Newspaper Page Text
it >
VoL*
MiiiLEOGfiVfliLE. uEDNIJS» f. :i\{ItakV*" 19 isiiL
published!?er
SbjTovU Flexing Gmahtlanis,
PRINTERS TO THE STATE,
Ooefferton-Stroet, opposite tke Sate- How.
TERMS.*.•••THREE DOLLARS PER AN-
HUM, ONE HALT TO BE PAID IN AD*
VANCE.
ADVERTISEMENTS will be tha^k-
PULLY RECEIVED, AND PUBLISHED
AT THE CUSTOMARY PRICES.
SB
Agreeably to the returns
made'to me by the Captains com*
mending the several Company Dis
tricts for the county of Pulaski, the
following are the Defaulters who
have failed to give in a list of their
taxable property lor the year 1811.
6apt. Took's District
Edmund Hogan, Denjamio Smith,
Seth Watson, Isham Carr, John
Pearce, John Hagan, Tho’s C. Stand*
Jcy, Jacob Pearce, Bartlet M‘Da
niiel, Starling Sanders, Benjamin
Carr, Benjamin Newburn, William
Ward, Archibald McMillan, Meri-
dith MerCer, Daniel Watkins Dru
ry Alston, Jesse, Williams, Joshua
Harris, William Moore, William
■ Yarbrough, jr. John Yarbrough, Jo
*aiah Winbum, James Clarke, Wil
lianv Lyon, Nelson Chace, Francis
Galley, John Nelson, Jacob Joiner,
Abram Nipper, John Blackburn,
John Longino, Nath’l Hawthorn,
Burril Campbell* Alaway Roach, A-
lexander Shaw.
Capt. Lee's District.
Elisha Brannin,, Arch’d Jones,
Frederitk Mills, William Lovelace,
Green Walden, Jeremiah Bell, Ste
phen Hagan, Wm. S. Turner, Etbel-
Ured Howell, Theopbilus Rogers,
Thomas Watts.
Capt. Fiveasti's District.
Jesse Jump,Richard Ganey, Tho
mas Phelps, John Vass, Edward
Burke, John Manning, Elisha Hanks,
■ Gailemore.
Capt. Mercer's District.
Joseph Regan, Henry Beaty, Mo
ues Kirkland, Elias Philips, Nathan
Maddov, Isaac Blount, Murdock
M‘Lcpd.
Capt. Sheffield's, District.
Moses Harrei, Levi B° wen » Jor
dan Leopard, Benjamin Johnson,
Jqhn Kelley, Charles Cooley, An
drew Fuack, Thomas Temple, John
Temples, Baptist Brumley, Isham
M’Daniel, Frederick Temples, John’
Stuart, CbarUs Covenah, William
Gibson,—— Gancy.
Lewis Lee, r. t. r
Febrnarv 12 16—3t.
THE HIG H B1&UDED,
Coram'trf*;l to
tfc* Jail of Hancock coon*
ty on the $Oth of i*miv
ry, a negro man by the
xameof
0'<ED.
who fays he belong! to
R. herwood of T>’'gK*.
county. The owner i« requefted to come for
ward, pay charges and take him away.
Sa.nuel Hrill, ymlor
February 12 10—4t
Whereas lohn Hamont and Burwell Bailey
have reported that John Oibbons has taken a
Bull of Benedict Bnurquin in a clandeftine man.
ner. this it to certify that the report is falfe and
entirely without foundation.
Fen. i2 I ;.n Gib 1>r *n«.
NINE montht aft-r date application will be
made to the honorable the Inferio court of
Greene County for leave to sell part of the trart
of land whereon John Acre deceafed former,
ly redded on the waters of Ogechee river
adjoining - oyal Nelms and others. Alfo, one
trad adjoining the above on the waters of Ste
phens Creek adjoining Spencer Vhomas and of
thers, lying, iii Greene county, being the real.ef-
tat* ol tke faid iobn Aero and to be fold for the
benefit ofJ»i* heira and creditors.
Starring Acre, Adm
February 12 Elizabeth Acre, Admx.
All persons jnd.dn-d fo tIa - ••stttc
of joel Keefe,late of Pu'nam county, dec. are
rrqurlled to make immediate payment, and thofe
having claim* againft the faid eftate to render
their accounts properly authenticated within the
time preferibed by law.
Rebecca Reese, Ev'x
Jas. Shackleford, J ?
Henry Harris, j sf
February 12 ns4m
Nrvv Advertisements.
