Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1811-07-11


.aps which kindlcd such fame Through:
the United States and among all our rc'i-
tical parties. In this instance ire biil;,l
government had regularly declared to Mr..
R;np that colonial produce entering cur
norts and paying duties might be safely ex-
ported 'fhis information had been duly
published for the information OF our n:er-
chants, and under the faith OF II they
nroceeded on foreign voyages. no soon
or howeyer, we're they luIled to secari-
ty and gone within the grasp OF British
cruisers and courts, than they became a
nrey to insidious and Retrospective orders
to the amount of many millions.
What in this respect was The British Or
der of the 9TH January, 1907! On the
s1st of December, preceding our neSoci-
ators there were told that some such
measure must take place if the United
States did not oppose the Berlin decree.
Seven days after, out came the ORDER Tor
bidding to our vessels the trade from one
mort Of Europe to another; thus retros-
nectiyely and insidiously, as well as coz
trary to our neutral rights, making prey
of all vessels then out or to goout before
a knowledge of the order could cross the
Atlantic.
Under this proceeding it is well known
that great numbers were seized and sent
into British ports. 1t is true that before
they were to be liable to condemnation
warning under the order was to be Civ
en- but in many cases return ZONE
was equivalent TO total loss, and in all
cases the great though partial loss was
the effect of the retroactive and ensnariDS
measure.
One other instance may be added. In
April, 1901, the British minister, Mir.
Merry, communicated to our government
an instruction from his government to the
naval commanders and courts in the West
Indies, "not to consider any blockade Of
s. those islands as existing, unless in res
q" pect of particular ports which may Be
t" actually invested. and not then to cap
"ture vessels bound to such ports, unless
they shall have been previously warned
IS not to enter them"
On the same day he communicated a
blockade of the island Of Curacao, with
an assurance that "the blockade would
+" be conducted eonformably to the above
{" Instructions" The blockade was not
conducted according to the rule laid down
land every vessel bound to Curracoa:was
captured by British cruisers and condemn
ed by British courts.
Notwithstanding these extensive depre.
dations of Great Britain, aggravated by
the consideration that they were thus re.
Prospective and ensnaring, the arrange.
ment with the British minister Erskine
was made without even bringing them in.
to the negotiation for the repeal Of the or
del's in council, much less making indem-
nifty for them prerequisite, which the
law W ould not in :act have authorised.
In the late arrangement for the repeal
of the French DEGREES, indemnity for tie
retrospective and insidious spoliations in
France was not therefore made condi.
ton !; it was no more than what both law
and impartiality required. In bringing
the subject into the negotiation and pres.
sing it in the manner we have seen it done,
the executive gave the strongest proof OF
zeal and exertion for the rights of the
nation and the interests of the merchants
and to make it a charge that more was
not done, more even than the law iustiii-
ed, is as absurd as tits unjust.
In looking carefully over the extracts Of
the two letters of June and July s. to
gen. Armstrong (Which We should take
n L ~
ry himselfif Mr.. Smith had not been Sc
cretary) We perceive struggle between
an anxiety to extort from the the occasion
an indemnity for past wrongs and secu.
rity against future ones, and a respect for
the law as well as for the rule Of imparti.
atty towards the two belligerents.
Mr.. Smith has not given us the sequel
cfthese two instructions to general Arm
strong. We may suppose therefore. es'
,>ooso1lxy - x,kiDb