The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-11-15

tore us. 1t is no wonder that Mr.. Foster is so
sadly put to it to frame excuses for such con-
duct vet feeble as they are, they will be
grasped at with avidity. There is party
among US, who will make every effort to re-
present the conduct of France as 10 better
than that OF G. Britain. They will of course
eagerly seize upoh AL the false facts and
sophistical arguments, used by MIR. Foster,
to prove that the Decrees Of France ere ROT
rSvoted-It is, therefore, important to re-
view his letters, and probe his arguments to
the lotion. Where the public n.ind is in doubt,
the public Counc!ls must partake of the con-
tag,an. ~. ttAte.4
Mr.. Foster sets up these two pleas:
1st. That the DEGREES arc not revoked O..
all. And
Cd. That even IS :hcy were revoked in
some points, they arc not IN all, s. that
G. Z. will rot so consider them, until her
manufactures are in some share or o.
ther, permitted to be introduced into
certain ports cf tho continent.
Until she has been satisfied in both these
respects, VIC ere told that VIC NAV look in
vain for the repeal Of her Orders in Conn
Gil
This discussion, therefore, will Sivide Itself
into two parts--the LIST, the revocation Of the
French DEGREES, and I'd, the claims Of &.
i,ritain to introduce her Manufacturers into
,thc Continent.
Revocation efhr French deerees.
We must revise both the Declarations Sx
the .fcfs of the French Government. If in
their Declarations, they have soler;nly avow-
eli resolution to respect the rights of
America, and il their acts, so far rs they are
known or explained to MS, do in fact CORE
spond w!th their promises, the questionis at
an end.
First, then as to the Decdrations--th
most material witness that we can produce,
is man high i'll the confidence Of France
Gall Mr.. Champaghy into Court:
Who are you, sirt
am Champagny, Due dc Galore.
What Office have you, sir, held under the
French Government
In 1910, was Minister of Foreign Relati-
ons for the Government of France.
Doyou know any thing of promise, made
by your Government to revoke its De-
crees ?
Twas the organ of that promise. I was
authorised TO declare to the American
Midlstei' at Par:s,S SC on the 5th August, 1910,
dd declare it in Consequence OF my
commission, in these words, that the de-
crees OF Berlin and Milan are revoked, and
tnat, after the First OF November, they will
cease to have effect it bdng understood
that IN consequence of this declaration, the
English snail revoke their orders in council,
and renounce the new principles of blockade
winch they have wished to establish Or,
that the United States, conformably to the
act you have just communicated. shall
cause their rights to be respected by the
English"
And mark, this is Declaration not made.
as in the case of Mr.. Erskine, far from his
own Court, and therefore liable to be disa-
v'wed uuder the Plea CT a misunderstanding
but made under the very eye Of his master.
drawn from his ownlips and perhaps traced
by his own pen, & therefore impossible to be
set aside on the ground Of a mistake in his
minister.
How then does Mr. Foster ATTEMPT to in
validate this promise Why, that it is no
promise at ALLIE boldly asserts, in several
parts of his correspondence, that it is an
" ambiguous declaration - that there is &c a
studied ambiguity in this note" and in mis-
letter OF July Goth, he says that &C the u. S.
have considerable as an absolute repeal of her
DEGREES without adverting to the ccaditio7aaL
terms which accompanied it,
is 1T thus ambiguous? Admit that it
is couched Ill conditional terms vet what
are those conditions either that G. Britain
shall revoke her .. in Council so far as they
violate the maritime rights of the u. States
or that, in case she does not, the u. States
shall revive towards her, certain sections
OF their intercourse law, conformably to
an act of Congress of May, 1910 Now, it is
enough that either of these terms were COM
pied with (; yet one of them was completely
within ourown power. Nav more this was
the very proposition which we had ourselves
Just made to France. SO, that in truth, this
declaration OF France was only an acceD-
lance OF the proposition which we had our
selves made. The u. S. had, therefore, on
ly to revive the sections of their own law.
and France was at once bound by her own
declaration AS soon as the President exercised
the powers vested in himself the engagement
ceased to be conditional, but thenceforth be-
came absolute and conclusive 1t was as
much SO, as the engagement Of Mr. Erskine
would have been, if it had been made in con-
fornity with'fh terms of Mr. Canning.
MI roster, however, may say, and indeed
nc mas more than insinuated, that this de-
ciaration is not to be trusted
But ii we had distrustcd it, it must have
oeen because the French government itself
was unworthy cf trust.
But II this doctrine were admitted what a
tram OF consequences would spring upon us
Lett once be rule that nofaith is to be 1)nt
In the promises ofFrance, Show emsarrass-
! ing would be the situation of G.. Britain her
| sell. Foe as he Is to France, even she has
an interest i'll her good faith THOUGH she
is at war with her, yet there are variety
OF cases III which she herself must rcposc
confidence in the faith OF France.
II she does not, how can she settle Car
Il