Newspaper Page Text
hheir nature incompatible ; one the re
peal of the prohibitory acta as to Great
Britain, without waiting lor the conclu
sion of a regular treaty, the other, a
pledge or engagement for their con
tinuance as to the other powers. Now
from the nature of our constitution,
which, in this particular, ought to have
been attended to by the British govern
ment, it is manifest that the executive
auth irity could have given no such
pledge, that the continuance of the
prohibitory acts being a subject of Le
gislative consideration, could not have
been provided for until the meeting of
the Legislature, and that the condition
could not therefore but have failed, ci
ther in the immediate renewal of,com
merce with Great Britain, or in the im
mediate engagement that it should pot
be renewed vthtc France, ihe British
government ought to have acquicsed
in. and, indeed, ought to have been s*t
isfi-d with the attainment of the impor- i
tant object of an immediate repeal of
nut-prohibitory law* and with the con
sid ration that the other obj -ct, not
in mediately attainable, was unneces
sary at the time, because the prohibi
tion as to Fr.nce was then in force,
and b'-canse there was every reason to
Infer n:U only from this f»<:t, but from
the spirit of tha communications made
fn»m time to time md from tlie over
tures bt fare submitted to the British
government that, without a repeal of
the French decrees, our prohibitory
laws would be continued in f are a
gainst France, and especially, in tlie
case of a repeal of the British orders,
tvbirh wool fni cess wily render a con
tinuance of tlie French decrees doubly
obnoxious.
But if on this head doubts could have
been ent-rtaijud, ins'e tl o< rej cling
tlie arrangement, ought not the repeal
ing act on onr part to have been met
with a suspension at least of the orders
in council, until it could have been
seen whet'nr the non-intercourse law
would or would not have been continu
ed against France. Such a suspen
sion could not have given, in any point
of view, more advantage to the United
States, than was given to Great Britain
by tlie repeal, which had taken place
on then* part.
If this reasonable course could not
have been substituted f r the disavowal,
why was not a final disavowal suspend
ed with a proposition, that the arrange
ment would he executed hy Great Bri
tain. in the event of a compliance on
the part of the United St ites with the
condition required us to France ?
I am not unaware, you may he told,
that tlie non-intercourse law of the U.
States did not extend to Holland, tho’
so intimately connected with France,
and so subservient to her decrees a
guin3t neutral commerce.
It would not be improper on this oc
casion to observe, that this ol»j ction
can be the less urged by Great Britain,
as she has herself nev. r in her alled
god retaliations adhered i ■ the princi
ple on which they were i nndrd.
Tluis she has from the date of them,
until vt-rv lately, dir<-cind them, against
the A meric:m trade even to Btissia, al
though Bussia h id lu-v r adopted the
French detr< es, nor otherwise violated
our nrut»'id trade -with (ive.it Britain.
So. in her "fill r of April last, she has
disrriminatitl. not only between the
countries devoted to France by the ties
ofb ood, and oth< r p vv is, but b: tween
Holland, Westijoaii * and Naples in en
forcing her pro'uhiton ordi r against
the first and not against the two last.
Whilst, therefore, she finds it expedi
ent to make these distinctions, she
ought to presume, *.h; t w..* too may
pM-c-rve equ l propriety in the dis
liilctions we have made’.
But it mav be of more importance
here to compare the British order in
Council of April I ist; with the arrange
nvent of Aoril, made by Mr. Erskme.
It will thence be seen how lit*Hr is the
real difference, and how trivial it is
wlmn compared to the extensive and
serious consequences of the disavowal.
Under the order in Council of April
all the ports of Europe, except France,
Including the kingdom of Italy and
Holland with their dependencies, are
op: ned t« our commerce.
Und r the* arrangement of April,
Combined with our act of nun-inter
course, all the ports of Europe, except
France and her dependencies, includ
ing the kin rdom of Italy, would have
beeb opened to our commerce.
