Newspaper Page Text
DOCUMENTS
•tCCOtiTASllH* THt PBESIDEXx’s MESSAGE
COJfTl.NWED.
The decree of Fcntainbiean is confessedly
'founded on the decrees of Berlin anti Milan,
dated the lS».h October, l#IO, and proves ’.heir
continued existence. The report o* the French
’minister of December announcing the per
severance of Ft ance in her decrees is still fur
ther m confirmation of them, and a re-perusal of
the icier of the minister of justice, of .he 2 3 h
last December,tot.firms me in the itifetence l
drew from i , iorothowise who should that
minister make the prospective restoration of
Amcucan vessels, taken after the 1st Jiovent-
bet, to be aconscquence olthe non-knportation
.and not’.of the Ftcr.ch revoca ion. If the
Fiettch government bad been sincere, they
would have ceased infringing on the neutral
rights of America, ef er the 1st November
-That they violated them ; however, after that
peiiod is notorious.
You' government seem to let it be under
stood that an ambiguous declaration from
tJrcat-ilritain, similar to that of the French
minister, would have been acceptable to them.
But, sir, is it consis ent with the dignity ofa na
tion that respects itself, to speak in amb guous
language ? The objects and citizens of either
country would in the end be the victims, as
many arc already, in all prob.-.btliiy, who Pom
a misconstruction of the meaning of the French
government, have been led iivo the rrost im
prudent speculations. Such conduct would not
be to procced pari passu with F'anoe in t evok
ing our edicts, but to descend to the use of he
petfiduous and juggling contrivances of the ca
binet, by which slie fills her coffets at the ex-
pence of independent nations. A similar con
struction of proceeding.pari passu, might lead
to such decrees as those of Ramboutllet, or of
Bayonne, to the system of exclusion or of li
cences, at! measures of France against the
A met lean commerce, in nothing short of
absolute hostility.
It Tb uiged that no vessel has been condemned
r.or.•■importation law aside by rendering io the
‘United State*, an act- of justice. If Great-Bn-
tain will cease to violate their ncuttal righ s by-
revoking her orders in couocii, on which event
alone the president lias the power, I am in
structed to inform you that he will, without de
lay, exercise it by terminating the operation
of this law.
Ali* 'itit C.cat-Bnutr- could wirh reason
complain of, was the inhibition by the French
decree*, of the lawful trade cf neutrals with
’he British dominions. As -soon as that inhi
bition ceased, her inhibition cl our trade with
France ought in like manner to have ceased.—
.Having pledged herself ta proceed / err passu
with France, in the revocation of their respec
It is presumed that the communications I live acts vioUiirg-neutral rights, it has afforded
which I have had the honor to make to you, cf - just cau-e of complaint, and e*cn of astomsh-
t>, revocation by France of her dec.ees, as far ment, W tne United States.- that 'he Butuh
as thsv violated the rights of the Unit- government should have sanctioned the seizure
... . . • AAn#lnmr>0'tlWl r » A mW, iron 11 Y-
ed States, and-of her cooduct since 'he revoca
tion, will present to your government a differ
ent view of the subject from that which it had
befoie taken, and produce ia its councils a cor
respondent effect.
I have the honor to be, lit.
James .Mokroe.
Augustus J. foster, esq.13c (3c. (3c.
MR. KOXROE TO EH. FOSTER.
Department of State- Oct 1, 1811.
Sir—l have had the honor to teceive your
lettci of the 26th of July, and to submit it to
the view of the piesident.
In uuswering that letter, it is proper that I
should notice a compil'd 'ha 1 I had omitted
to reply in mine of the'23 1 of July, to your re-
morvsttaQce against: be proclamation of .he pre
sident of N .ventber last, and to the demand
which you had made, by the order of your gov
ernment of'be repeal of the non-importation
act of March 2d of the present year.
My letter has certainly not met tied this im
putation.
