Oldalképek
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

VOL. XIII, No. 15.]

SUMMARY OF POLITICS.

AMERICAN STATES.I was in hopes, that, after my last number, there would have been no further necessity of saying any thing more about this enemy in disguise; but, a publication, which has appeared under the title of a Debate in the House of Lords, and which publication includes certain resolu tions, said to have been proposed to that House by Lord Holland (one of the persons who negociated and concluded the treaty sent back by Mr Thomas Jefferson), demands particular attention. There are other subjecs, which, in point of national importance, would command a preference, such, for instance, as the proceedings upon the reversion bill; but, this subject commands a preference in point of time. The American new negociators are coming; and, it is expedient that the public be put upon its guard against the numerous tricks, which the American fundholders and merchants will play off, while the negociation is going on. The debate took place on the 29th of last month, and the resolutions, proposed by Lord Holland, were as follows :————“ Í. "That it appears to this house, that his majesty hath been advised, without any "alleged provocation from the United "States of America, to issue Orders in "Council, on and subsequent to the 11th "of Nov, 1807, for interrupting nearly the "whole of the comerce of the said states "with the conting of Europe; for limit

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

BES DURANIUKAINO

"France has but to suspend her navigation laws and the seas are filled with vessels that bring home her *commerce. The English cruizers have domineered over the sea; but, like crows, that are scared by a bundle of rags, no sooner does a piece of bunten, marked with thirteen stripes, depend from the mast *head, than our brave sailors are compelled to sheer off, and the wealth and commerce of France are carried as safely over the Atlantic, as if lodged in a British 74. She has millions floating which no eneiny can reach; she enjoys every benefit of her colonics without the risk of capture or detention; "she may fit out nothing but privateers and cruizers to attack our trade, and distress our colonies, whilst "her own are heyond the efforts of our aimed vessels. She lets out her colonies to farm upon a rack rent, "which rent she is sure to receive, as she is the only customer for the neat produce; and thus, by a contrivance as ingenious and fortunate for herself, as it is ruinous for us, she unites the whole benefits of **war with all the security of peace."- -BELL'S WEEKLY MESSENGER, previous to the issuing of the Orders in Council.

--

545]

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 9, 1808.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

[546 "same shall be accompanied by particular "documents certifying the place of its "growth or manufacture.II. That it appears to this house, that previous to the issuing of the said Orders in Council, a negociation had been carried on between "this country and the United States of "America for the maintenance of peace "and friendship between them, and that a treaty had been actually signed respecting some of the most material points in dis"cussion; that a desire had been expressed

(6

66

by the government of the said United "States for the addition of certain other provisions to the said treaty, and that a proposal was made for renewing the ne"gociation for that purpose; but that this "offer was abruptly and intemperately rejected by his majesty's ministers."III. That at the time when the said Or◄ "ders were issued, his majesty's ministers

"6

""

had recently received from the ministers "of the United States in this kingdom assurances that the injurious decrees of his majesty's enemies had not, in any one instance, been executed against the commerce or navigation of the United States: "and that from all that had passed subsequent to the issuing of the said decrees, "his majesty's ministers had every reason to conclude, that any attempt of the enemy so to execute the same, would be de"cidedly resisted by the government of the "United States; whereby it must have

kc

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

(6 ing such trade to be carried on in future through British ports only (with the exception of neutral and allied ports in cer

tain cases) thereby exposing it to such re"strictions and duties, and even probibitions, as the government of Great Britain may think fit to impose upon it; and for confiscating the property of the citizens of the said states, in all cases where the

[ocr errors]

65

[ocr errors][merged small]

happened, either that the said decrees "would have continued to be wholly nuga"tory and ineffectual, or that the enemy, "by endeavouring to enforce the same, "would have driven the United States into

66

a closer connection with this country."IV. That it appears to this "house, that the "Order issued by his majesty in council, on "the 7th of Jan 1807, was not intended to

