Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1812-01-06

Inc hIse error of American policy was.
mat the United States suffered themselves,
! 10Y moment, TO lose sight of the Original
EcTong, which was the Ruie Of Sc: :, The Sc
como error was, that Key sk2uH hape enfey-
| ca mfo controversy zpish Ire British minis
'7'y concerning the fer'ocutio,, of The Berlin
and Milan DEGREES. The evil of this latter
error mas been, that it has enabled Mr.. Fos-
| 'er 10 give to MS part of the correspoD6ence
an ar OF conviction, that if France has not
reSc!naed her DEGREES Great Britain is justi-
"eo In keeping on her orders in Council But
nothing can be farther from the reason of the
case than this o,fectafion !; because, whether
france has or not rev oked her edcts, Great
| Britain is answerable to the United States for
all the oiltfagcs which she has committed up-
| on .neir commerce from the commandments
OF the operation ut the rule OF SO down TO the
present day, whether pcrpetrated under the
uamc OF that rule, or under other rules do
nominated Bockades or Orders in Council
And what have been the Blockades of Cur
racoa, Martinique, and Guadalupe, but
emanations CT the spirit that dictated the rule
oil SO! To prevent American bottoms from
resorting to those islands for colonial pro-
uuce, squadrons were stationed in their yici-
hh'y ana proclamatlons of Blockade were is
sued, which the British themselves have of
law OF nations. Finding that these biockades
OF the islands were not effectual, and that
| American enterprise surmounted them. the
| RUE OF SO was announced, which authorised
american vessels laden with the produce of
the Colonies OF France or those Of her allies
10 DC selzcd by British ships OF war wherever
| they could be found. This excited universal
clamor III American: republicans, fcCeralists
all united against it; and the British minis
try not wishing to carry the quarrel to the
extent oil war, upon the able circumstances
OF the government of the United States, soft.
ened the severity of the rule by insttutinp
inc blockade OF May 1906. Mr.. Monroe,
when personally appealed to by Mr.. Foster
confirmed this view of the subject in the
most particular manner, and Mr.. Foster
| docs not pretend to contradict him, Here
then' we perceive the o,isieoi zvrons march
| ing on from bloCkades of French and Dutch
| islands, to the expanded Ruls of Sc, and then
to the Blockade ofMay 1906: One step more
brings 1t to the orders in council and, here.
likewise, Mr. Foster will not permit us to be
mistaken. ut is most material (says he) that.
on This iioint, no mistake should exist between
US :" and beavers (see Mr. F's letter Of July
so that the blockade of May 1906 is now
included in the more extensive operation of
the orders in council.'' Thus the connection
rs complete, from the period of commence
ment OF the original zvrong, up to the present
time, between all the anti-neutral acts of G.
Britain, which in themselves, zoithouf anu re-
ference zyhateper TO French violations OF lazy,
form such a mass of outrages as to justify on
our part, without taking into consideration
the question of the revocation of Napoleon's
edicts, formal declaration of war by the
United States, and the pursuit of it to the last
extremity.
~, Dnco,;,,,.y H..