OEORGIA, Warren county.
Jnfeph Busson having applied to me for
Letters of Difmifllon on the ellate of Jo-
teph Bufson, Sr. late of Warreo county, dec.
These are therefore to cite and ad-
monifti all and lingular the kindred and
creditors of faid deceafed, to file their ob
jections in my office within the time pre.
fcribed hy law, if any they have, why laid
letters Ihould not be granted them accord
ingly. Given under my hand this 25to day
of January, ISIS
John Torrence, c c o.
like for like. But win !■ •the , inert.
non-importationartexcludes British trao'c
from me Uimed sides ports, it mulliie
recollefted that it goes Hill further ant
excludes also Britt(h armed Hups from
American ports while it admits thole o
the enemies of Great.Bruton- A. neu
ral nation is rr sponsible for the equality
t»t Its rules qf conduct towards the b**lli
gcrent powers ' (tb jtse tho word 4 of ar
American Secretary of Hate in the year
1796) and therefore the part of the law
which efiablifhes #n inequality was jufily
an object of more serious complain on
the part of Great Britain. Y ; ou are a
w ire sir, of the .advantage which his Ma
jelty's enemies have deiived from this
Hate of inequality, which enables them
though pofseliing no port in this hemis
phere continually to prey on the trade o
iii Maj-lly a subjects, secure of a re fug
tor their cruisers and their prizes.
file prohibition of entry to his Majes
ty's Blips under these circumltances might
perhaps juftify Great Br.tain in asserting,
tha-. whatever reafotj fhe may have for
rep-aling or m <difying her orders in
council, so as to leffen or entirely remove
the preffu e n • w unavoidably laid on the
trade of America as a neutral nation, file
might yet refute to enter into any dis-
rulfion on that lubjert. with the United
States, until either by the revocation of
the prohibition above Hated, or the pla
cing ail the belligerents under the same
prohibition, Ameiica Ihould ceafe to vio-
iat> t 1 e dines of a neutral nation
With refpert, however, to the fupposed
demand that America Ihould force the en
try of Britilh manufactures into France, it
is moll particularly ueceflary that I Ihould
explain myfelf, as a total mifconceptionap
pears to have taken place upon this point.
The queftion of retaliation on the French
decrees is directly one between England
and France. In confequence of the txtra-
ordinary blockade of England, we have in
our defence been obliged to blockade
France, and prohibit aH trade in French ar
ticles in return for the brohibition 1 y France
hcinV-x H nee, in drder that we may know
ti whet extent the decreca have been rr
pealed, if they really have been f«> in any
reaped! Mr. Ruffe! however, does not ap
pear to have been in p'fleflion of it at tht
date ot his letter of laft July It i« indeed
become p.vticularly mU-refting, that w*
fiiould fee this infirnmeni, since the pubb..
cation of Mr. Ruffci’a correspondence with
his own government, by which it appear
that fcallity, and in fart, the French go.
vernment did not releafe any American
•hips taken after November 1, until they
had hrornc acquainted with the Ftelidei t’-
ptoclamation, and that veUyls have been ta
ker. fo late as D-eembrr el, in the d'rert
voyage from this country to London ; for
umil a copy ofiucli indrumr litis produced,
it is impolfible to know whether any other
trade is allowed by PrancCsthau that be
tween her own dominions and the ports of
the United Ststes
I have the honor to be, withHhe highefl
consideration, sir, your moft obedient hum
ble servant.
AUG. FOS TER-
To the non.
James Monroe, &c l$c.
SIR,
MR. MONROE TO MR FOSTER.
Department of State,
January 14, 1811.
Young- Dioined,
ASW
WILL BE SOLD
OnThurfday the nineteenth day of viarch
nest, at the late dwelling-houfe of Abraham
Herring deceafed, in l.aurens county, horfes
cattle, fheep and hogs houf«bo!d and kitchen
furniture, a quantity of bacon and dtied beef,
plantation tools, and a number of other articles
too tedious to mention. Tbe fale to begin af
10 o’clock on faid day and continue from day to
day tilt ill it fold. Terms will be made known
on the day.
Richard Ricks, ") £
Feb. 19 1*! Harmon Ncail- J p
©tplonuttc.
of all trade in Engliih articles. This ip e# - burn.
I have had the honor to receive yo&r letter
of Deceiribcr 17th, and I embrace the firft
moment that I could command, to make
the observations which it suggelt*.