The difF*r<*nce toen is reduced
m i Iv to Hull mI. and that again is
reduced to the diff-tvnee between a di
rect trade t * the ports of Holland, and
an indirect trade to Holland, through
tiit- neighboring ports of Tonningcn,
Ilam'nug, Bremen and Emden.
N »w, as the injuring the enemies of
IkiVat Britain is the only avowed ob-
ject of her inderdictwg order against
our trade, let a computation be made
of the effect, which this difference be
tween the order in Council and the ar
rangement could possibly have in pro
ducing such an injury. And then let
the question i>e candidly answered,
whether, laying aside all considera
tions of right and justice, sufficient in
ducentent could have betn iound in
that result for rejecting the arrange
ment, and for producing the conse
quent embarrassments, as well to G.
Britain, as to the United States.
If it be necessary, as Mr. Jackson
has stated, to set bounds to a spirit of
encroachment and universal dominion,
which would bind all things to its own
standard, and to falsify by honorable
and m-.nly resistance an annunciation
that all Europe is submitting by de
grees, the effort must be feeble, indeed,
which is to lie found in the inconve
nience accruing to the formidable foe
from tlie operation of this order in
Council, and especially when we com
bine with it the strange phenomenon
of substituting for the lawful trade of
the United Stales, a trade of British
subj cts, contrary to the laws of the
adverse party, and amounting, without
a specie! licence, in the eye of British
law to high treason.
'Huts much for He orders in Coun
cil. What lias taken nl-cc with res
pect to the case of the Chesapeake will
ctni illy engage your attention.
You will perceive that throughout
the early stages of the corit spnnd, n< e
this case w«><* in si.me rts nets impro
perly confounded with, in ollie’s im
properly separated from that of the or
dtrs in Council ; and particularly that
that pains had been laktn by Mr.
J tekson to substitute verbal and vague
observations on the dis vnw d of this
part -ftlie arrangement for air-explicit
and formal explanation, such as was
< bvi< us!y due. It will he seen also that
when finally brought to the point, he
referred for a justification of the disa
vowal to the departure of Mi. Erskine
from his instructions without shewing
what those instructions were, and to
allusions to an expression in the ar- j
rangetm.nt without giving to his mean
ing the distinctness pre-requisite to a
just reply.
It appeals, howeAer, that he lays
greet stress on the proposal enclosed
in bis letter ofthe 27th October, os at
once indicating the departure of Mr.
Erskine from bis instructions, and os
containing the conditions on the basis
c>f which he wis raady to enter on .>n
adjustment. And front a note from the
Secretary of the B;iti>h Legation, it
appears that he has complained of not
having received an answer to this pro
posal, as he had before complained
that no answer had been given to his
verbal disclosures on this head in his
interviews with me.
With respect to his intimations in
coversation, as they Were preceded by
no prop t assignment nf the reasons
for not h iving executing the original
adjustment, it cannot be necessary to
remark that no such notice, as he
wished to obtain, could with rny sort
of propriety have bi ui taki n of tin m.
With r sped to bis written project,
it will suffice to remark :
Ist, That, besides bis reluctant and
indistinct expl9.ll-.uinn of the disavowal
;of the original aujuvment he did not
j present in# proposal, lin'd he hud made
such progress in his offensive insinna
i tion as made it proper to wait the is
! sue of the reply about to be given
to it. *nd that this issue had ne'cessa
l ily pit', a stop to further com mu
locations.
i 2d. That although fie had given us
to understand that liie ordinary creden
tials such alone u%he had delivered,
could not bind Ids government in such
l a esse, his proposal had neither* been
1 preceded bv nor accompanied with the
exhibit! u of other commission or lull
i powt v : Nor, indeed, lias he ever giv
; e-n sufficient reason to suppose that he
I had any such full power to exhibit in
j relation to this particular case. It is
1 true, that in his Icttu of the 23d Octo
ber, he has stated an authority eventu
(l/u to conclude a Convention between
the two countries. Without advening
to the ambiguity of the term eventually
with the mark of emphasis attached to
it, and to other imeertailics in the
phraseology, it is clear that the author
ity referred to, whatever it may be, is
derived from instructions suljict to his
own discretion , and not from a patent
commission, such as might he proper
ly called for. It is true also that in
his U tter ofthe 4th of- November, suh
sequeot to Ids proposal, lie says he was
possessed of a full power in d?le form
for the express purpose of concluding
a treaty or convention.