S

interrupt neutrals" in a commerce of discharge from port to port of the enemies' #territories; that such was understood to "be its legal construction by those who "were in his majesty's service at the time

the said Order was issued; and that an "explanation to that effect was given by

them to the Danish minister, in an official "note dated on the 17th of March, 1807.VicThat in a note from the American Se"cretary of State to Mr. Erskine, dated on “the 20th of the same month, considerable "uneasiness was expressed, under an ap

fa

prehension of a contrary interpretation of "the said Order: That although the above * mentioned note was actually received by his majesty's present ministers in the "month of April last, yet no steps have "been taken thereon up to the present hour, for removing the unfounded apprehensions of the American government "on a point to which they appear to have "attached so much importance: That by "this omission, much unnecessary irritation "has been suffered to prevail in America,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

66

long after it was in the power of his ma"jesty's ministers to have effectually re"moved the same; and fresh obstacles to conciliation and friendship have thus wantonly been interposed.VI. That it is, "therefore, the opinion of is house, that "the said Orders are in themselves unjust and impolitic; that the issuing of them at the time, and under the circumstances "above mentioned, was an act of the utmost improvidence and rashness; and "that, by abruptly breaking off a friendly negociation, and withholding a satisfactory explanation on a point, on which it might have been given with so much ease "and advantage, his majesty's ministers "have acted in disregard of our true policy, "which is to cultivate the friendship of a nation, whose interests and prosperity are so intimately interwoven with our own; and have conducted themselves in a man"ner the least adapted to enable his majesty "to maintain that maritime superiority, on "which the greatness, and even the exist"ence of his empire so much depend."These resolutions were negatived by a very great majority; but, that is not quite sufficient to satisfy me. I wish to shew my readers, that they merited their fate. The first resolution barely states well-known facts, except as far as relates to the provocation given by America. It was, upon that ground, perhaps, proper to negative the reSolution; else I, for my part, should have ben glad to see it pass in the affirmative; for, certainly, one object of the Orders in

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"

Council was to knock up the trade of Ame rica with France and all her dependent states.- -The second resolution censures the refusal, on the part of the present ministers, to resume the negociation with America upon the basis of the treaty, which Mr. Thomas Jefferson had sent back, with marginal notes, like amended articles of capitulation. "The American government," Lord Holland's resolution says, expressed to "have certain conditions added to the said treaty, and proposed to renew the nego "ciation, for that purpose; but, that this "proposal was intemperately rejected by "his Majesty's present ministers." To those, who had thought it quite becoming in a king of England to enter upon a negociation respecting objects, in order to accom. plish which, the other party had passed an act of non-importation; to men who could advise the king to enter upon a negociation with an openly avowed roď shaking over his shoulders; to men of this humble and submissive cast of mind, the turning of the poor worm, when trodden upon, would, doubtless, appear to be an act of " intemperance." But, to those who have not the good fortune to be made wholly of earth, I think, that the rejection of the proposition of Mr. Thomas Jefferson will appear to have been marked with mildness, rather than with intempe rance. The case stood thus: Thomas wished to obtain from England several con cessions, the chief of which was, that she should, by positive stipulation, give up her right to search for her own seamen, on board of American ships, such ships being in all parts of the world, and every where offering to our sailors the casy means of desertion. In order to accomplish his objects, Thomas (his christian name, like that of any other potentate, is enough) sends an embassy to England, or rather, he sends over a negocia tor to assist his minister already here. But, lest the eloquence of these two should fail, he procures to be passed, previous to the departure of his negociator, an act of Congress, enabling himy whenever he should judge proper, to prohibit the importation of certain English goods; or, in other words, to eramp and embarrass, as he and the Congress thought, the commerce and the finances of England; and this act, it was openly declared, was intended to be put in execution, the moment England refused to make the demanded concessions. Under such cir cumstances would you, reader, had you been a minister of England, have advised the king of England to enter upon a negociation with Thomas? Who, amongst my readers, is there, owing a sum of money to his

