The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1812-06-23

the British government, DECLARING, as tNe
true definition If Il legal blockade "tnat par
tcular ports must be actually invested, and
previous warning given TO vessels bound to
them, not to enter"
Not content with these occasional expc-
dients for laying waste our neutral trade,
the Cabinet of Great Britain resortcd, at
length, to the sweeping system of blockades,
under the name of Orders in Council, which
has been moulded fand managed, as might
best suit its political views, its commercial
jealousics, or the avidity OF British cruisers.
| To our remonstranCes against the compli-
Gated and transccndant injustice of this in
novation, the first reply was that the orders
were reluctantly adopted by Great Britain
as q necessary retaliation Oh DEGREES Of her
enemy proclaiming general blockade of
the British isles, at 4 time when the naval
force OF that enemy dared not to issue from
his own ports. She was reminded, with
out effect, that her own prior blcckades, un-
supported by an adequate naval force actu-
| ally applied and continued, were bar to
this plea that executed edicts against mill
lions of bur property could not be retaliation
on edicts, confessedly impossible to be exc
I cuted: that retaliation, to be just, should
fall OH the party setting the guilty example.
not on an innocent party, which was not e.
ven chargeable with an acquiescerce in 1T.
| When deprived of this Rimsy veil for a
prohibition of our trade with her enemy, by
the repeal of his prohibition of our trade
with Great Britain. her cabinet instead of
a corresponding repeal or a practical dis
continuance OF its orders. formally avowed a
determination 20 persist iii them against the
q! u. s., until the markets of her enemy should
be laid open to British products thus assert
ing an obligation Oh neutral power to re-
|quire one belligerent to encourage, by its
internal regulations, the trade Of ano-
Their belligerent ; contradicting her own
lpractice towards all nations in peace as
well as in war; and betrayng the insin-
Certify of those professions which inculcated
a belief that having resorted to her orders
with regret, she was anxious to find an &C
) casion tor putting an end to them.
Abandoning still more all respect for the
neutral rights of the United States, and for
: its own consistency, the British government
now demands as prerequisites to u repeal
OF its orders, as they relate to the United
States, that informalty should be observed
i'll the repeal of the French DEGREES no wise
necessary TO their termination, nor exempl-
ned by British usage; and that the French
d repeal besides including that portion of the
: DEGREES which operates within 4 territorial
jurisdiction as we'll as that which operates
oil the high seas against the commerce o:
the United States, should not be a single
: special repeal in relation to the u. States,
but should be extended to whatever other
= be affected by those DEGREES. And as ar
II additional insult, they are called on for a
formal disavowal of conditions and preten-
II sions advanced by the French government
for which the United States are so far from
: having made themselves responsible. that
l. IN Official explanations, which have been
% published to the world, and in a correspon
l. dence of the American minister at Londor
with the British Minst er for Foreign A fairs
J. such a responsibility was explicitly and en-
8 phatically disclaimeS.
i 1t has become indeed sufficiently certain
II that the commerce of the United States i:
1t to be sacrificed, not interfering with the
N belhgerent rights of Great Britain, not a
er supplying the wants of her enemies, which
rs she herself supplies but as interfering will
m the monopoly which she covets for her owl
l. commerce and navigation. She carries O
s. war against the lawful commerce of
n friend, that she may the better carry on
II commerce with an enemy, commerce pol
Of luted by the forgeries and PERFUMES whicl
n, are for the most part the only passports b.
= which it can succeed:
II ANXIOUS to make every experiment shor
e of the last resort OF injured nations, the Uni
l. ted States have withheld from Great Bri
i tain. under succe, ssive notifications, the be
d nefits of free intel course with their mar
s ket, the loss of which could not but outweigl
:. the profits accruing from Ter restrictions @
d our commerce with other naliohs. ana
't entitle these experiments to the more iavoT
o able consideration, they were so franco d
to enable her to place her adversary C'hae
: the exclusive operation OF them. To the
e appeals her government has been equal,
81 mfeXible, as if willing to make sacrifices o.
u every sort, rather than yield to the claims
c OF justice or rcnounCe the errors of false
: pride. Nay, so far were the attempts car.
d ried to overcome the attachment of the Bri-
< fish Cabinet to its unjust ediots, that it re-
= ceived every encouragement, within the
d competency ofthe Executive branch of our
: government, to expect that repeal of them
: would be followed by war between the u
c nited States and France, unless the French
edcts should also be repealed Even this
t communication, although silencing for ever
the plea of disposition in the United States
n to acquiesce in those edicts, originally the
y sole plea for them, received 40 attention.
! If no other proof existed of predeter-
d miDation of the British government against
: a repeal of its orders, it might be found il
y the correspondence of the Minister Plenipo-
Tertiary of the United States at London, and
c the British Secretary for Foreign Affairs
> in 1910, on the question whether the block
= ade of May 1906 was considered as in force
or as not in force. 1t had been ascertained
: that the French government, which urged
c this blockade as the ground Of its Berlin de-
IS cree, was willing, i'm the event of it's rerno-