Having shewn the injustice of the British
government in issuing the orders in council on
die pre’ext assigned, aud its still greater injus
tice in adheting to them after that pretext had
faiie , a tespect lor Gieat-Btitain, as well as
for the United Sia cs, prevented my placing it.
the strong light in which 'he subject na'U'ally
presented i'seif, the remonstrance collided to,
and the extraordinary demand founded on it.
that while your government accommodated in
nothing, the United States should relinquish
the ground, which by ajust regard to the pub
lic rights and honor, they had been compelled
by the-tribunals cd ftrance nn the principles of ! t0 ( a [ iSi Pioposiions tending to degrade a na-
her decrees since the 1st November. You al- j tion Can never be brought into discussion by a
low, however* that there have been some de- ■ government not prepared to submit to the de-
laindd since that per iod, and that such part of tlte gradation. It was for this reason that I con-
cargoes as consisted ot goods, not the produce fined my reply to these passages in your letter,
of America, was se zed, and the other part to- j w hich involved the claim ot the United S i es, •
gelher wfitli the vessel itsetf, only released after , ^ t h e principles of justice, to the revocation
* of the orders in council. Your demand, how
ever, was neither unnoticed or unanswered.
In laying befoie.you ihe complete, a id as was
believed, it resistible proof on which the United
S ates expected, and called for the tevocation
ofjhc orders in council, a very explicit ansvret
was supposed to be given to that demand.
Equaliy-unfoun Jed is your complaint t fiat I
the president’s . proclamation became known
in France: these circumstances surely only
prove the difficulty, that France is under in
leconciling her anti-commercial end anti-neu
tral system, with her desire to express her sat
isfaction at the mcar-iues taken in Ameiicn
against the commerce of Great-Briiain. She
seizes in vii tue of the Berlin ar.d Milan decrees,
nr ct the mdets
a cr/ttduiori tii the tevoca
council, that ’.he trade of Great'B"itaiti with
the continent should be rcs'ored to 'he s’.are iti
Wilt cl
C?’CCS
it wasLefoic the-Beilin
Er.'IO
issued.
but she makes a partial res oration tor the pur- j misunderstood that passage which c!r
pose of deceiving America.
I have now followed yon, 5 believe, sir,
through the whole range of your argument, and
-on reviewing the couise of it, I think 1 may se
curely say that no satisfactory proof has as yet
been-brought forward ofthe repeal of the ob
noxious decrees otFrance, but on the contrary
♦hat it appears they continued in full force, con
sequently that no grounds exist on which you
can with justice* demand of Great-Briiain a re
vocation of her erdets in council; that we have
a right to complain of the conduct of the Ame
rican government in enforcing the provisions
of the act of May.. 1810, to the exclusion of the
British trade, and afterwards in obtaining a spe
cial law for the same purpose though it was
notorious at the time th-t France still continu
'd ikm de-
i. As ibis pretension was
novel and extraoiriinaiy. i» was nocessarv that
a riictinct idea should he iomietl of it, and with
that-view, ii asked such an explanation as.would
enable rns >o form one.
In t'.-: explanation given, you do no* in;,a! on
the right to trade in British property, v/iih Bri
tish vessel;, ditecily .with vour enemies. Such
a claim, yau admit, would be g’eposterous.
But you do insist by neces-ary implication,
thai France has no righ to inhibit the >mpoita-
tion into her.ports of British manufactur es, or
the produce of the British soil, when'he pro-
and condemnation cf Ametican vessels uraler
the orders in council, after the revocation of
the FVeach decrees was-announced, and even
in the very morrrr,.t when your mission, avow
ed to be conciliatory, was to "have i<s effect.
1 will only add thnt had it appeared finally,
that France had-failed to p-eifor'm her engage
ment, it might at leas' have been expected that
G'eat-Bi itain would not have molested such of
the vessels of he United States as might bcen-
tciitig 'he pot t oi Ft ance, oo the faith of both
governments, till . hat failure was clearly proved.
