The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1813-09-07

IL ociscs himself an tna most un5oMrdeG corr
plants.
Thanks to the. Federal Republican for
the document which be has produced -.
The poor willing has truly gwen us a stict
to beat his own mead
All persons ipnst fhen agree tha. ND to
the Gaze OF this documeni. the l4,h lire.
lSU9, the idea of a French Influence is a
mere chimera--but it has been contend.
ed, go.
ia the Cd place. shat il began from the
GATE OF this production that il spraop FROM
TINS remembrance for that every thing
Gen. 1 complained Of cur. not Going. has
subsequently, been done. And so inoudeut
are the saccusers in the use OF this argument.
That one of them declares the claim. oil the
heirs OF Bcaur arChsis N0S kcen satisfied -
Let cs see. what has been done which
urreau wishes to BE dope.--Have we &C
ceeded TO the maritime confederation Nc.
Have we punished the assai!arts of Moues-
! sat mo. Have we made god the loss NJ the
! lnpetueuX No. Have e satisfied he
claims ot,Bcaur,archas? No. Have we -.
pressed medita'ed attack on the s,paniards
The contrary lis now charged Have we
continued the S. Domingo law No Have
we passed any laws against the {. seduc,ion''
! OF Ficnchmen No. Have we put reins =,
the liberty Of the press The cclurnps of
Messrs. Wagner * CO supply the answer.
And tho we resist tie impressment Of cur
citiIens, OK oar 97on occoAn,t. vet we have
also enacted law which will secure to C..
d. 'he use OF her own stG.nen; by which
She will gain more than she will ,ose--S,
tar. then, there is no French influences.
But the Cd aspect, under which re Re.
oeraists view this letter, is the reception
that 1t met with. The writer was nct dis
misFeo, nor was any r"Guost made TO rec eli
MN. And therefore, he was under The Dro
lection Of Frcrsh Influence
Let US see however, upon what ground n,
should have been treated IN this manner
In what light are we 10 rcgari ;his letter
ourely not as an Q5tciot paper. Il never
was put on !1le IN the department cf St,te
1t was from tae pen of a fore ion minister
to the Secretary of state, in h7irqkc va.
Let us examine this letter. ana see if it he
NOT at this description. 1T was sufTicieotlv
painful % me to address you an the com
p'a,nts OF France against the United States
without laying them open 10 you IN an cgFc;oL
note'--ln PLAN words. it is painful encueh
20 complain 10 you IN this style. without ma
KING that style othcial'-And therefore I
nave thought that Simtte letter. the tone of
which would approach nearer to that of c,,-
conferences, would produce the same effect
as u IL gpere oHcioi J with v,y S;r
whose liberal principles and loyal cIiarsc.
ter are known tome"
Again have thought that oorIl
even on subject SO serious and without Ge-
WAITING from, or With proprieiy. adopt
nl0@F q COMMUNICATION more analogous to
the conformity of Our views."--TG;s dc.
tnctiy proves that it was not meant for an
?DietGt paper addressed to the government,
Tut private note to the Sec. Of Sta,e. Jts
object was to tell Mr.. Smith " SIR voIr
toyai mind and my own are in harr.cn on
rench subjects; and beg you to use your
harmonise with both of us
Yet this letter, tho it was not considered
as official. "was considered 81 ex,ep,;o,,.-
bic Gas M. Graham irtarns US hat Cen.
J was comheHed TO -yifh0row il or s,bjlrt
h;mSrJ 10 c9''S"qmencrs morc unhlrasQnl.''
II ne had persisted ~ this imCGfciat cnrres-
pondence, rs MIR Jackson did IN his = e;c;,,
ne too would have been dismissed in dis.
srsce. Such tiren is the charge Of FRENCH
influence