Alexandria gazette, commercial and political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1812-1817, 1813-05-17
from tie Losdaa Fines IT May -.

Among other important and curious
,;cles with which We are furnisnsd y
the present papers, one of the most pro
minent, which we have, therefore, OK
trscted a, length, is the Report OF the
COMMITTEES Of Foreign Relations, miro
ducing bill to prevent the employment
Of British seamen on board of Amerisan
ships. Against the bill we can nave no
objection. Ii imposes penalty Of iooo
dollars on the commanders OF men OF
war, and of 500 dollars on the masters
Of merchantmen, for every foreign sailor
employed by them. to be recovered IL
the manner of a qni tam action by COM
mon informer. We are Tar from saving
tia, this, connected with other pfecau-
tionsrr measures, may not form the GA
sis of lar arrangement for the snaae"-
sion Of our undoubied right OF impress
inc our native barn subjects We Will
so further and say, tina; the mere cx-
emp.ion Of those seamen. that Up to the
present time, have actually been nasura
lied in America, is not circumstance
worth dispu,ing about We know the
extent of the evil, and we know 1t can
not materially inlure us. 1t is only a.
gainst principles, against pretensions OF
ind a6nite extent,or of ruinous magnitude
that nations can be justified in contend
ing by war.
But whilst we applaud the pfin-
ciple oil the bill--.fop every step to-
wards real reconciliation OF Grsot
Britain and America deserves the graft.
tude Of mankind we can by no means
assent to all The arguments contained IN
the accompanying repsrt---Thcy are in
troduced, indeed, in e candid manner,
and proceed apparently from a spirit OF
considerable moderation. With the
British c!aimto impress Britisbseenan,"
say the Committee, the United States
have no right to interfere, provided it
be IN any other than American vessels.
That american citizens should beleremtf-
ga from lis OPERATIONS is all Mat they DE-
~and." We are Happy "a see he ques-
ton thus brought to lie traa bearings, as
question of claim on our part, founded
on q right unoontested in the abstract,
but leading to abuses in practice; to re-
medy which abuses it is, and not upsn
: any vague revolutionary hypothesis of
the flag covering the cargo or crew, that
it is proposed We should agree By treaty
not 10 exercise impressment on board
Americas vessels. We cannot in consci-
euce and honor deny the existence of
these abuses. They have douStless been
grossly exaggerated; but they still have
existed, and their recurrence ought as
much as possible to be guarded against.
We, however, have our complaints also
to make; and to these il actually behovss
the American Government to attepd.--
1t is'no the single bill here reported
which will afford Us an the guards and
securities which We have right to de-
mand (; and, perhaps, with the fairest
dispositions on both sides, it may ba ul-
tinateiy found impossible entirely to ba.
lance & ccnciliate the conflicting Claims.
We, therefore, do by no means soc the
absolute necessity,that because i,nHTcss-
meot has been elledged as enc, among
seycra, CAUSES Of war. I" = must there
fore lie provided forln the paci5cs,ion."
The omission Of this Subject In treaty
of peace woald not "be reiinquishment
Of the rights" otether pc ty. Suppose
general peace, maritime and contihen-
,sl, were concluded, what right of the
United States would be exposed TO dan.
gor?-Theirs, according to the reason
ing of the committee, is only the right
to guard agains. an abuse, which abuse,
in such state of things, could not exist.
The report is loaded with other decIa.
matery topics, which would have been
much better omitted; such as tie cruel
and sfflicsing bondage Of seamen on
board OF oar men of Wharf.-The wide scene
of distress among their rela,ives--the
want of disposition in our government
10 accommodate existing differences, on
any fair conditions. All these things,
to say the least of them, are far too high
ly colsrsd; but upon the whole, the
language Of the report is more mode
rate and reasonable than we have been
accustomed to hear from the supporters
of the American executive. We wish
we could have traced in it any latent
sparks of tina, more comprehensive and
nobler policy, before which the question
ofimpressment sinks into insigni6cance.
Why should the United States be back
ward to declare their detcstation of the
atrocious principles against which this
country has so long and so honorably
Struggled ? How comes it that they do
not feel 1t TO be their duty to range
themselves on our side, in defence of
the great cause of national independence,
against one who has openly declared that
he Will acknowledge neither the rights
nor even the name of neutrality +! When
nature. when reason, when policy all
pieadso powerfully for the intimate and
cordial union of tw % nations sprung from