To many insinuations, in your let er I made
no teply, became they sufficiently suggest the
only one that wouid be proper.
if it were necessary to dwell on the impar
tiality which has been observed by the United
S'a es towards the two belligerents, I might ask
whether if Grsgt-B itain had accepted the con
dition which was offered equally to her and
France, by the act of May 1st, 1810, and France
had rejected it, there is cause m doubt that the
non-impot tation act would have been earned in
to effect against France ? No such doubt .can
possibly exist, because in a former instance,
when this government, trusting to a fulfilment •
by your or an arrangement which put an end
to a non-iDiercoutse with great-'Butain, the non-!
intercourse was continued against France, who
had not then repealed her electees as it was not
doubted England had done. Has it not been
yc’J think, see {hr cause why the minis
ter who then leprcesfkctl toe United S’aici
with the British government slid not make a
formal complaint against it. You have appeal
ed to me, who happened to be that minis
ter, and urged my silence as an evidence
of. my approbation off, or at leas; acquiescence
m the blockade. An explanation of the cause
of that supposed silence is not less due to
myself, than to the true character, of the
transaction with the minister with whom I had
the lion or to treat. I may add, that an official
forma! complaint was not likely o be restored
to, because Iriendly communications weie invit
ed and prefetted. The went of such a docu
ment is no.p'Ool the', the measure was vppruv-
cd by <i.e, or 'oat no complaint was made. In
recalling to my mind os this incident na n rally
d ’es .he manly character of that distinguished
and illustrious statesman, and *hc ro fi.lenco
wi h which he inspired all those with whom he
had to treat, l shall be permitted to express,
as a <ig!u tribute* of respect to bisanemory,
the very high consideration in which I have al
ways held his great trlenls and virtues.
The United State-* have not not can they ap
prove the blockade of ar> exensive coast. No
thing certainly can be inferred from -any thinjj
that has passed relative to the blockade of May
1806, '0 countenance such an inference
It is seen with satisfaction tha- yi>u still ad
mit that the application of an adequate force is
necessa’y to give a b! ck-jde a l. gal character,
and that it will lose that chatacter whenever
an adequate force ceases to be applied. As it
cannot be ailedged that the application of any
such adequate-force has been continued, and
ac;tnlly ex's'.s in the ca^e ot the blockade
of May, 1806, it would seem >o be a fair infer*
ence that tils repeal cf thr. orders in council
will leave no iumperab’c difficulty with tesp'ect
tout. To suppose the conn ary, would beta
suppose that titeordeiu in council, saidxo in-
perty ot
'hat, un il Fiance re-
■cd her aggressions upon American commerce,
end has recently promulgated anew her de-' ( moves that icfubiikirt, the United States are to
crees, suffering no t'adc horn this country, but be cut off by Grett-Btitaiu fr.^m all tiade what-
through licences publicly sold by her agents and ever wuh her enemies.
that-all the suppositions you have formed of On such a pre'ension it is almost impossible
innovations on the part of Grea'-Btitain or of to teason
Jier-pretensions tn trade with her enemies are
wholly - groundless. I have also slated to you
the view his majesty’s government has taken of
the question of the blockade of May, 1806, and her tha> she must trade in British goods. If
it now only remains that I urge afresh the injus--l Fiance and Giea'.-Bii'air. weie at peace, tins
lice ot the Unnec States* govci ament perse- j
vering in their union with the French cystem
tmjioria
the same declaration bar, often been made to
yourself, and that nothing more is wanting to!
the temova! of the ex.s'.iug obsuuction to the
commeice between the two countries, than a
satisfactory assutance, which will be received
wi It pleasure from yuuisell, that the orders io
council are at an end.
