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

+ Have suci, facts occurred? Iwillnot nrain
aliude to the circumstances Of MIR. Hoses dctaI-
ture upon his mission at such precise point of
time, that his commission and the orders OF coun-
ell ot-llth November, might have been signed
with the same pen full of ink. The sub etts
were not immediately connected with each 9th
or, and his majesty did not choose to associate
distinct topics of negotiation. The attack up
on the Chesapeake was disavowed; and ample
PREPARATION was withheld, only because with the
demand Tor satisfaction upon that injury, the
A'aerican government had coupled a demand
Tor the cessation of others; alike in kind but OF
MINOR aggravation- But had PREPARATION real
been intended, would it not have been
offered, not IN vague and general terms, but il,
precise and specific proposals, Were any such
made! None. But ii is said, Mr. Monroe was
restricted from negotiating upon that subject
part; and therefore MIR. lose was to be sent To
washington, charged with this single object;
and without authority To treat upon, or even to
discuss any other. Mr.. Rose arrives The A
nerIcan government readily determine to treat
upon the Chesapeake affair, separately from all
others; but before MIR. Rose sets his fot Oh
shore, in pursuance of pretension made before
oy MI. Canning, he connects with the negocia-
ton, subject far more distinct from the buche-
~ Ut the Chesapeake, than the general Impress
incnt OF our seaInen. mean the proclamation,
interdicting the British ships of war, the en-
trance oi our harbOrS.
The great obstacle which has ALWAYS inter
Tered with the adjustment of our differences with
britain, has been that she would not acquiesce
IN the only principle upon which fair negotiation
between independent nations can be conducted,
the principle of reciprocity-t.,at she refuses
the application TO us of the claim Which she as
serts Tor herself. The torcibIe taking of men
from an American vessel, was an essential parr
Oh The outrage upon the Chesapeake. II was
the ostenSiDie purpose for which that act of wa
unprecedented, was committed. The Presi-
dents proclamation was subsequent act. and
was avowediy founded upon many similar ap-
gressions, OF which that was only the ,,ost ac-
giavated.
lfthen Britain could, with any colour of rea-
son, clam that the general question of Impress
nent should be laid out of the case altogether
she ought upon the principle of reciprocity, to
nave laid equally out of the case, the proclalna-
tion,a measure SO easily separabic from it. and in
It's nature merely defensive. When therefore
She made the repeal of the proclamation an in
dispcnsible preliminary TO all discussions upon
The nature and extent of that PREPARATION which
she had offered, she refused to treat with us up
on the footing of an independent power. She
insisted upon an act of sef-degradation on our
part, before she would even tell us what re-
dress She would condesccnd to grant for a great
and acknowledged wrong. This was conditi-
on which she could not but know to he inadmis-
slble, and is Of itself proof nearly conclusive
that her cabinet never intended TO make. for
that wrong, any PREPARATION at all.
10 be Coniinued.)