It would have,f.ffcidcd great satLfatfliou
to the President, to have found in the com
munication, some proof of a disposition in
the Uritiih gOv Tiiment to put an end to the
differences subfifting between our countries.
I am sorry to be obliged to (late, that it
presents a new proof only of its determina
tion to adhere to the policy, to which they
are imputable.
You complain that the import of your for
mer letters ha* beeo minimdtrftood in two
important circumftanccs ; that you have
been repreien ed 'ohave demanded of the
United States, a law fur the iniioduftioo of
Britifli goods into their ports, and that they
ihould also undertake to f.frce France to
receive Britifli mauuiadlure# into her liar-
Correspondence between Mr Fofter and Mr.
Monroe- >
JIR FOSTER TO MR- MONROE.
Washington December 17 1811.
Sir—.1 did not mean to have writ en
to yoi/at this moment on the subjtA of
our late correspondence* but that I have
had the mortification to perceive Rate
ments circulated from highly respecta
ble soujccs, which give a view of the
pretension*
of Gieat Britain relative to
The Noted Large Jack,
Belonging to tbe Suhspuber, nuilljtemd
the ensuing Spring^nd 7.« seafon at Col.
Robert Iverion’s, in the fijwer edge of Pot-
sum county, ntarGigc's Bridge, and will
be let to marcs at the reduced price of SIX
DOLLARS for the tcrofeafons, payable
at Chriftmas next. Any perfon putting
Five Mares and beftig Accountable for the
feafon, :at» have them at five dollars each
Young Diomed is a beautiful dapple grey,
near fiEteen hands high, five years old next
April, was golttirby Dr.Cox*s Diomed of
Virginia, who was gotten *»y the celebrated
Old Imported Sorrel Diomed, his dam by
(Brilliant, out of a thorough.bred.Nonpareil
mare. A few of hie Colts are to be seen,
, and itfe equal to any in the State. We
atand them hy the Season on account of
their foaling a number or maree at one un
cle fifit each. Robert Iverson
February is _St A. Mites.
The Subscriber,,
R RSPECTEULLT informs his friend*
and those who may wifh to employ
him In his profession, that he has removed
to Twiggs Court'Houfe. where he may.u-
fuiliy he found uolefs when on the circuit»
at for ike Mrcfcatt iwniedutely m toe
SigStwhooT ’ MOSES FORT
January 29
W-tf
\ Caution \
It is the Wish of th* UWribrr. that no per.
foa fhouU employ either of hi» fellows without
permiffion. Thofc who do got s«end to thia
notice Will be profecetsd. orpn
K phrtiarv 5 _ ~ BlRi*
Doctor M itcheii
the United States not warranted by any
of the letters which 1 have had the honor
t |addr» S3 ;o you, 5c winch at a time wlu-n
di enffi ns are continuing fo important
to tlie two countries, might tf leit unrec.
.tjted. produce, an effeti highly to be la.
mrnted by both the Amencanund Biit.
ilUGovernments, inasmuch a* by creating
upneceffary irritition, they might throw
obftaclea in the way of a rettoration of a
frtrJidly underfianding between tliem.
I find it afsbrted in the ftau ment re
ferred to, that I have in the na ne of qiy
(roveinment, demanded that the United
Spates govermnent, Ihould pafs a law for
the introduction of British go. ds into the
American ports and alfo that the United
States flionld undertake to force Fr uice
to receive into her harbors Britilh manu-
faAures- ...
' l beg permiflion, sir, to declare that
neither of these demands have been made
by me, and that niy meaning mult not
have been underfiood. if such was concei*
ved to have been its import. I could not
have demanded the passage of such a law
as above Bated, because my government
does not pretend to interfere with the in.
ternal government of a friendly power,
nor did I "lean to demand that America
(hould force France to receive our manu-
faAurei* ^ . ,
A l( 1 meant to fay wts, that the ad
miffiofi of French coqies.rce while that qf
Knglattd has been excluded from the U.
furr of retaliation, it i* willied, (hould ope.
rate on Franve alone, but from the trade
carried on'with France by America, it un
avoidably operates alfo on her; it is a mea
sure to deftjoy the F ench trade in return
for the flmilarmeafures of France of which
it is retaliatory, and its acting on neutrals is
an incidental effeCl of it, confequent upon
the f.ibmiffiot' of neutrals to the original
meafures of the enemy againlt Great.Bri.
tain. It ist indeed, mrUuchply that tbe
unnatural situation of Europe (hould pro
duce such a refuli, but 1 cannot see how this
can beconfidered as war on American com.
mercc. when ail other American trade but
that which is carried on with our enemy’s
ports in defiance of a blockade aulhoriled
by the lino of retaliation is unaffected by
it. We complain that America does not
resift the' regulations of the Berlin and Mi
Ian decrees, and object to permitting the
French to trade with her during their con
tinuance againft the commerceof England -
but this is not exacting, as has been repre
sented, that A > erica (hould force Britilh ma
nufactures into France : it is puriuing on.
iy a juft course of retaliation on our enemy.
