Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-03-27

| Sttied. ana was There any hardship,
Mr.. +. asked, III requiring bond from n
citizen that he will refrain on the high
seas from acts affecting the character Of
The country, and involving il III disputes
with foreign powers? Aud vet there was
nothing else in thai act which cven in the
eye OF the honorable Speaker was repre-
| hensible. But this provision had been
SAID to be unprecedented. Why, Mr.. T.
SAID, our statute book is fall OF similar
provisions. Every restrictive law of the
United States every law forbidding com
mercial intercourse, or regulating II with
foreign nations, contains neutrality-suspicious..
He laws prohibiting the slave trade con
! tam similar provisions. fla person swear
| that he suspects another OF intention 10
violate the laws against the slave trade,
the person so suspected is required by
| the collector 10 give bond and security
| that he will not violate the law in this res
pect. And where, Mr.. f. asked, was the
| improperly of this provision? But there
was sill stronger case That OF The act
prohibiting the intercourse with ST Do
| mingo was perfectly parallel 10 The pre-
| sent for, although the color of those
who were there lighting for their liberty,
might make difference in the policy
OF the government, it cOuld make none
| IN the principles on which that policy was
founded. Ii was well known, that, at the
date oil that act, a contest existed between
| the European cOioniStS and the cOlored
population of ST. Domingo the latter
eiaiiinr!nga ree1ognii"n - til III - ohci;
4 'N'"AS' st"i'iiHS - br"NC~ ttitiu 10 opt,il-
ence. Did the United States permit The
vessels OF that government, or pretended
government, 10 come here for military
supplies? Did il permit the agent from
ST. Domlngoto reside here, to grant com
miss ons TO priyateers, 10 make reprcsen-
! tations 10 TIC government. officially or-uu-
officially, and To make appeals fiam the
! acts OF the Executive to the Congress or
the people :? No, Mr.. T. said, the govern-
ment of France asked from the Justice of
this country, to pass laws prohibiting any
, commercial intercourse with the citizens
| OF ST. Domingo, and an act was passed,
for two years, and afterwards continued
| III force for two wears longer, one of the
| provisions oiwl'ich was similar 10 that one
Of The act of II, which was so mucllrep
ROTATED by the Speaker.
MIR. T. concluded BIS remarking, that
| ne thought he had said enough 10 satisfy
the committee that there was nothing in
! the origin of the act of 1917, or in any Of
its provisions, which required its repeal !;
but that If ought TO remain on the statute
bill! before the house.
MIR. ROBERTSON, of Louisiana, said he
had voted against the act Of 1917, and was
now IN favor OF IFS repeal. Before coming
to that question, however, lie would re-
mark that, when our situation was more
critical, and when, III point of resources,
we were infinitely weaker: when, in 1894,
our citizens were engaged in behalf Of The
republicans of France, with zeal inf
Hl!eiy more dangerous TO the peace OF the
country than any thing that has been cx-
hlblted in regard to the patriots of South
America, the act Of 1894 had been deem
cd sufficient 10 secure the observance of
our neutral relations. Was Our situation,
he asked, more critical III 1917 than in
1904 If not, ought we TO have been in
duced 10 take stronger measures by far
than had been applied TO the emergency
OF i79i? The administration of Washing
ton Not only deemed the act Of that day
sufficient, but cautiously limited its dura-
ton 10 two years. 1t had been subse-
quenly renewed two or three times, aud
Congress had always been satisfied with
lis provisions. In 1917, however, Il state
OF things somewhat similar occurs, but
infinitely less critical, in consequence OF
another effort, by anOtIerp people, TO throw
oil the yoke OF despoiic government
AS the struggle Of the people OF France for
liberty gave rise TO the act of 1904, so that
OF the people Of South America gave rise
20 the act of 1917, which was passed by
Congress without the knowledge of any
exterior pressure OH the government, or
OF the letter which had been mentioned.
and other representations. Itnow appear
ed, that the act ofl9i7w was passed in con
sequence OF representations of foreign
nations, growing out of hostile feelings TO
the cause i'll which the people of South
America were engaged. This, said Mr..
X. might he sufficient ground for the
ministers of Portugal, of England, and of
| France 10 proceed upon-bui shall we
sS1Dpaihze in Il .. feelings Oh the sub
ject, and be induced BY them to pass acts
to shackle cur citizens, when tits so easy
TO trace their demonstrates to Il general
hostility TO the cause Of any people who
are engaged in struggle TO amelioraie
their condition by changing their fornFof
government Ii did moi appear now, he
said, that that act had been passed so
much with view to do what was plst TO
ourselves, as 10 accommodate tile views
of foreign nations. That, Mr.. r. said,
had been his objection 10 tic act when it
passed and the more lis causes and eff
iects were developed, The more anxious
he was TO get rid of it, and TO return TO
the statutory provisions Of 1894, which,
for number of years, had been found
sufficient. The cases stated by the chair.
man the committee Of loreign relations,
(Mr. Forsyth as having induced the pas
sage of tile act of last session were alrea-
dy provided for by tie act of I794--he
referred TO cases of fitting out vessels in
our harbors, and with them cru1ing a.
galnst the commerce of foreign nations,
prohibited in that act, under very heavy
penalties. Butthe act Of 1917 went step
further and autitOrizrd tl,a cnllectcr 10