By the remark in your letter ofthcSdof
July that the blockade of May, 1806, had been
included in the more comprehensive system of
the orders in council of the following year, and
that, Jf that‘blockade should he continued in
force after the repeal of ,the_orders in council it
would he in consequence of the special applica
tion ofa sufficient naval force, I could no but in
fer your idea to-be, Chat the repeal nl 'lie oideis
in council Avo'ild necessarily involve the repeal
of the blockade-of May. 1 was the' more rea-
ddy induced to make this tote.care from the;
consideration that if the blockade was not revo
ked by the'repeal of the orders in council there
would be no necessity for giving no’lce that it
would be continued ; -as by toe f,it titer consid-
eta'.ion, that according to the decision t.fyciu
c«u:t of admiralty, a blockade instituted by
j proclamation dries not cease by the removal, oi
the toice applied to it,-nor without a formal no-
tice by the government to that effect.
It is not, however, wished to discuss eny
q'lestion relative to the mode by which that
blockade may be terminated. Its actual let-
mina'ion. Its actual termination is the materi
al object for consideration.
It is easy to shew, and it has already been
abut dantly shewn, that the blockade of May,
1806, is inconsistent on any v’cw that may be
taken of it with the law of na’ions. Ir is also
ted to requlc the application of an adequate
i force, until such adequate :oice should art .ally
take the place of the ordet s in counc 1. When
ever -,-rty blockade is instituted it will he ;> sub
ject for consideration, and if 'he blr okade t><> in
conformity to the law of nations the*e will bs
no dirpositicn in this government to contest it.
I have the honor to be, See. c
James Monroe.
.lug. J. feeler, esq tN’c. Lfc 13c.
(Tobeconmued.)
Female Academy.
The subscriber wishes io give n.formation-,
th t on Monday ti-.e w5tk inst. the above ins.itu-
iic>u will rig -.in be open, for the ircep ion oi pu
pils t and Itc earnestly requests ull who wish to
e:uar me iu 'Jtutlon, to do so as e..rly as bossi-
i,le, as it will he of greet advantage to tire
member ; of each cats ;, to cuter upon 4l\e atu-
iriy so
There is,'l believe, no example of
1*. in the history of past wars. G eat-B'itain.
the enemy of France, undertakes ta regulate
'hs trade of France ; iirrr is that all ; she tells
lor the purpose of crushing the commerce cf
Great-Bt itain.
From every consideration wh ; ch equity, good
policy or iiiteiest can sugge t, there appears to
be such a call upon Ametica to-give up this
system which favors Fiance to the injury of
Great-Briiain ; that I carinot, howetmr little
satisfactory your communicationa a'e, as yet
abandon ail ko^es that even before the conjC’ess
meet, a new. view may be taken of the subject
by the president, which will lead to a more
happy result.
I have the honor to be, with very high con
sideration and respect, sir. your nvst obedient
humble servant, Augustus J. Foster.
To the Han. James Mwrcr, LXc. (3c. t3c.
HR. MONROE TO MR. FOSTER.
Department of State, 27ih July, 1811.
Sir—I had the honor to receive your letter
of yesterday’s date, in time >o submit it to the
F iew of the.president before he left town.
It was tnv object to state to you in my let
ter of the 23d inst- that under existing citcuin
stances, it was impossible tor the piesident to
terminate the operation of the non-importation
* law of the 2d March last : that France having
accepted the proposition made by a previous
law equally to Great Britain and to France, and
having revoked her decrees, violating our neu-
ira) tights, and Great-Briiain having declined
to -revoke bers. is-became the duty ct this gov-
ermnent to fuifil its engagement and to declare
the non importation law iu force against Great-
Briiain.
This s'ate of affairs has not been sought by
tlte "United States. When the proposition
contained »n live Haw of May 1st, 1*10, was of
fered equally tn both powers the c was cause to
presume that Great-BritA* wouhl have occcpt-
•would not have operated against her.
ft is in the power of the British government,
at this time to cu
pretension would not he set up, r.-.r even
thought of. IDs Great-Brhain then acquired
in this Respect, by war, rights which she has
not tr. peace? And d- es site announce to neu
tral nations, that unless-they cunscnt to become
the insti uments of lii's policy, 'heir commerce
shall be annihilated, anti their vessels shall be
stiut up iti their own ports.
