Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-11-14

CIT topic, which was still Depending, The
British government had interfered with the
trade between France aud her allies in the
produce of their colonies. The just claim of
the u States was then subject of negociati-
on and'your government processing It's will
]ingness To make satisfactory arrangement
fit, issued the order which allowed the trade.
without making am concession az to the prin-
cipie, reserving that for adjustment by treaty
II was in this light that viewed, and in this
sense that represented that order to my 60
vernmcnt; and in no other did make aay
comment ON il.
When you reflect that this order by allow
Ing the trade OF neutralS, in colonial produc-
tions to all that portion ofthe coast which was
not vigorously blockaded, afforded To the u
States an accommodation in principal
point then ut issue between orr governments,
and of which their citizens extensively avail
ed themselves, that that trade and the ques-
ton of blockade, and every other question i'm
which the United States anf, Great Britain,
were Interested, were then in train of ami
cable negotiation, you will / think, see the
cause why the minister who then represent
ed the United States with the British gov
eminent did not make formal complaint a.
gainst 1t. You have appealed to me, who
happened to be that minister, and urged my
silence IS an evidence of my appreciation of,
or at least acluiescencc in the blockade An
explanation OF the cause of that supposed 81
lence is not less due to myself, than to the true
character of the transaction with the minister
with whom had the honor 20 treat. NAV
add, that an official formal complaint was not
= likely to be resorted to, because friendly COM
hunications were invited and preferred. The
ant OF such document is no proof that the
measure was approvedby me, or that no conf
plant was made. In recalling to my mind
{as this incident naturally does, the manly
character OF that distinguished and ilustri-
Nous statesman, and the confidence with which
ne inspired all those with whom lie had to
.eat, shalt be permitted to express, as
|ght tribute of respect = his memory, the
cry high consideration in which have al
AVS held his great talents and virtues.
The United States have not nor can they
bprove the blockade of ar extensive coast.
othihg certainly can be inferred from any
ling that has passed relative to the blockade
May 1906, to countenauce such an inference.
1t is seen with satisfaction that you still adj
Nit that the application of an adequate force
IS Necessary to give blockade legal cha
racters and that it will lose that character
Whenever that adequate force ceases to be APP
piled. AS 1t cannot be alledged that the ap-
| plication of any such adequate force has been
IOhthiNSNl anu hSNuduY GhiStS III IIle case Oi
4 the blockade of May, 1906, it would seem to
be fair inference that the repeal of the Or
ders in Council will leave no insuperable diff
ficulty with respect to it. To suppose the
the contrary, would be to suppose that the
Orders in Council, said to include that bloc
kade, resting themselves on principle of re-
ta!iation only, and not sustained by the APP
plication OF an adequate force, would have the
effect OF sustaining a blockade admitted TO re-
quire the application of an adequate force,
until such adequate force should actually take
the place ofthe Orders in Council. Whenc-
ever any blockade is instituted, it viii be a
subject for consideration, and if the blockade
be in conformity to the law of nations, there
will be no disposition in this government to
contest ie. gave the honor to be &c.
(Signed) JAS. MONROE.
dug j. Foster, Esq sc. &c. &c,
(7o be Continued