Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1812-01-18
LETTERS.
(copy.)
MR. FosTER ~ MR.. MONROE.
Washington, Dec. l7th, 1911.

7 did not mean to have written 10 you
this moment on the subject OF our late Cor
respondence, but that have had the mo!tlfl
cation to perceive statements, circulated iron
highly respectable sources, which give view
of the pretensions of Great Britain relative t
the United States, not warranted by any OF tn
letters which had the honor to address t
YOU and which, at tune when discussion
are continuing so important to the two coan
tiles. might if left unrectified, produce an ei
feet highly to be Iamented by both the Ame
rican and British governments, inasmuch
by creating unnecessary irritation, they NIGH
throw obstacles In the way OF restoration 0
a friendly understanding between them
find il asserted in the statement referred
70, that have, in the name OF my government
demanded that the United States government
should pass a law for the Introduction OF Brl
fish goods into the American ports, and alst
that the United States should undertake t.
force France to receive into her harbors Bri
: fish manufactures
beg permission, sir, to declare. that mel
Their of these demands have been made by nlt
and that nv meaning must not have been un
derstood, if such was conceived to have beer
its import. | could not have demanded thu
passage of such law as above stated, because
my government does not pretend to lnterter'
with the internal government OF trlendl.
power, nor did mean TO demand that Anne
RIGA should force France to receive our mar
ufactures.
M All meant to say was, that the admission
of French commerce, while that of England
has been excluded from the United States
ports, was regarded by Great Britain as high
" unfriendly in America, and that a continual
ton of such policy, would be retaliated upor
by Great Britain with similar restrictions or
her part, which was so for merely an offering
oflike for like But while the American non
importation act excludes British trade from
the United States ports, it must be recollect
ed that it goes still further. and excludes alsu
British armed ships from American ports
while it admits those of the enemies of Great
Britain. " A neutral nation is responsible for
the equality of its rules of conduct towards
the belligerent powers" Ito use the words Of
an American secretary OF state IN the year
lYa6 ) and therefore the part of the law which
establishes an inequality, was justly an object
of moro serious complaint on the part OF u
Britain. You are aware sir, of the advantage
which his maiesty's enemies have derived
from this state of inequality, which enables
them, though possessing no port In this he
misphere, continually to prey on the trade OF
his maiesty's subjects, secure OF refuge tor
their cruisers and their prizes.
The prohibition OF entry to his majesty s
ships, under these circumstances, might per-
haps Justify Great Britain in asserting that
whatever reason she may have for repeating
or modifying her orders in council, so as to
lessen or entirely remove the pressure now
unavoidably laid ON the trade of America as a
neutral nation, she might yet refuse to enter
into any discussion on that subject with the
United States, until, either by the revocation
Of the prohibition above stated, or the placing
all the belligerents under the same prohibition
America should cease TO violate the duties OF
neutral nation.
With respcct, however, to the supposed
demand that America should force the entry
of British manufactures into France, it is mosl
particularly necessary that I should explain
myself: as total misconception appears to
have taken place uponthis point. The ques-
ton of retaliation on the French DEGREES, is
directly o,;e between England and France
In consequence of the extraordinary blockade
of England, we have In our defence been OBJ
iiged to blockade France, ard prohibit all
trade IN French articles. in return for the pro-
.hibit;on by France OF all trade in English ar
ticles: This measure oil retaliation it is wish
ed, should operate on France alone but from
the trade carried Oh with France by America,
# unavoilahly operates also on her: IL is a
measure to destroy the French trade, in re-
turn for the similar measure of France, on
watch it is regulatory and its acting on neu-
trails, is all incidental effect of it, consequent
upon the submission ofneutrals to the origin
a inensu IS of-the enemy against Great Bril-
1sip. Its indeed melancholy, that the unna
RS is,;''ation of Europe should produce such