But it still remains uncertainf whe
ther by the treaty or convention to
which it related, was not meant an
eventual or provisional treaty <>n the
general relations between the two
countries without any reference to tin
Case of the Chesapeake. Certain it is
that the British government in fotmei
like cases as will he seen by the adjust
nient of that part ofthe aff.ir at Nuot
ka Sound, which is analogous to this
case, did not consider any such distinct
full power as necessary ; nor is there
the slightest ground for supposing th U
Mr. Erskine, although confessedly in
structed to adjust this very case of the
Clu-snpeake, was furnished with any
authority distinct from his credential
letter. That Mr. Jackson lias any
such commission is the less to be sup
posed, as it is but barely possible, that
possessing it he should not on some oc
casion nr in some form have used a
language susceptible of no possible
doubt on this point.
But proceeding* to the proposal it
self. it is to be kept in mind that the
conditions firming its basis, are the
very conditions for the deviating from
which Mr. Erskine’a adjustment was
disavowed. Mr. Jackson, if not on •til
ers, is on this point explicit. “ I now
add,says he, that the deii ition consis
ted in not recording in the official do
cum nt signed litre the abrogation of
the President’s proclamation of the 2d
July, 1807. as Well as the two reserves
specified in the paper of memoranda
epejost d in my official letter to you of
the 27th ult.”
Considering then the conditions in
the proposal as an ultimatum, in what
light arc we compelled to view such an
attempt to repair the outrage commit
ted on the frigate Chesapeake and to
lieal the disappointment produced by a
disavowal of a previous equitable repar
ation ?
It is impossible on such an orcesion
not to recall to the circumstances
which constituted the character ofthe
outrage to winch such an ultimatum is
now applied. A national ship pro
ceeding on an important service, was
watched bv a superior naval force en
joying at the time the hospitality of our !
ports, was followed and scarcely out of
our waters when she was, after an in
sulting summons, attacked in a hostile
manner ; an I the ship so injured as to
require expensive r. pairs, the expedi
tion frustrated, a number of the crew
killed and wounded, several carried
into captivity, and one of them put to
death under a military sentence. The
three seamen, tlio* American citizens,
and therefore.on every supposition de
tained as wrongfully as the ship would
have been detained, have notwithstand
ing remained in captivity between two
and three years ; and. it may he added
alter it has long ceased to be denied
that they are American citizens.
Under these rircumst.inces we arc
called upon to ransom the captives.
Ist. By acknowledging that a pre
cauti >nary proclamation, justified by
events preceding the outrage, by the
outrage itself and by what immedi te
ly followed it, was unjustifiable, and
t lat a repeal of it vvus properly a con
dition precedent to a reparation for the
the outrage. And this requisition is
n peated, 100, after such an acknowl
edgment had been uniformly asserted
by this government to be utterly inad
missible and, what is particularly re
ni iik'ble, at a time when the procla
mation, as is well understood, was no
longec in 'force- The occasion obvi
ously invited a silent assuption of the
existing fact, and this would have ex
cluded the difficulty heretofore found
to be insuperable.
[TO UK CONTINUED.]
St. LOUIS. November 6.
On Monday last, two men heloning
to the party which conducted the Man
dan chief to h:s nation, arrived here in
43 days from (lie Mandan village.—
They sav, they arrived at the village
on the 24th of September last, all well,
having a passage of 101 days from
this place. From the mouth of the
Missouri to the village 1C 10 miles, and
calculating their being obliged to stop
sev-.-.ral days on their journey to pro
cure provisions, progressed upwards
of twtnty mr>- s p e r day.
