The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1813-02-16

the paper in question, was undoubtedly ex-
tremely exccptionable. But maintain that,
mad 1t made its appearance earlier, it would
not have had the. effect supposed; and the
PROOF lies IN the unequivocal declarations of
the BRUSH government. / will trouble you,
SIR, with going no further back. than to the
letters ot the British Minister, addressed
to the Secretary of State, just before the
expiration of his diplomatic functions. 1t
VIII be recoliectcd by the committee chat
ne exhibited to this government despatch
from Lord Castlereagh, in which the prin-
cipie was distinctly avowed, that to produce
the effect ct d repeal of the orders in coun-
Gil, the French DEGREES must be absolutely
and entirely revoked as to all the world,
ana not as to America alone. A CODY OF
thac despatch was demanded Of him. and
every awkwardly evaded it. But ON the
ioth of June, after the bill declaring war
mad actually passed this House, and was
pending before the Senate (and which I
have no doubt was known to him,) in a let
ter TO Mr.. Monroe, he says: IL have no
hesitatlon, sir, in saying that Great Britain,
as the case has hitherto stood, never did,
nor ever could engage without the greatest
huustice to herself and her allies, as well
as. to other neutral nations, to repeal her
orders as affecting America alone, leaving.
them IN force against other states, upon
condition that France would except singly
ana specially America from the operation
vi her decrees. On the fourteenth OF the
same month. the bill still pen dinr before
the Senate, he repeats Z" | will now saw.
mat feel entirely authorised to assure
you. that if you can at any time produce a
y"H ana unconditional repeal of the French
aecrees' as you have e right to demand it
III your character of a neutral nation and
mat 1t be disengaged frc.n any question
concerning our maritime rights, we shall
De ready to meet you with revoca ton of
the orders in council Previously to YOUR
producing such an instruments which | am
sorry to see you regard as unnecessary, you
cannot expect of us to give up our orders
W council thus. sir, you see that the
British government would not DE content
with repeal Of the French decrees as to
us only. But the French paper in Question.
was such repeal. IL could not, therefore.
satisfy the British government 1t could
hot' therefore, have induced that govern
ment, had it been earlier promulgated, to
repea. the orders III Council. 1t could not.
therefore, have averted the war. The
withholding OF it did not. occasion the war.
and the PRONUNCIATION of it, would not have
prevented the war. But gentlemen have
commended that, in point of fact, i: did pro-
duce repeal OF the orders in council. This
ny hiler II ihaue ltS appearance in
England, it was declared by one of the
British ministry, in parliament, not to be
satisfactory. And all the world knows,
that the repeal of the orders in council, re-
suited from the inquiry, reluctantly acceded
to by the ministry, into the effect upon their
m manufacturing establishments, of our non
importation law, or to the warlke attitude
assumed by this government, or to BOTH
But 1t is said, that the orders in council are
done away, no matter from what cause
and that having been the sole motive for
declaring the war, the relations of peace
','lgnt to be restored. This brings me into
an examination Of the grounds for continu-
ing the war. L. =;
am far from acknowledging, that, had
.he orders in conhci! been repealed, as :hcY
have been, before the war was declared.
the declaration would have been prevented.
In a body so numerous as this is, from which
the declaration emanated, it is impossible
to say with any degree of certainty, what
would have been the effect of such a repeal
Each member must answer for himself /
have no hesitation, then, in saying, that
have always considered the impressment of
American seamen as much the most ser-
Gus aggression. But. sir, how have those
orders al last been repealed9 Great Bri
tain, it is true, has iutimated Willingness
she still arrogates to herself the right to
revive them upon certain contingencies, of
which she constitutes herself the sole Judge
ohe waves the temporary use of the rod,
but she suspends it in terr0rem over our
heads. Supposlng it was conceded to gem
tl.meu that such repeal of the orders in
council, as took place on the 23d of June
last, exceptonable as it is, being known
before the war. wouli have prevented the
war, does it follow that it ought to induce
us to Law down our arms, without the re.
dress Of any other injury Does il follow,
in all cases, that that which would have
prevented TIE war in the first instance,
should terminate the war! BY no means.
II requires GREAT etrmgglk for natihn
prone to peace as this is, 10 burst through
it's habits and encounter the difficulties of
war. Such nation ought but seldom to go
to war. When it does, il should be for clear
and essential rights alone, and it should
hrfHiy resolve to extort, at all hazards,
their recognition. The war of the revoluti-
On is an example OF war began for one
object and prosecuted for another. 1t was
waged, in its commencement, against the
right asserted by the parent country to tax
the colonies. Then no one thought of alb.
solute independence. The idea of indie
pendence was vcpclled. But the British
government would have reIinquished the
principle OF taxation. The founders of our
liberties saw, however, that there was no
security short of independence, and they
achieved our independence. When nations
are engaged in war, tooSe rights in contro-
versy, which are not acknowledged by the
treaty Of peace, are abandoned And who
80 70 eav thaf American NOR,