If Amctjca withes to trade with. France,
if French commerce is of importance to her
—we expert (he (hould exact oi France to
trade with her as (lie hat a right to demand
on her quality of oetUnl; but if (he does j
not chute to exercife this right, all we ask i
is, i hat (he (hould abftain from lending her J
afliftance to the trade of France, and not
allow her commerce to be a medium of un
dermining the refources of Crest ..Britain.
I have thought it necefftry thus to en
deavor to let thefe two poKito In their 'rue
light; tbe repeal of the law was asked, as
being an unfriendly mrafu'e, partial in its
operation againft Great.B nain, and a pius
peft ot retaliation was beid out on its cqm*
mcrcial operation if continued. This is no
demand on the United States to admit Bn
tiih manufactures; they are at liberty to
continue that law, only as it is of in un
friendly nature some rettriction of,a fimilar
kind was to be expefltd from England; and
with respect to the alledged demand for
forcing Britilh goods, the property of mu
trals Into French ports, if theUmted States
are willing to acquicfcc in the regulations
of the French decrees unlawfully affecting
Y iu date that on ike firft point, it was
your intention only to retnonftrare againft
the non-importation art,'as partial in its o-
peration, and unfriendly to Great Britain,
on which account its repeal was cl timed,
and to mtimatethat ifit way p. tfevered in,
Great Britain would be compiled to retali
ate on the co nmerce of the United State*,
by similar reftrirtions on her part. And on
the second point, that you intended ouiy to
urge tint m co ilequmcc of the ( XTaordi
nary blockade of England, your government
had been obliged to blockade France, and
to prohibit all trade in French articles,, in re
turn for the prohibit'! ■>« by Fraitcc of ail
trade in E igldh articles.
It is suffi. ieiit to retook on the firft point,
that on whatever gr untf the repeal of the
non.tmportHtion art is required,.the Uu'ted
Staves are juftified in adhering to it, hy the
refusal nf the Bri'tlli government to repeal
its orders in council; ami it a diftitiCfon
of ijiftructi m i from his government, with
n offer of i vtry information possessed bf
bim, which might contribute todrtertand
fupprels it. h iapainful to add that Jhia
communication was entirely disregarded.—-
Fha Great.B'rain mould coiftplain of arte
! rt France, to which by her negiert.fhe was
'nltruniehtal.snd draw from them proof in
iippoft of her orders in council, ought cent
ainly not to have been exported.
Your remark silo, thst the pra Sice of rhs *
French government to grunt licences to certain
American vufjeb, engaged in the trade between
the United Stats* and France, is an additional
proof that the F rench decrees (till operate in their
lulled extent’ On what principle this inference
is dra wn froiu that (art it is impossible for me to
conceive. It Wat not the object o else Berlin and
Milan decreet to prohibit the trade, between the
United State! and France. They were meant to
prohibit the trade ot the United Slates with
Great Britain which Violated our neutral right*,
and »o prohibit the rrade of Irea, Britain with
the continent, with which the United Statee
have nothing to do. Jf the object had been to
proiubit the trade betwe, n die United State*and
France, Great-Britain could never have found iu
them any prete -t for complaint. *\ud.if the idea
of retaliation, could iii ny ic-pe-St have- been ap
plicable, it would have been hy prohibiting our
trade ith lierfe f- To prohibit it w;n1i , ranee,
Would not have been a retaliation; but 9 coope
ration, If licenceng by France the trade in cer
tain inflaucea, prove any thing, -it proves nothing
more than that the trade with ftaitce a Jn other
inftstur* is under rtllraint. It teems inip, Ifibjh
to e, r rt from it in ». re»,'e )t,that the Be Ifti Sc
\1ilajj decree, are infuse ft taras they prohi
bit the trade lte^i{en,the United States nd Jin*
gland. I mii>hrhere repeat that the French prac.
tice of grahtmg licences to trade between theU-
nited State* and France may have been intendtd
in part, at lealt as a fecurity againft the fimuU
ted papei» ; .the forging of .filch wee hot I up.
prefaed in 1 ngland. It i> not to be inferrM frotn
thefe remark*, that a trade by licence, is one with
which tbe United States are satisfied They
have,the (Irongeft objections to it, but theft an
founded on either principles, than thofe fuggeftei
in your not.
