Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-08-17

aud their cargoos, on the pretext oftheir being
employed in trade with the enemies OF Great
Britain. prohibited in time of peace, Is an un-
provoked aggression upon the property of the
citizens Of these United States, violation OF
ticr neutral rights, and an cacl,oschncnt uDon
their aationat Independence"
On the 18th OF February 1906, the question
upon the adoption of this resolution, was taken
IN the senate. The yeas and nays we've rcqmlr-
ed; but not solitary my was heard in answer.
TWAS adopted by the unanimous voice of all the
senator's present. They were twenty-eiyit in
number, ana among them stands recorded the
name of Mr. Pickering.
Let us remember that this was n question
most peculiarly and Immediately of co,s,nersiai,
ana not agricultural interest; that it arose from
acaii, loud, energetic AMI unanimous, from all
the merchants of the United States upon con-
gress' ior the national ibterposition; that many
oi t'e memorials invoked all the energy of the
Legislature, and pledged the lives and properties
o. the mcmarjalists in support of any measures
which congress might deem necessary to vind-
cate those rights. Negotiation was particular
iy recommendation Boston, and elsewhere
negotiation was neutrality-suspicious. has failed
and now Mr. Pickering tells us that Great
Britain has claimed ana maintained her right,
He argues that her claim is just--and is not
sparing of censure upon those who still consider
1t as serious cause os complaint.
British doctrine on this question was then only
considered incidentally in the United States
because it was not deemed material for the
discussion OF Our rights We examined it
chiefly as affecting the principles rs between
beIligerent and neutral power. But in
fact 1t wds an Infringement OF the rights of
war, as well as the rights Of peace II was an
unjustifiablc enlargement Of the sphere Of hos
Interpretations. The enemies of Great Britain had.
by the universal law of nations right TO the be-
nefits of neutral commerce within their eiomin-
IONS Subject 10 the exceptions of actual block
ado aud contraband) as well as neutral nations
have right TO trade with them. The exclu-
sion from that commerce By this new principle
OF warfare which Britain, in defiance of all i'm
memorial national usaGes, undertook her by
single authority TO establish, bnt too naturally
led her enemies To resort To new and extraortIiu
airy principles, by which in their turn they might
retaiatc this INJURY urOn her. The pretcnce
upon which Britain in the first instance had at
tempted to colour her Injustice was a miserable
fiction. 1t was an argument against fact. Her
reasoning was, that neutral vessel by mere
admission in time of war, into ports from which
it SHOULD have been excluded in time of peace.
became thereby deprived of its national cha
raoter, and pso fitcto was transformed into ene-
my's properly.
Such was the basis upon which arose the far
famed rule of the war of 1866 such was the
foun lation upon which Britain claimed' and
naaiataiaed this supposed right Of adding that
new instrument of deso.aton to the horrors
of war--it was distressing to her enemy-ves I,
had she adopted the practice of dealing with
them in poison-had Mr.. Fox accepted the
service of the man who offered to rid him of
the French emperor by assassination, and had
the attempt succeeded, it would have been
less distressing to France than this rule of the
war OF 1856 {; and not more unjustifiabe. MIR.
Fox had too fair mind for either, but his
comprehensive AMI liberal spirit was discarded,
with the cabinet which he had formed
1t has been the struggle of reason and hu--
manty, and above all of christianity, for two
thousand years, to mitigate the rigors of that
scsurge of humanity, war. Itisnow the strug
gle of Britain to aggravate them. Her rule of
the war of 1856, in itself and in its effects, was
one of the dea,lliest poisons, in which it was
possible for her to tingc the weapons of her hos
tility.
In itself and in its effects, SAVIOR the
French DEGREES Of Berlin and of Milan, the
Spanish and Dutch DEGREES of the same or the
like tenor, and her own orders of January and
Noy.--these alterations of licensed piIlage, this
eager competition between her and her enc
mics for the honor OF giving the last stroke to
the vitais ofrnarti,ne neutrality, all are Justly
attributable to their assumption and exercise OF
this single principle. The rule of the war of
1855 was the root from ,oi;c alitte rest are but
suckers, still at euery shoot gro,oiag ranker in
flruriance.
In the last DEGREES of France & SPAN, her own
ingenious fiction is adopted; and under tbn,n,
every neutral vessel that submits to English
Search has been carried into an English port,
or paid tax to the T. iglish governments is de-
caareI dsatti0n s!izeu; t,tt is to have lost her
national character, aud to have become Eng
lish property. This is cruel in execution; alb
suri in argument. To refute it were folly. for
TO the understanding of Child it refItes tseIf
But 1t Is the reasoning of British iursts. 1t is
tue simple application tn the circumstances and
powers of France, OF the rule of the war OF
1856.
am not the apolcgist Of France and Spain
have no national pirtialities; no national at .
itch nents but TO my own country. | shall ne
Vor Undertake to nstfy Or paiiiate the insults or
injuries of any foreign power to that country
w:,iciiis ;learer To me than life. 1.-THE voice Of
reason and justice could be hearl by France
AMI Spain, they would say-you have done
wrgag to make the in; utice of your enemy TO-
wards neutrals the measure of your own. Ifshe
chastises with whips do not chastise with scur-
pions. Whether France would listen to. this
language, know not. The most enormous in
Factions Of rights, hitherto committed b,
her, have been more in menace than in accom-
p'istinoat. The alarm his been Justly great,
the anticipation threatening but the amount of
act;tal inJnry small. But to Britain, what can
we say five attempt to raise our voices, her
minister has declared TO Mr.. Pinkncy that she
will not hear. The only reason she assigns for
hes recent orders of council is that France pro-
caeison the same principles. 1t is only by the