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

tcdus was CCltaus MS, AT least, NapOicOll
(who is obstinate only when his interest re-
quires it, did. and, apparently without any
reluctance, as we have seen i'm the letter Of
the French minister Of foreign affairs to
Mr.. Armstrong. In that letter, an OFF,
CIAL INSTRUMENT, it is declared, that
the DEGREES of Berlin and Milan " are re-
Uoked" and that they are to cease to have
effect on the first day of November. Now,
when this was communicated tn our govero-
ment. as we see it was, on The 25rh of Au-
gust last by the American miUister here.
IN an OFFICIAL INSTRUMENT, why were
not our orders in council, our retaEatory r.
ders in council-why were hey not also re-.
v ked IN the same avay /; that is t. Say, why
were they not declared to BE- revoked, and
that they should cease to have effect OH the
first OF November last! The orders were
from first to last, declared to be acts of re-
tddafon hey express the regret of the
King OF England at being obliged to adopt
measures 81 injurious TO the commerce OF
Heutrals /; they clearly convey the idea, that
hey are to continue in force no longer than
re DEGREES of the ell my, whence they have
arisen and our minister in America, i'm
Februar' 1903, declared to the American
government "h's majesty's earnest desire
to see the commerce Of the world restored
to that tire edom, which is necessary tor its
prosperity, and his readiness 10 abandon the
system which had been forced upon him,
whenever the enemy should retract the hrin-
ctf,ies which had rendered II necessary >"
IL 'hese words had any meaning at ALL they
meant, that our orders in council would be
revoked whenever the French should re-
woke their DEGREES tor in what other zoay
were they. to make a 'etroction Of their firin-
ci1tcs ? Indeed, NO other sense can possibly
be attributed to this declaration of our mi
mister in America, unless it be pretended,
that the king of England meant, that France
should make an express and formal confes
sion of her having acted upon unjust and
erroneous principles and, ], think, tina,
there is no man, with any pretensipns to
fairness, who will attempt to support n o.
plnioD, that the words of our minister wors
either taken or meant, in such a sense -
1t, then, the reader be Of opinion, as, I
think, he must, that the letter of the French
n mister for foreign affairs to Mr., Arm.
strong, fairly amounted to retraction O,
the trincitles complained of by us, lie will,
OF Course, ask for the reasons, why his ma
Jesly's earnest desire to see the commerce
OF the world restored to freedom and his
readiness to abandon the system forced up
on him, did not produce the effects which
were naturally to be expected from them !;
or, in other words, what could now be the
reason tor not following, immediately, the
example of the French IN re, oking The or
ders in council. Instead, however, of an
i immediate revocation. upon receiving, from
the American minister here, an official no
LITIGATION of the revocation tthe French de-
crees, our minister for foreign affairs, Lord
Wellesley, answers, that whenever the
repeal of the French DEGREES shalt have &C.
tuGly taken f5iace, and the commerce of u
trail nations shall have been restored TO The
condition in which IL stood hreyiousiy to the
PRONUNCIATION Of those decrees," then the
king will relinquish his present system-
What, let me ask, was meant by the revo-
caion having acfuaHy taken PLACE 2 Had
1t not actually, hat is to say, really, taken
place The French minister saws. the
DEGREES are revoked" What was he to say
| more In what way was actual revocati, n
to lake place, if not in this way? And how
| was. he fact to be communicated to US, ex-
cept in the way in which it was communica-
ted that is to say, officially through the A
merican minister, to whom. or to whose go
vernment the revocation would of Course
be announced by the government of France ,
Really, cannot, TOT my part. form any no.
ton OF what We should require further; or
of what Gould further be demanded As
proof, hat the revocation of the French d..
crees had actually taken place. Did Lord
Wellesley mean, thaT we we're to stop till
the 1st day of November in order TO see
whether the French won ID act upon the re-
vocation. agreeably TO heir promise If
this was what was meant Gow dd i agree
with the declaration about The king S readi
HeSs 20 renouncc d system that had been
forced upon him, & which he So ea7nestly de-
Srrd 70 do awayl For if we reused to 6eein
Our yocat ion if we refused to declare it even
C additionally, how was it to be expected, or
hoped for, that the French would act uDon
theirs at the day named in the notification
of the French minister to Mr.. Armstrong !!
What, in short, did such ft1sal or post
ponement amount to, but this that though
the French had officially declared to Ame..
RIGA The revocation of their DEGREES, to be
acted upon on certain day, yet, such was
our opinion of the parties, that we must see
it acled upon, befo we would even declare
our revocation, to be acted upon at any time
at all ?
If he reader thinks that this was what we
could not reasonably expect any independent
nation to hear with great complacenSy, that
opinion will certainly be strengthened upon
his being informed of the declara ion of our
minister in America, to The American gov
eminent. in February 1903, as laid before
Congress in Nov. OF that year. He, accord
ing to these documents, then "communica =
ted the several late DEGREES (orders in coun
ci) OF his government, with expressions Of
the regret felt by his Bri annie majesty at
the necessity imfo8ed on him Tor such an in
reference with neutral commerce, and wi h
assurances that his majesty would read y
IL