The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1813-03-09

OF the suggestions brought forward by th,
co"i",s>i, ners ON the part OF America, the,
were un"b!c to suItaount
! Sihist this proposition, transmitted
thtomgh the British Admiral, WAS pending
IN A;ncrica, another Communication ON the
SUBJECT ri 'nerm'S,ice was inoiiicially made
10 the Brush government in th;s country
The agent, from whom this pvooosition
| was received, acknowledged thai he did
Aot consider, that he lad any arthnrity
himself, to sign an asrce roept OK the part
iotE!s government. IL was obvious that any
lstpulat'ons entered into, in consequence 81
tins overture, would have been binding on
inc BRITISH government, whilst the govern
mentof the u. States would have been free
20 reinse or accept them according to the
c rcumsta,;ces OF the moments This propo-
sitlon was therefore necessarily declined.
Alter this exposition of the circumstances
Which preceded, and which. have followed
the decia' alton of war by the u ,Statce,
his Royal highness the Pri,ice Regent, act
iag IN the name and on the behalf OF his Ma
lJesty' feels himself called upon to declS e
the leading principles. bv which the con-
duct OF G. Britain Irad been regulated in
the transactions connected with these dis
| cussions.
His Royal Highness can never acknowl
edge any blockade whatsoever to be lille
gal, which has been duly notified and is sup
parted by an adequate force, merely upon
ttLe ground of its extent, OF because the
ports or coasts blockaded are not at the
same time invested by land. His Row
al 1ighness can never admit, that neutral
trade with G.. Britain can be constituted a
public crime, the commission of which can
expose the ships of any power whatever to
be denationalzed. His Royal Hiehness
can never admit that G.. Britain can be de-
barred ct its rights of just and necessary
retaliation, through the fear of eventually
affecting the interest Of 4 neutral. His Roy
al Hlshness can never admit that in the
exercise of the andoubted and hitherto un-
disputed right or searching neutral mer-
chant vessels in time of war, the impress
ment of British seamen, when found there
IN, can'be deemed any violation Of neu
tral Tag. Neither can he admit the taking
fsuch seamen from on board such vessels,
can be considered by any neutral states as
hostile measure, or a justitiabe cause Of
war.
There IS no right more Clearly establish
ed, than the right which a sovereign has to
the allegiance of his subjects, more especi-
ally in time of war. Their allegiance is no
optional duty, which they can decline, and
resume at pleasure 1t is call which they
are bound to obey t began with their birth,
and can only terminate with their existence
If a similarity of language and manners
rnSy make the exercise nf this right moro
liable to partial mistakes and occasional
abuse. when practiscd towards vessels of
the u S.--the same circumstances make it
also right, with the exercise of which,
IN regard TO such vessels, it is more diff
cult to dispense. But if, TO the practice of
the u. s. to harbor British sramen, be add
ed their assumed right to transfer the allie
giance of British subjects, and thus to can
eel the jurisdiction of their legitimate SOW
eign, by acts of naturalization and certi6-
Gates OF citizenship, which they pretend to
he as valid out of their own territory, as
within it, it is obvious that to abandon this
ancient right of G.. Britain, and to admit
these novel pretensions of the u. S. wonld
be to expose to danger the very foundation
OF our maritime strength.
! Without entering infinitely into the o. her
topics, which have been brought forw ard by
the government of the II. ). it may be
proper to remark, that whatever the de-
claration OF the u. States may have assert
! ed, q. Britain never did demand, that they
thould force British manufactures into
France; and she formally declared her
Willingness entirely to forego, or modify in
concert with the u States the system, by
which commercial intercourse with the
enemy had been allowed under the protec.
ton OF licences provided the ". States
with real impartiality. The government of
America, ii the differences between states
are not interminable, has as little right to
notice the affair of the Chesapeake The
aggression, in this instance, on he part OF a
British officer, was acknowledged, his con-
duct was disapproved, and q repara ion was
regularly rendered by Mr.. Foster on the
part OF his majesty, and accepted by the
government ut the y. States. 1t is not less
unwaFranted in its alusion to the mission
OF MIR. Henry ; mission undertaken with.
OFT the authority, or even knowledge, Of his
majesty government, and which ME-. Eos
ter was authorized formally and officially
~ uisnvUw. inc Charge vi exciting the
lndan' tn offensive measures against
the United States is equally void of founda-
ton. Before the war began, a policy the
most opposite had been uniformly pursued,
and proof OF this was rendered by Mr. Eos
ter to the American government. Such are
the causes of war which have been put for |
ward by the government oF the u. States.
But the real origin of the present contest
will be Found in that spirit, which has long
nuhappily actuated the councils Of the Il |
States their marked partially, in paliating
and assisting the aggressive Tyranny tt
France their systematic endeavors to in
Il Tine their people against the defensive mea-
sures OF G.. B.--their unEe erous conduct t, =
wards Spain, the intimate ally Of g. B-SL
their unworthy deser;ion Of the carse ofoth.
er neutral nations. It's through the prevs
lcnce Of such councils that America has