It is a cacfetif great furprife to the Preffdert,
that your government has not feen in the coffej.
pondence of Mr RuiTeir whnjh I had the hoi
nor to communicate to you on the f7th of >cto.
her laft, and which ha* been lately transmitted to
you by your government, fuffnienr proof of the
repeal of the Berlin and Milan decrees, iudepi-a,
dent of the conclulive evidence of the fact, x.tudi
that correspondence afforded ; ft was not to be
prefumed from the intimation of the Marquis of
Welleflef, that if it wa* to be tranfmitted to y«u
to be taken into coufidera ion in the depending
discufiions. that it was of a nature 10 have po
Weight in thefe di'tuffiana
•he demand whih you now mike of a view
of the order given by the French government to
it* cruder*, in confequence of the repeal of the
French decrees, is a ne " proof of its mdi poli ion
to repeal theV Y*i j in council. The decianvion
of the French#iv«rn nent was, as has been here,
tofor* obhrveu a folemn and obligatory act, and
at tuch entitled to the notice atidrcipecc of other
g iv*mments i It was incumbeut uu ‘ -reauBru
tain, tberef ire.in fulfilment ot Jitr eiijjagmiril, to
have provided that herorners m council Ihould
not have effect, after the time filed for. tire ceari.
tian uf tn« firench decrees a , pteteuaiou in
ureat Britain t.ik-ep her urderiiti (,«. * till (he
receivedTitisfartion of -he pra.fftcal e"mpiianco
is thua produced between Crr-at Britain and , of (troupe,is uiterl/ incoitipauble with Vtpledge.
the other belliycrent, it mud 1* rcterred to I Adnubt.lounded. wianylirnsie^.hawe-e. uu-
the difference in the conduct of the.two par | aumorded, «om.nKted by a French privateer,
might, oo that (iruiciplu become a motive tor
On the second point, Ih.vc to observe *'»y sndretuwl . fu.picn that fuohlurt.
,b J ,.h,c, P? .... r . , w. rr; ».
tartnry, bee Ute 1 doe n . : withheld as I mg a> ihe war cnmimifd But fi-t
noweidtiM. j'r«nccdid,iliatriw,dctabic« I 11>e iaqre reYaZk. rt.»7 if there wadtLont fora
blork dc of F.ugluid, againft the trade ol ^jefti,in, whether the Prench repe.U didst dul
the United States, and prohibit all trade m
Eogiilh articles on the hvg’i sear, but this
Wockadeand prohibition no longer ixift. I
is true also, that * part of those decrcfS, did
prohibit a trade in Engiifh articles, within
her territqriai jurvadirt'on ; but ibis profit
bition violates no national rights, or neutral
commerce, of '.tie United States S’i'i your
blockade and ptvrh.tupon ire continued, iu
violation ol the national and Oc-uUal npbts
of the Unite J S:a'.:*» on a pretext ;jf rcta.
liation which, if even applicable, tioiild on
iy he applied to the former, and r.ov to the
latter in erdirts ; and it is. required that
not WX - effecl.at the date aunuuucrd' by France,
and rrq't'.red by the Jailed States, it cannot- he
allege that *.h* degrees have ndt crafcd to ope.
rate ftpevth® Fd nf Fet, runr y lad, a* heretofore
o'lferved. And a* tbe ad<ur. ceflatmn of .the
deenre* to violate our neutral right*, wa* the, only
cffeutlal tart in the cafe, and has long been fcnowu
to our goveryin-nt, tl)e order* in tdhncit; tTofu
the date Of that knowledge, ought to have tea-
fed,according to its own principle* pledge*.
U tn* q -ftgr.i <y:.u her, -n» J wbtn^tbc
repeal ot the Beilin, an 1 Mi ah 'ecre- s < ok
cfF'-t in re's'ion us 'he neutral x 'ti;fnJ r ce
of t re U i"rd .8 a'cs, is snoerc <ied t the
France ihal'ch inye her inltciis: re»u'jjilions 1 n >veti. r«,l eatrau d n.rv < iann qf G **t-
againftEngnih tiade, beidie ^ngland Will
Change her ex'er-,at regulations ag iinft the
(cade .if the U States.