The men report that they arrived at
the Ricaree village on the I2tli Sept,
and experienced a considerable degree
of hospitality from these people , the
Seaux appeared very hostile and noth
ing hut fear prevented their stopping
the party. These in. n left the hunt
ing party about 25 miles above the
Manila village on their wav to the
hunting ground, at the foot of ihe
mountain, they express great appre
hension from the Bluckfoot Indians
who swarm in tho3e regions, and wh»
appear entirely in the interest of the
Bnluli (actors, who have trading hou
ses on tile Yellowstone river, and other
.streams which empty, into the head
branches of the Missouri.
Messrs. Cook’s, Miller and McClel
land who had permission to ascend llie
Missouri to its head, were stopped by
the Tttons and escaped 6y stratagem,
otherwise it w.«s expected they Nvottld
have been cut off. These gentwnen
ate now trading with the Mahu’s on
the river Platte.
Messrs. Pierre Chouteau and tw*
sons, Auguste son of colonel Auguste
Chouteau, Mr. Manuel Lisa and doc
tor Thomas, are expected daily ; front
them we expect a more particular de
tail of the voyage.
OHIO, November 23.
STATE OF OHIO.
It is about twenty years since the
first settlement was effected this
state. For several years after it com
menced a destructive Indian war re
tarded its growth* Since that period
a rapid emigration from the different
states, and ais* from Europe, has
great!/ increased the number of the
inhabitants and changed the wilderness
into a fruitful fit Id. The population
of this state is at present rising of two
hundred thousand souls. Agriculture
is cariied to a great height. Com
merce and Manufactures are rapidly
increasing. There are four different
Banks with large capitals, es
tablished—And thirteen public news
papers published weekly.
•Notice.
subscriber having removed t©
Savannah, offers his services t©
the public in the
FACTORAGE
AND ;
Commission Line,
and hopes by strict attention, to render
satisfaction to those who may favor him
with their business
James Bcws.
, Oo
October 15. 1 65
•(
CharlcS Goodwin
OF this place having 1 assign
ed over to Trustees fortlie benefit of hi*
Credited* all his estate} real and per
sonal ;we ilie subscribers who have ac
cepted the trust,give noticell atvvehavti
been putin possession ol the same, .nd
requ-st all the said’CiWiitors, tfNfbid
a statement of their several deja.JHi to
Tbonus Ogicr, esq Charleston, Joseph
Hutchinson esq. Augusta, the said
Chirks Goodwin or ton idler of us.—
As soon as we can m..ke an < stimale of
the property and a stan nu m of the de
mands igiinst it, we will call a meet
ing of the Creditors, of which due no
tice will he given, and in the mean
lime, vie think it our duty to repeat
the former'notice, u.at all those Cred
itors who do not come in by toe iCb of
January tnxt, will be deprived of uH
benefit Under the dt ed..
Leroy Hammond.
James Be
Town Creek-Mills S. C. )
25th September, 1809 $ \ 13_*
—"— : —•k'r—
Scriven Superior Court. *
September Term —lßo9.
RULE NISI.
ON the petition of William Scar.
brough, stating, that being pos
sessed by endorsement of a note of
hand given by Nathaniel Lunday to
Thomas Hall, for 10/; 17. 6. dated 27th
March, 1792, and made payable on or
before the Ist January, 1793; and by
said Thomas Ilall endorsed to William
Scarbrough ; a copy of which said note,
as nearly as the petitioner could recol
lect, is annexed to the pe'itieri, and is
| filed in the (fficc together with an sffida
\it. that the sid note is' lost or mislaid,
and other circumstantial proof being
hi id before the court, Oli P ERR D y ...
That the said note be established asdi- <
rected bv the act in such’cast s made and V
provided, on the said William Scar- v|
hrnugh publishing a notice for the ■
space of six rn-mths in <mt of the puhlic
Gazettes of this state, uuless cause be %
sin wn to the contrary.
True Extract from the Minutes.
Jas. Caswell, C. S. C. S C.
. September SO. J 2