Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1813-04-22

| Se'eht 20 the Eurupean ports of that belii-
serent- Now theeblockade IF May, 1906.
rounds no interdct on the origin of the p,o-
duce or Commodity conveyed but inserdicts
an entrance into the ports of a great line of
coast winch It was physically impossible &C
tuaiiy to blockade. Indeed this order Of
blockade did ertend the principle Of the
rule OF SO BY forbiddng intercourse in ncu-
trail vessels from one OF their ports OF d bel
| lscrent, or ports dependent on him, to an
other OF these ports. In short this innocent
ana even benehcient order, as gentlemen
WIN nave IT. embraces the substance of all
the subsequent orders IN council.
! Gentlemen have revived the old argu-
ment which originated with them and y iii
end with them, that the French DEGREES
were not observation-disclosures of the informa-
hty OF the instrument--the letter of the
Duke OF Ladoie of the 5th August 1910.
One gentleman (Mr. Blceckcr) has said
that TINS government was tricked BY France
into war with 6. Britain, and the evil
dence OF this trick is the subseouent formal
act OF repeal. Now, the first act was eli
ther repeal or it w3s nor, and, If a rcpeal.
tue subsequent act OF France, though ii were
repugnant, could not change the character
OF the hrst act. But it is not rcpugnant. 1t
is confirmatory and recognises the first a,
a repcal.-And so it has been considered by
" Britain who never objected,nl the infor-
Inaiity OF the first act. i. was LETT to the
ingenuity OF gentlemen ON the other side of
the house to furnish this sapient objection.
and that they might not be endured in the right
OF authorship. they have been left to the
exclusive enjoyment of it-G. Britain has
never repubishcd tit is to be found in
iohe Oh tAe volnninious correspondence of
her minister's Her objections were not want
Oh form III the act, but /. That the re roca
ton was conditional and depended ON the
resistance of the L. S to certain PRINCIPLES
Oh blockade. That it was partial, and
appncd not to all neutrals, but to Amcri
ca alone. Now mark her ccnsi,tency. She
mas revoked the order in council, and tina,
act OF the French govsrnment which she has
made the pretext for his revocation, is a
liee Conditional and alike partial. Ii states
the resistance of the U. ). as the ground IF
revocation and il confines the revocation 20
America.-G. b. has then deserted tn Ken
tlemen on the other side of the House, and
has herself admitted, in effect and in prac-
tlce the suthciency of that revoca alton which
the honorable gentlemen say was no revo-
cation. The act of the government was
then strictly proper INC aecrees of France
were repealed. But gentlemen, for want of
better argument, dwell on the perhdy of
France to this Country and the gene raj afro
city of the conduct other ruler WHO'S the
apolosist of France : Is any man on this side
OF the house mo, sir. For my own part, |
hope that the unjust actsgof France may lie
resented and that We maybe enab ed To pun
ish her for her perhdy and injustice.-With-
out using the violent, / was about to say
gross epithets which have become fashiona-
bile, declare / abkor and detest as much
as gentlemen OH the other side of the House,
the conduct of France. wish Spain TO be
emancipated from her yoke. l shall re-
| iOica in he IS
save the independence of Russia. This
hope is the language of all parties. All u
mite, believe, in their abhorrencs of the !
conduct and character ofthe man who sways 1
the destiny OF France. Why then is it said
when we have the will and want but the
power and opportunityto resist him, that we.
have indulged partiality for France q
b. has been properly selected as the first
object OF our hostility. When proposition
was made to include France as well as G..
Britain in the declaration Of war, Eenee-
men neither side of the house did support
it. The opposition prints throughout the
Union laughed tito scorn. Few men tho't
OF resisting both at once. The voice of both
parties appeared 10 bc>againtt it. The go
yernment, obliged to resist, was obliged to
select lis enemy. Should France have been
selected With the blood of our citizens IN
sultiugly slaugh tercd without the slightest
pVONOCatlOn Oh the SHORES OF our own terri
tory unatoned for till the moment of the dc
ciaraton of war, with the habitual impress
ment Of our Seamen in every cline, it'll
the continual aud reiterated violation of
our right To seek where we choose mar
ket for our produce, all before your eyes,
and with no hope of dscontinuance Of
these injuries. we are told that we ought to
have diverted our ehmity from G. b. and
directed it against France. Where, sir, could
we attack France Where are her colonies
into which we could carry our armsl Where
could We subjugate her provinces Where
are her ships ?-Where her commerce
| Where could we have carried on against
her any OF the operations of war Would
| tho chiyalry of gentlemen on the other side
| at the house have suggested an invasion Of
| France An hon. gentleman from N. Y
| (Mr. Cold said 1t would not have required
another man nor another ship, 70 have re
sisted France. But why, pray you Be
| cause such a resistance would have been
| confined to the idle and nUgatory act of de
| claring il, EEectual resistance would have
| been impracticable. Gentlemen would re
| sst France, would declare war against
! France merely to shew their indignation at
her perfdy and injustice, and here / con-
fess my feelings go with the Septlemau-I
would do so too, had we no other enemy to
| contend with. But if we had abapdoficd or
! deferred our Resistance to the ii,iuries OF
bngland and as pretext for IL a s ,Aied
France, wouldnOt the act have seen idle
and weak WoulGi il not have teen wicked