-I might ask whether French goods are ad
mitted into Great-Btt'em, even in peace, apd
if they are, whether it be of right, or by the
consent and policy cl ’lie B itish government ? I
<5-.es ot it; at the same tame, or ac
as con veil teiitly caub?.
T t the i ifcrmauoii uf those at a distance, 4c
it inay not be improper to observe, tlr.ft thft
setninaiy is designed exclusively f*tr young la
dies, who have already been tolerably well,
grounded iu the tirst principles <A a correct
education. The course of instruction is at once
liberal and extensive; nearly the same.as in
the most respectable northern institutions of th#
same kind. vie. Murray’s Grammar, Murray’s
Exercises, Morse’s Geography, with the use of
the Globes and Maps, Amlimslic, the lsle-
tnents of History, Bi-air’s Lectures, Penman
ship,- com position in the form cf Letters, Mor al
/ J hilosophy and Astronomy. Leading, Spel -
ling and pronunciation will be attended to,
through the whole course. None will be receive
ed fur a le-.s
easy to shew that, as now exponded, it is equally k "“ tnr f le ' s ,ir ! ,e 1,1,1 11 q uart 'v 1 '- J*- coulcl bts
1 ; : wished tor their own sakes that nc-ue would
jnconstsient with the sense ol your govei nment, 1
when the order was issued ; and this change is
a sufficient reply to the remaiks .which you
have applied to mo personally.
If you will examine tho order, you will fmc!
'hat it is strictly little more than a blockade of
the coast from the tAinn to’-Gsteed. There is an
express reservation in it in favor of neutrals to
any part of the coast between TLest and the
Seine, and between Ostcnd ay! ihe Elbe. Neu
tral powers are permitted by it to take fiom
their own por s every kind of produce without
distinction as to i;o origin, and Jo entry it to the •
continent under that limitation, and with the j
exception only of contraband of war and ene-!
cuter for less than nine months, or. vt least six.
Evert pupil --nil be- considered a« n pt-rni.tnent
scholar, uti'il vhe leaved the rhstitutir.n. or itx
ctti-.r words there will be no'deduction for ne
cessary vacations or voluntary aToeence for a
short time. I'or terras, a ply to
Da;:iei K* M‘Neil.
Savanmih, nov. 23—^—hi 141
Education.
ray’s property, and to b'ing thence to their own ’
ports in tetute, whatever articles they think nt.|
Why were cor.tiaband cf war ard enemy’s pro
perty excepted, if a commence even in these
articles would not other wise have been petmit-
Vhat the property would be nemralized does ! ted under the reservation ? No order wes ne-
not affect the question. If the "United S ates
have no right to carry their own productions
into Faince without the consent of'he French
government, how can they unde take to carry
there -hose of Great-Bri-ain ? In all cases it
must depend on the interest and the will of
the pariy
Nor is it material to what extent, or by what
powers, the fade to the continent is prohibited.
If the powers who prohibit ir, are at war with
Gicat-Britain, the prohibition is a necessary
consequence cf that state. If at peace, it is
their own act; and whether it be voluntary or
compulsive, they aiot e are answerable for it.
If the act be t hen at the instigation and under
the iriuence of France, 'he most that can be
said, is, that it justifies reprisal against them,
by a similar measure. On no principle what
ever can it be said to give any sanction to the
oandnet of Great-Bi itain towards neutral na
tions.