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

neighbour, and seeing that neighbour ac company his demand of payment with the shaking of a horsewhip at the creditor; who, amongst the English people, is there, that would, under such circumstances, consent, for one moment, even to talk about the debt? Which of them would not say: "lay down

your whip; beg my pardon for the outrageous insult; and then I will discuss with you the subject of your demand, but "until you do that, I set you at defiance?" If such ought to be the conduct of every man, in the case of a just demand, accompanied with an insulting threat, what ought to be his conduct in the case of an unjust demand, accompanied with a similar threat? Yet did the late ministry enter on a negociation without saying, as far as the public has heard, one single syllable about the nonimportation act, which was suspended from time to time, in order to see how they would behave. Their treaty was, at last, returned by Mr. Thomas Jefferson, accompanied with the additions, which he wished to have made. "No," said the present ministers, ›we will not renew the old negociation with you. We shall be happy to treat with you upon a new basis; but, we will "have nothing to do with the amended ar

66

>

"

[ocr errors]

ticles of capitulation." As a step previous to negociation, they would, I hope, have demanded a repeal of the non importation act; a laying aside of the horse-whip. It is said, that America has a right to pass

what laws, she pleases to regulate the 54 trade cauried on with her. Very true; and we hart just as good a right to determine whether we shall enter upon a negociation with her, or not. Your taylor, for instance, has an undoubted, rigtig to buy his cloth sof another draper, and not of you; but, have you not as good a right to employ another taylor I know there is no laweto prevent the Americans from being outrageously insolent to us; but, I also know, that there is no law to prevent us from resenting that insolence. Let them pass acts of non-importation, 'till the very stones in the street rise up against their stupid vanity; but, let not the said acts be pointed solely at England; let them not think to bully us out of any thing. Mr. Canning's letter, refusing to renew theonegociation upon the basis of the amended articles of capitulation (for I can call the treaty nothing else), was, in my opinion, rathesh.too condescending towards America. It did resent the insult; but, it did stut resent it in terms sufficiently strong. Tameness towards America has, all along, been the fault of England; nor need we much wonder at it, when we consider the

great influence, the numerous votes, of those, who, either directly or indirectly, have been, and still are, so deeply interested in the funds and lands and trade of America. The questions, which I, some time ago, put to Mr. Alexander Baring, touching bis Ame rican citizenship; his ownership of American vessels; his trade in those vessels to the countries of our enemy; and his ownership of American stock, being the amount of the loan, with which America purchased Louis siana of France: these questions that famous petitioner, and his no less famous puffpublisher, of the Morning Chronicle, have suffered to remain unanswered. The process, by which we were to be done out of our maritime rights was curious enough. King Cong" talks big and threatens. His fund and land and ship owners here as semble, issue their circular letters, plague the ministers, and, at last, come to pariiament with a petition, in which they declare, that unless matters are arranged with "King Cong," England will be ruined. He brags of his resources and his power; but they talk of his inability to pay them, if England destroy his trade. He cuts off his resources by his own act, and his minions here blame the ministers for making him poor.. “You "shall yield to me," says he," your right "of searching for seamen, or I will pass a

66

66

"

non-importation act and lay an embargo." "For God's sake,cry the minions, “pre"vent his passing the act and laying the "embargo, for if he does it, we shall not "be paid what he owes us," and, it follows, of course, that we are to yield to him the right, for that only will prevent him from passing his act and laying his embargo. It was upon the influence of this bis faction here, that "King Cong" relied for the carrying ofubis ends; and, if the late ministers had remained in power, there is, I think, sufficient proof, that he would have secceeded.→ -To the third resolution of Lord Holland, the letter which will be found at the end of this Summary may serve as an ar swer. What reason had "the ministers "to conclude, that any attempt of the ene"my to execute the decree would be de"cidedly resisted by America?" What reason? I can discover none, any where; and as to the "driving" of the United States into "a closer connection with this country," alas for the poor nation, if governed by men who could really entertain the hope. Let Lord Holland read Mr. Thomas Jefferson's newspapers, of which I will presently give him a few extracts, and then talk, if he can, about America' being driven into a closer connection with England.The fourth

