Alexandria gazette, commercial and political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1812-1817, 1813-07-19
MR.. HANseN's sEceNDsrEEcH
on
Nh. Wass9ERs REsoLUTIoSS
CONTINUED.

1 country. not one man In hundred sup
| no.ed for moment, that the President
| would take the letter as coming "ithih
the meaning of the Ia" OF May 1917
because its express provision was paipa-
| DIV inadmissible, being condition pre-
| cedcnt, and not condition subsequent.
Mr. Hanson asserted, upon authority
! which he deemed altogether good, that
the President himself. when he hrst re-
eeiyed the Dukes letter, pronounced 1t
| JE.U1rIcAL, and expressed himself IN
terms auihorising the belief, that he
| would not accep, of it as coming within
the terms OF the law of May 1910 How.
ever, notmith. landing this, and the III.
deniable evidence upon the taGt OF the
| letter itself, to the amazement OF all dis
corning honest men, Mr. H. we'll recol-
lected 10 his own utter asronis mens, on
the I'd of Nov. 1910, the President did
issue his proclamation declaring the
tact of the repeal of the Berlin and MI
Ian DEGREES, on the first Of tho same
month and year-shat is, that they were
repealed the day before, according to
the provisions of our law OF non-inter-
course. Now was drawn the strong line
of demarcation between the two great
parties in this country Each took lis
decided stand, and bottomed its support
or opposition to government upon the
truth or falsehood of this proclamation
We the minority con,ended. that there
had been positive viol.tion OF PLAIN
law to favor France and embroil US with
England--that palpabIe jugsle had been
practised to induce state of insurmount.
able repulsion in our relations with one
bellieerent, as a manifestation OF our
partislity to the other, and finally, with
the view to connect our destinies TO
those of France. You the majority con-
tended, that the President had only dis
charged ministerial uty,doing nothing
more than the law required of him, and
in doing which, he had no discretion to
exercise. To Say nothing of the spirit
of prophecy with which it was solemnly
proclaimed to-day, and the DEGREES were
coma fde and in 6 fact" repealed yester.
day, ask what was the fact 2 how has
it turned out in evidence were we the
minority, as roundly asserted, in the
wrong, or were you the majority a6 mi
tto in the wrsng, and have you continued
in the wrong ever since? What says
the evidence in the case! On the 2eth
OF April, 1911, the emperor Promulges
his decree, annotated or not, 1t IL imma-
terial, which commences thus -" See
| ing BY the report of our minister, sc.
that the United States have passed law
of resistance, &c. we, Napoleon, sc. de
decree, &C." What law of resistance !?
The March law of 1911. which super
coded the false proclamation, and made
that proclamation the only evidence Of
| the repeal in the courts OF law,-So that
administration sought 10 entrench them.
selves behind the assumption OF the
fact, that the DEGREES were repealed In
| November 1910, and that the Law OF
March, 1871, "the law Of resistance
TO England" was \ consequence of that
| repeal, while on the other hand, our
good friend Bonaparte officially DEGREES.
and produces the very repeating decree
itself to remove all doubt, that the re-
peal was consequence of the law Of re-
sistance. To aggravate the wrong and
insult, he solemnly declares through his
minister Of state, that the repeating de-
cree had been communicated to Mr..
| Russell and Mr.. Serrurier about the
| time of its date, in order that it might
be laid before this governmental is
this collateral fact of communication,
that these resolutions are meant perhaps
| in vain, to establish. Were we right
| and you wrong! The evidence is be-
fore the world, and the best and only
witness to the fact, the emperor himself,
by publishing his decree proves the rec.
titude of our course, and the fallacy of
all your positions. 1t proves the pro-
clamation to have been false, the law Of
| March to have been unjust, as predicst-
ed Ito use the fashionable phrase) upon
a faisehood and it proves that every
step since taken towards this war was in
our own wrong, contrary to truth, jus.
tice and honor-it proves that the war
mas no other foundation to rest on than
an undeniable authenticated falsehood.
The war, therefore, deserves and can be
distinguished only by no other appella.
ton than an unnecessary, unjust and
unrighteous war, for opposing which We
are moral traitors All the gentlemen's
reasoning, (Mr. Grundy) therefore,
drawn from MIR Munroe's and Mr. Fes-
ter's correspondence, is of no avail, and
merits no reply.
To strengthen my positions, l will in.
troduce another piece of testimony, from
witness altogether unexceptionable,
the late Secretary of State, than whom
none, save the President himself, stood
higher in the estimation of the domi-
nant party, and whose honor was guard.
\