all these wonderful disco
veries from MIR. Smiths statement. we viii
just return them TO him with one or two sim
pie observations. We discover from the date.
OF the law that it past on the very last even-
ing OF the session. 1t must then have come
to the President at his chamber in the capi-
tai with a number of other bills, some os
| them doubtless ofinfnitely more consequence
Ii he did not at the next session send formal
message TO recommend its repeal, it might
have been because he thought it better that
Congress should take up the subject at the
instance of a member; and indeed it was
well understood that member Of the SEM
ate, the very author Of the first bill. had en-
gagged to propose it. Formal messages or re-
commendatiOns on every subject Of legisIati-
on wouid multiply them to excess, and would
not appear respectful to- the Intelligence and
vigilance OF the members. MIR. Madison has
! probably gone farther in this than any of his
predecessors. Every body knows that it all
ways has been aud ought TO be the practice
for informal communications between the ex-
ecutive e legislative members to take place,
with an honest view to the dispatch ofbusis
ness. Mr.. Smiths squeamishness therefore
on this head IS little curious; and he oughtto
have been very sure, before he averred il, that
there are no members Of Congress with bet
ter memories than himself
Allowing him however the peculiar atper-
refined scruples 70 which lc no7y makes pre-
tensions, he was the more bcand for that We.
~ reason 10 DO what was necessary in the
more regular course for effecting the public
objects connected with his department. Yet
he has not told as (and who will doubt chat
he would have told US If he could) that he
! discharged his duty b. calling tie attention
6 the President from time to time 20 the case
Of the six suffering functionaries, and to the
/ eZpediency q recommending TO Congress a
revision Of the act in question.
| Article 9. Pargggulha Helcgerfo ETy.
Erskfnc. This paragraph, he says, the
| President inserted With his own pen and we
I believe il. But when he tells US that Robert
Smith opposed IL IT, the cabinet, we do not
believe It. We viii venture to SUI that Rob-
ert -mith never opposed any thing in the ca
i kimqf He ha1 A. -t.,rf !.