[ocr errors]

and fifth resolutions shew, that, if the late ministers did understand their own Order in Council, nobody else did.The sixth resolution, which is a recapitulation of the for-the Orders of Council, but the resolution of

the project of forcing us to abandon the right of search? Embargo or war or some hostile act must have come; and, therefore, it is not

mer ones, contains, besides, the sentiment, that it is our true policy to cultivate the friendship of America, because "her inte

66

England not to yield her maritime rights, that is to blame. To this point I have made many attempts to hold the citizens, who have speechified and petitioned against the Orders of Council. They seem to have no ears or tongues or pens for this question about searching for seamen, though it is manifest, that this is the question, upon which the two countries have, at last, come to an open quarrel.—I wish to satisfy the public mind upon this point. I wish to convinice all men, that it is not the Orders in Council which have produced the hostile measures of America. For this purpose, I take another extract, from the same paper (The Phi ladelphia Aurora), of the 17th of February, some weeks after the Orders in Council had been received in America. "Much has "been said of the pacific disposition of the "British cabinet, much of their ardent de"sire for peace and reconciliation; bot "since the arrival of the king of England's

|

rests and prosperity are intimately inter"" woven with our own." The close of his lordship's speech, as reported in the Morning Chronicle, before referred to, amplifies the expression of this sentiment. "When we saw all Europe under the dominion of one man, pressing and urging forward plans inimical to the interests and happi"ness of mankind, we might have looked to "America for that order of things, conge"nial with our own feelings and our own "views; and as forming a counterpoise to "the power of the ruler of the continent." What does this mean, reader? I fancy it must mean, that, if the Orders in Council had not been issued, America would have joined us against France. If this be not the meaning, I am sure I do not know what it is, and cannot even guess what it is. But, if this be the meaning of his lordship, I venture to assert, that his lordship has been most grossly deceived. The Berlin decree was passed long before Mr. Jefferson made his last Congress speech; long before the American newspapers proposed a subscription for giving rewards to deserters from our ships of war; long before our men were inveigled away at Norfolk and New York; long before the toasts about the "liberty of the seas" at Rochefort and St. Petersburgh. But, Lord Holland and others have asserted, that the embargo arose out of our Orders in Council, and they have appealed to the American newspapers for proof of the truth of this assertion. Let us, reader, appeal to those same newspapers. In the AURORA, a paper devoted to Mr. Jefferson, the "chief cause" of the embargo is stated, as follows:

66 66

squally" proclamation, which speaks a "language which cannot be misunderstood, "we hope to hear no more of this. The "determination of the English ministry,

expressed through their royal engine, to resist our claims and insist upon our sub"mission, is unequivocal. It now remains "for our government to say whether they "will tread back the steps they have taken "to procure us justice, or whether by a

66

manful advance they will convince the enemies of America and the world that we are not to be bullied out of our rights or intimidated to surrender our indépen "dence. There is no room now for quib

،،

A proclamation of the British govern"ment, asserting her right, and declaring "her determination to pursue a line of "conduct on the ocean incompatible with "the hitherto universally acknowledged

laws of nations, a conduct which has been "the subject of dispute between that govern"ment and ours for several years past, and "to. which she was well assured, that we "could not assent, without sacrificing our "national honour and independence." This is stated as the chief cause of the embargo; and, though it appears, that our approaching Orders of Council had some weight, what is the consequence, seeing that Thomas and the Congress appear not to have relinquished

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

bling or sophistry. The question is a plain one. Shall we defend or shall we comply? As there can be no évasion there "should be no hesitation, we know the men "whom we have placed at the helm of our

ship too well to suppose them capable of "yielding to the exactions of foreign com "manders, or of striking the colours while "there are hands ready to support them.

