Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1813-04-05

IKE stores, &c are found on board an Ame-
rican vessel, she IS detained and carried into
port. tor adjudication by competent courr.
whether the adjudication be always i'm
partial or not is another affair, but in this res
pect nations are on an equal footing, and
these Admiralty Courts, well or ill conduct
Ell, are recognized by all maritime nations.
hut with respect tn the impressment of sea-
men, the act is violent because summary,
and because it is subject 20 no revisal-to
no adJudication-and because the individual
seized has no means OF redress. BY this
sort OF reasoning there is a tacit admission
on tue part of America, that it is not to the
act itself which they object so much as to
the manner OF the act; and accordingly we
see various suggestions made by Americans,
for entering into an amicable discussion on
the means of getting over the outrageous
way in which the right is exercised, and of
giving security to both nations against the
abuse inquestion. On the other side, Lord
Castlereagh declares the readiness of the
British government to receive aud discuss
any proposition on this subject coming from
the American government tho he would
not enter into negotiation, a preliminary
to which should be the concession of tvs
right, and SO far we think he was clearly
ITO ~ hut iubnStTOuS TWO DeO-
pie of common origin, and of almost insepa-
rablc interests, should remain at war on
point upon which there is so little difference
between them! Surely, without any sacri
tcc OF etiquette on either side, the expedients
might be canvassed, By which this mighty
cause OF war might be removed. Let each
party promulgatc their thoughts OH the SUBJ
Ject, and ii their be an honest disposition to
peace, it must follow. The agreement
ought to;be so drawn to make it most dan
gerous to the Captain of an American ship
to employ British seaman on board and
OH the other Side, to make it equally. dan
gerous for 4 British Captain to seize and
carry oil an American seaman, under a pre :,
text of his being Bsitish subject Or i'll
other words, it ought to be made their inte-
rest to abstain from those two causes of ma
tional offence. Various modes have been
suggested for this purpose. The most eff
tectual undoubtedly would be to ordain by
treaty, that the subjects of each power,
II found ON board the merchants, vessels of
tbs other, should be considered in the ma
fnre Of contrd6and Of syar, inasmuch as
their natural Sovereign was thereby depri-
we'd of their service in war, and tina, that
should be cause to detain the vessel for
adjudication. BY this the American Can
tam or his owners would most seriously suf-
Ter by having British seamen on board
and, on the other hand the British Captain
would equally suffer. if he had all the risk
and loss to incur of an improper detention.
Against thus, however, the arguments are
strong. The American Captain NAV have
been imposed upon by similarity of language.
&c! and when brought into one of our.
ports, where there is competent court to
adjudge the point, real American seaman
might lind it impossible to adduce proofs of
his nativity. Besides i'm both eyentstbe
penalty would be inordinate. Another sn,r.
gestion has been made, that the British naval
ofhcer imPressing seaman on board AN
American vessel and rice Versa. should he
bound to make a certificate in duplicate Tor
what the French call hroccs uerbQl, to the
tact, one copy of which he should deliver TO
the American Captain, and transmit the
other to the Admiralty to be fled and that
the seaman seized should have his action for
damages in the Courts of Law, the certifi-
cate to be produced by the Admiralty as
proof ct the tresPass, ifthe person canprove
himself to be native of the country thar
he pretended to be. We confess we think
that this ought TO satisfy both governments.
for this would make officers cautious in en-,
ercising the right which at the same time
cannot pc safely surrendered" This is Door
paltry trash. But, it contains QUE assertion
which | declare TO be false.
1t is here asserted, that "the right of
impressment of seamen on board of trading
ships, is right which has, at all times been
asserted, and acquiesced i'm by sove reign
states respectively" l give this an un-
qualified denial. / say, that is RIGHT.
which no nation ever acquiesced in. Let
the Morning Chronicle name the nation that
has ever done either let him Cite an instance
OF such practice as we insist upon: let
him name the writer, every English wri-
ter, on public law, who has made even an
attempt to maintain such doctrine nav.
let him name the writer, who has laid
down any principle, or maxim, from
which such right can possibly be deduced.
And, II he can do none Of these, what assn
rance, what desperate devotion to faction
must 1t be to enable man to make such
AN assertion The assertion of the g value
OF the cause being slight to America, in
comparison to what il is to us, has no bet
ter foundation. The value what is of value.
what is of any value at all, il the liberty and
lives of the people of America are of no va
lue! And, when we know, when no man
will deny, when official records of the fact
exist, that hundreds of native Americans
nave been impressed and sent to serve ON
board our ships of war: when this is notori-
Gus; when 1T neither will nor can be deni-
ed, what is of value to America, if this cause
be not of values AS to the proposition-ofI
making English seamen contraband of
war, it is so impudent, it is SO shameful.
Il Is even so horrid, that will do no more
than just name it, that it may not escape
the readers indignation. Indeed, there
needs no more than the reading Of this one
article to convince the Americans, that all
the factions in England are, in effect. of one
mind upon the subject of this war and l
am afraid, that this conviction will nrndnce