The United States can have no objection to
the employment of their commercial c.qn’al in
the supply of Ft ance, and-oftfce continent ge
nerally. with manufactures, and to comprise in
ihe supply those of Great-Bvi'uin, provided
those powers will consent to it. But they can
not undertake to force such supplies on France
or on any other power, in compliance with the
claim of «hc Z?.i»tsh government, on principle-
ed it, in which event tlte non-importation law incompatible wi'h the rights of every indepen-
JitCV ul vill- urillSI'iJUVwI miiXlllj 3 J.
kabb the president to set ibcj *hcfc.sslvts.
dent nation, etru they will not demand in favr
of another power, what they ciaaol claim for
cessa r y to subject them to seizure. They were
• liable to it by the law of nations,
j Why then did the Bihi->h government insti
tute a blockade which with respect to neutrals
was not rigorous as to the greater parr of lbs
coast comprised in it-? If you vviil look to the
-rate of things which then existed "between the
United States and Great-Briiain, you will find
the answer. A controversy had taken place
between our governments on a Afferent topic,
which was stiii depending. The British gov
ernment had interfered with the trade be:vveen
France and her alhes in the produce of their
colonies. The just cltim of the United States
was then a subject of negocia’ion ; and your
government professing its willingness to make
a satisfactory arrangement of it, issued the or-
i der which allowed the trade, without making
J any concession,as to the principle, reserving
that for adjustment by treaty. It was id this
light that I viewed, and in^his sense that I re
presented that otder to my government ; ar.d
in no o'her did T make any comment cn it.
When you reflect that this order by ailcwing
the trade of neutrals, in colonial productions,
<o all that ponion cf the coast which was rot
rigorously blockaded, afforded to the United
States an accommodation in a principal point
hen at isspe between our governments, and of
which their citizens extensively availed them-
elves that that trade and the question of block-
vde, and every other question In which the
United States and Gieat-Bihain were interest
ed, were then <oe train ci amicable re^ocia;:wj {
-’The subscriber' wiii o> n a SjfHGOL, m*
joom, directly b.u-k oi G.ub >ns’sbuddings mar
ket squire, ,on Monday,.25 h -inst. wIk -ehe
pri-posef to teach Spelling, hearing, VY; iting.
Grammar, Aiithuietic, Geographv, use of the
Globes, Geometry, Trigonometry aiui book--
keeping. • -
Ha refers the parent; and gum dims of chil
dren, who nay wis'd to pi. ce them unde j- his
issirocthn. to Messrs. A. Woodruff. S. C. Dun-
ri-'.tj, and j. F. Morris, ter lii-. qu Uificat/b' sand
-c.iaVActer; who will give satisfactory in firms.-
tlon. lie also refers them to the ?bcve gentle
men for ids terms or tuition, in 'whose hands a
subscription x' ip-^r is pi-ictd.
E. W. A. Bailey.
nov 2d—rr—141
E eeeived,
Per sloop Eliza, Dennison, master, from
X tr. 1 - Yor/c,
20 barrels new prime FORE
12 do. BKKF, warranted oi a superior quality.
For sale by F. TOKFY.
nov i9 133
Ran away,
From the subscriber ne ,r Camphell'or, (S.
C.) about three weeks ago, a >'cg-o Wc-aan
named HANN AH, black c< mplected, and of
small statute ; r.hcut 4 r j or 45 vears of age.
. j She formerly belonged io cap:. Vv m. Kennedy,
dec. of Augusta, ar.d L -.veil known in bar
place; she had lea - e ot absii.ce for two days,
bet has not yet it tamed ; she has n c-orst ctioa
in Savarm ih, ?. p:ea..;;er of v. i-.'-rn she is par
ticularly fqti;!,.atd it is probable she in y be
harbored ir. that place. Any *:er-on stcuiir.g
her, and giving ini nr mafiosi -n the «criher, or
at this office, v.iijbe Very iiberaliy rewarded.
Jaa.fcS Liviv gston.
nov 2“ M- 141
• • . *
Blank Manifests,
For sale
at tHs OiHgt.