Principles of delicacy, of courtesy, of for"bearance, it seems to us, should have "taught a foreign court, while a negocia "tion was pursuing with a neutral nation,

<<

to refrain from publishing to the world its "ultimate, its irremediable decision upon "the most material points of that negocia "tion. Was ever an instance heard so sin

gular, so opposite to the customs of civi"lized nations as the present. The United "States and England differ upon this im

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"portant point, the right of search, to adjust the difficulty and restore harmony if possible, special instructions and authority 66 are communicated to our ministers at "London; proposals are made to the Bri"tish government. They promise to re"turn an answer, and while it is hourly "expected; on a sudden appears a procla"mation of that government, which (pre"cludes all further discussion upon the "principal object of negociation; refuses to "hear either argument or reason, and says, my determination is fixed; submit or "feel the effects of my displeasure. The measure appears to be a gross, a studied "insult upon our national dignity; it seems "intended as a ridicule upon our modera"tion, at the same time that it is a menace "to frighten us from the ground we have "taken."How false these facts, how fallacious this reasoning, it is needless, at this day to show, the subject having already undergone so ample a discussion. All I wished to show, by the quoting of this paper was, that it was the question of searching for seamen, and not the Orders in Council, that was, and is regarded as of importance, in America. As this writer says, the two countries are really at issue upon this question. The king has declared, that he never will yield the right of search, and the Americans have declared, that they will not submit to the exercise of that right. They would, it is very likely, complain as loudly as Mr. Baring does of the Orders in Council; but, this they cannot do, without complaining of France also, and their base partiality for that power will not suffer them to do that. The American papers, which now lye before me, down to the 20th of February, exhibit a picture of national feeling and affairs very different from what the people of England would have expected to exist, had they believed the representations of Mr. Alexander Baring and his coadjutor, the Morning Chronicle. It will be borne in mind, that the Aurora, from which alone I shall quote, upon this occasion, is a paper devoted to Mr. Jefferson and his party. Let us hear, then, what sort of opinion they seem to entertain of the virtue of the members of Congress and other persons of influence in America. Feb. 2nd." UNDER THE ROSE. Since "the arrival of Mr. Erskine's colleague, at "the seat of government, merely out of compliment to Mr. Rose, Mr. Erskine "has opened a levee every Tuesday evening and it is very handsomely attended by members of both houses!--Mr. Rose " is not backward in politeness in return for "these civilities. He has in the most con

86

"6

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

66

[ocr errors]

descending manner waited on several "members at their own lodgings, and has "entered into very long and innocent con"versations with them-sub rosa !——We "propose publishing, from day to day, after "the 1st of Feb., after the manner of the "court papers in London, the names of all "the gentlemen and ladies who attend Mr. "Erskine's levee, (sub rosa) merely for

66

public amusement, and to see how this "kind of court news operates. It is a I fact, that fifty thousand guineas have "been landed from the Statira frigate."To solve the question-Is that sum for "secret service money? We have only to

16

inspect the anglo-federal papers printed in "all our seaports.- Could not your Parks, your Russels, your Langs, and your Colemans, your Relfs and your Bronsons, your Youngs, and your Dalchos-give some "account of its distribution-the quantum

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

or portion allotted to Boston, to New "York, to Philadelphia, &c. &c.?"

-Feb. 4. "The report of Mr Rose's going home, we did not believe, though we heard it before. Mr. Rose is come "here to do something. Bullying and palavering have failed: there is one resource more; and that will be tried: the "GOLD that has corrupted all Europe, "and destroyed all that it has corrupted, "will be tried here."--Feb. 10. "Citi"zens of America, the gold of Britain

must be diffused abundantly; or there is more profligacy in some of your citizens, "than the vilest of despotisms produce. "MARK THEM."- -Such is the language of Mr. Jefferson's newspapers; such the confidence they repose in that republican. virtue, of which they have boasted so much, and of which the poor deluded enthusistic Brissot gave the European world such a flattering picture.The next thing I shall notice, is, the alarm, evidently excited in America, by our expedition to Denmark. I said, that this would be the case, and here is the proof of it.Feb. 3. "This "doctrine was advanced by English and "American federalists. Denmark, they "asserted, was about to throw her mite "into the scale of France to the evi"dent injury of England. This was the

66

cry of every pimp and agent of the corrupt government of Britain; a government, that is never at a loss for pretexts "to encroach on her neighbours-it was this government, which without the "shadow of proof to substantiate her in"famous conduct, basely and treacherously accomplished the destruction of the naval "power of Denmark, and piratically invad

[ocr errors]

66

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

66

[ocr errors]
« ElőzőTovább »