But you It'll • 9lift that the French de-
cfccs are unrevokrd, and yrge in proof of it*
a fail drawn irnm Mr". Rnffel.’s cprrenpon.
denct, that friut American vcffcla have
been taken sityre the firft of November, in
England through them, they cannot furely tlu j r route , 0 England. It is a satistattory
be 7urprifed if we Consider ourfelvt* as at an , wer to this remark; that it appear* hy
’ .. f. r .iii r*mni«k fax ... ‘
BEOS lesweto inform «b*
county that he wift attend to the duties od-kis
jirotation,with every »**» *■* “
Tanuary |. ^
Hberty to refuft permiffnm to the French to
profit by that arquielcence.
I will noiv, fir, take the opporypnily of
dating toJ^u, that 1 have received from
His Majwr;’s Secretary of State, the cor.
respqndcnce of which you did me the ho
nor to transmit to me a copy in your let.
ter dated Ortober T7. My government
have not been able to f«e ( in it satisfactory
proof of the repeal of the French decrees,
and doubt whether the trade earned on by
licences between France and America* will
not be regarded, even here, as proof of the
continuation of them in their fulleft extent,
at leaf no licence (hould be neCeffary, h li
cence being given to allow *hat, btR for
that liceoce, would Bemohibjted. ,
niwdStatea'ports, was regarded by Great j . repeal hasten
Hritaip as highly unfriendly “ e £3ed, is^mattcr alfoof furpris, for if
>nd tint a continuation of fuch policy I . re ' ov fur dealing u* the transae.
and (M - , ^ .
would he retaliated upon by Great fir
,in *itn sirndar rerriduanvonherpart,
whtuh w»s so far merely an offering 0.
there were any faw deakng
t|ua no reaaon can be ^vrqby Froncc fqr
oot producing it; ft:1avery defirable that ft
IhoulJ 6e produced, if such an uifttumefct
the fame.correspondence, that every Amiri
can veffel which had bem taken in that
trade, the ae<7.ure of which refted on the
Berlin and Milan decrees on y, were, as foon
as that fart was ascertained, delivered up
to their owners. M ght there not he other
ground >d»o, (DO which seizure* 'might l«
made f Great Britain claims a right to
seize for othrt eaufe*, and all nations admit
it in the cafe of contraband of war* If by
the law of natrons, one belligerent has a
right to seize neutral property in any cafe,
tbe other belligerent Iws the fide sight.—
Nor ought I to overlook that the practice qf
counterfeit!rg American papers iu England,
whioh is well known *0 *h e continent, ha#
hy impairing thy faith due 10 American do
euments, done to.the United States ewoti
al Injury. Againft this prarticc the Minis
ter of the United States at London, as will
appear by reference to his letter to the
Marquis WetUslej of the Sd of M»y. 1810,
I made 4 forma! rrpresctU.v.iou, in puiroance
B u i n t > q.trade in Bih.ir'if'e.r, *ith
hereqevpytor (uppolwg t' V repeal to ave
t^Wenpuce, in the'fulleft rxt- t canned
by the Uwttd States, it r-ouid, according
tadlihr claim, have no effert in s«nio v >ng
the order* in copricil.
On a (till view at-thc copdqrt of the
B’ltiftl govenimeut in 'he^e traa|art<oqs, it
i* impulfible to i'ecia it any ’tang fliort of
a (pint of determined fioftili'y in the rights
and intereft* of the United Sutee. It is.
Med the orders m council, on a fvrfocipie of
ibtalistion on Prance, at a time when it ad
mitted the French decrees to be ineffertu.
at | it hat suftained thole orders in full
force fince, mKwittiftanding the pretexi for
them hat been removed, and latterly it hat
added a new condition of theft rcptsl, to
be performed by France, fo which the U-
niicd Sts'et in their neutral ch irarter have
no claim, and could not demand, without
departing from 'hair neutrality, a ounditi-
oq which, in respect fo <He coiumgrcc of o-
ther nations with Great Britain, is repug.
Hint to her own policy, and prohiHRed by
pqr own laws, and which cid stiff be en**
forced Ym any nation withoutm tuBbgrttoa.
of its fovereiguty and iadqpend«|«hK
I Have the honor to hr, Ac.-
* JAMES'MONROE*
Augu/hu J. ltyrr> */£• &c. ty*
