The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1813-05-07

'nat am without the power of affordine
any portion OF assistance to the poor suffer
| ing wretches in the manufacturing districts
10 return now to the debate Lord Cas-
tiereagh talks Of concession made TO Anne
herica IN the repeal Of the Orders i'm Coun-
Gil. have often shewn that there was,
| according to the settled laws and usages
oi nations, no con ceSSion at all. Nay, there
was according to our own doctrine accar.
cling to own part OF the CORE spondence,
no concession made 10 America. The
thing Is shown as clear as day light, in
two words.
We all along avowed. that, III Themselves
considered, our Orders in Council were a
violation of the neutral rights ofAmerica /;
but, We asserted, that they were justified
oy the violation of those same Nights COM
united by Napoleon; & we declared that
we would cease our violation the moment
France ceased hers. France did cease ;
we had, according to our own declarati-
on, proof that France had ceased before we
| made the repeal, We then ceased; but,
put IL to the common sense of the re ader,
whether this cessation ought to be called a
ONCESSlON.-Thus, according to our
own doctrine; according to our own diplo-
matte correspondence according to our own
more solemn acts, the Orders themselves &
the Declaration of repeal, according to all
America. Why, then, talk about concession
1t may have an effect here but assured
", IL VIII have none in America, where the
government Ia government chosen by and
resting upon the free and unbought voice
oi the people, have constantly protested a
gainst our Orders in Council as an open &
gross violation of the known and acknow-
lodged rights OF America, and as receiving
not shadow of justification from the vio-
lent and unjust conduct of France. To talk,
therefore, OF concessions, seems to me to be
something intoierabie ; but to expect, that
he people OF America would, after the So
lemn declaration of Congressto the contrary;
TO expect that they would disarm upon our
ceasing To violate one OF their rights, while
still more grave subject of complaint exc
listed; to entertain such an expectation as
this, appears unaccountable upon any sup
position than that of our ministers * mem
bers of parliament being wholly deficient
in knowledge relative to the opinions and
feelings OF The American people, and the
means OF the American government. Be-
sides, there was another consideration con-
nected with the repeal of the Orders in
Council and that was, that, by the repeal
we merely announced our intention to cease
10 violate a right. We said nothing about
com enSatton tor the past This was very
material; for 1t was Impossible that it
should be overlooked by the American go
vernment, without an abandonment of all
the principles upon which it had resisted
the Orders in Council. also pointed
this out at the time, for which was treat
ed as a fool and friend of France by a
Scotch newspaper. The manufacturers of
Paisley, will, by this time, have discos cred,
that was a better friend of England than
their impudent countrymen, and | foresaw
an obstacle to peace which had escaped
the eyes OF both the parties in parliament
--for, Lord Castereagh now tells US, that
such compensation was demanded as pre-
liminary to a cessation of hostiiities. "The
Orders in Council, he said, were inozv
wholly out OF the question, by the overture
for an armistice on both sides but even OH
the ground of the repeal of the Orders il.
Council, the American Government had
pressed the matter so far, and in such a
temper, as to admit of no amicable ar
rangement. Mr.. Russell had put in claims
to have indemnity for all CAPTURES made By
our cTnizers under The Orders IN Council
| since 1906. He did not say that this might
not have been given nh, but, as the questi-
on stood, it evidently appeared that Ameri-
ca had shewn no disposition to be satisfied
with the ./orbedrance of this country."-
Well, if this might haze been given IN on
our side, why not give up it at Ersf, and see
Wiat ~ WOu'u uO' IlOWGNcT, lHG WAC
made, we see, & / said it would be made.
The American Government could not
| avoid making it, without exposing itself
to the detestation of the people, as
base abandoncr of their rights rights so
long ccptended for, and sought to be redress
sed by means of so many and such large
sacrifices. Now our ministers and Mr.
Ponsonby and Mr.. Brougham ought to have
foreseen til at this demand would be madeI
In not foresceing it they Showed want of
knowledge upon the subject, and also
want of knowledge as to the circumstan-
ces in which America stood with regard to
France, from whom she was, and still is
demanding indemnity upon exactly the
same principle that she makes the de-
mand on us. sThe reader cannot be too
often reminded OF the origin and nature OF
the Orders i'll Council. They arose as we
alledge out of the French DEGREES of Berlin
and Milan, the two places ut witch the
| Emperor was when he signed them.--
| These DEGREES violated neutral rights on
the seas but, it was declared in the pre-
ambles to then, that this violation was
rendered necessary by certain Orders in
Council Of England which enforced grea-
ter violation of neutral rights. We upon
the appearance Of these DEGREES, issued
other Orders in Council, enforcing other
violations of neutral rights. Both parties
we're complained OF by America Both
parties call their measures retciiaforu.
I Both parties aAo7Ocd that their measures
Utotafed NEUTRAL rights. Both parties said
a =