Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1834-12-18

It's remarks respecting that portion OF the
Presidents Message which refers to ou
relations with France, as follows -
"The Message, we know, disclaim,
all intention of menace. But, whilst the
language of menace is held, the dlsclaim
er will 90 for noihing-we had almos
sad, ought to 90 for nolhing-wih {
proud, fiery, chivalrous and powerful ma,
tlon. Let any one imagine what would
have been the feelings of this country
oithe President himsell-ii'lhe Monarch
of the French had recommended to the
Legislative Chambers of his country, on
his high responsibility, to pass "A law di.
rectIng reprisals upon the property of on,
Government and People of the Unitcc
States, to take effect in case Congress,
should not, with the fear of this consc.
quence before them, hasten to pass some
law about which they had hesitated.-
Would our Congress quail beneath such
Il threat, or would il wait to see whether
The Chambers would make it good!-
And if the Chambers passed such an act
of reprIsal, would Congress, with the
sword at the breast, conccde what it bad
deemed unreasonable? On the mere
ground OF expediency, considering the
end aimed at, and the means proposed,
we cannot conceive of any error greater
than that into which the President has
fallen. 1t is no part of our purpose, to
question the reclitudc of his design, in
this instance; but in no one movement,
under his Administration, has, in our
opinion, defect of judgment been more
clearly manifested"
eli the interest of this People, does
not invite the course of measures indica-
ted in the Message, does the National
honor demand it? Not at all! II may
be well settled princi pie of intor-na-
iional law, as stated in the Message,
that, when a debt is due by one Nation
to another, the latter may seize upon the
property of the former, to pay it, without
giving Just cause OF war: but that is "A
point which would in practice, we ap-
prehend, depend very materially on the
ability or inability of the former, to re-
Portugal would never have submitted to
this "rcmedy," when administered by
France, if she could have helped her
self. The example Of France, in this
case, does not appear to us to afford the
happlest possible illustration Of the paci-
fc nature Of the lorcible seizure and Sc
questralion Of the property of one \ alton
by another. We trust that we shall not
commit the fatal error Of initiating it
! If the President had read a little further
in "thc international CODE" he would
have found that reprlsals, under any cir
cumstances, are justifiable only in the
last resort, when every other attempt at
redress has failed. A Government has
no right, any more than an individual, 20
resort to force, but where mild and peace
full methods are Intellectual. But, II IT
has the right, is it rig ght to be exercis-
ed without regard To Consequences
! There are occasions on which power
that has the cIoarest right, renounces it
for the preservation of peace. Much
more may q Nation refrain, without stain
upon its honor, from vindicating any right
by arms, when assurances arc held out,
as in this case, that, with delay, and up
on examination, the right may be re-
spected. We are running ahead of
our argument. To return, however. -
Besides, on this subject of reprisals, we
must take care that we do not wholly
mistake our remedy for the grievance
complained Of Let us not, ifthe proper
remedy would be Declaration OF War,
resort to reprisals, which in such case,
would only be real acts OF hostility, with
out the declaration of IT. Let lis not
make war with professions Of peace up
on our lips"
"There was time, indeed, when re-
prisals against French property would
have been the undoubted remedy for the
very spoliations which, after an interval
of almost thirty years, have become, IN
a somewhat different form, the ground OF
the present hostile movement on the part
of the Executive. When Napoleon, IN
the plenitude of his power, and at the
zenith Of his glory, not only seIzcd the
vessels of the United States on the high
seas, but coniiscatcd them after inviting
them into his ports, he laughed at our
circumstances and intreatics; and our IN
suited Minister Indignantly Withdrew
from the Imperial Court. Then was the
time for reprisals. Why did we not re-
sort to them? For reasons best known
to ourselves, and of course not so well
understood by the world. 1t was not
deemed expcdicnt"
wn ether words, prudence and policy
forbade il. II we would not resist when
we were thus outraged, is there any