« PoprzedniaDalej »
6 cluded: but Great Britain was required against the injuries she has received frota “ previously to agree, without any know- France, the “ DECLARATION," this “ me6 ledge of the adequacy of the system which " morable document,” as the Courier " could be substituted, to negociate upon calls it, concludes thus :-" This disposiGi the basis of accepting the legislative regu- “ tion of the Government of the United 6. lalions of a foreign State, as the sole " States-this complete subserviencji lo the i equivalent for the exercise of a right, “ Ruler of France--this hostile temper 66 which she has fell to be essential to the towards Great Britain-are evident in “ support of her marilime power." " almost every page of the official corresWell, and what then? " A right' it is pondence of the American with the called again; but, if America denied it to " French Government. - Against this be a right, as she has uniformly done, what " course of conduct, the real cause of the wonder was there that she made the propo- 6 present war, the Prince Regent solemnsition? Great Britain might "feel," though “ ly protests. Whilst contending against I should have chosen the word “deem," as France, in defence not only of the libersmacking less of the boarding-school. Miss's “ties of Great Britain, BÚT OF THE style; Great Britain might “ feel," if feel “ WORLD, His Royal Highness was enshe must, that the practice complained of" titled to look for a far different result. was essential to the support of her mari- “ From their common origin— from their time power ; but, did it hence follow, that common interest-from their professed Ainerica, and that impressed Americans, “ principles of freedom and independence, should like the practice the better for that? " the United States were the last power, We have so long called ourselves the deli- s in which Great Britain could have ex. verers of the world, that we, at last, have “pected to find a willing instrument, and fallen into the habit of squaring up all our
«abellor of French tyranny.Disapideas to that appellation; and seem sur- " pointed in this just expectation, the prised that there should be any nation in the “ Prince Regent will still pursue the
poworld inclined to wish for the diminution licy which the British Government has of our power. The Americans, however,
-The Americans, however, “ so long, and invariably maintained, in clearly appear to see the thing in a different repelling injustice, and in supporting light. They, in their home-spun way, call “ the general rights of nations ; and, unus any thing but deliverers; and, it must “ der the favour of PROVIDENCE, rebe confessed, that, whatever may be our “ lying on the justice of his cause, and the general propensity, we do not seem to have tried loyalty and firmness of the British been in haste to deliver impressed Ameri. “ Nation, His Royal Highness confidently can seamen. -That one nation ought not 66 looks forward to a successful issue to the to yield a right, depending for compensation" contest, in which he has thus been comsolely upon the legislative provisions of a pelled most reluctantly to engage.” foreign State, is very true; but, if the right The last paragraph is in the old style, and be doubtful; if it be unsupported by any will hardly fail to remind Mr. Madison of law, principle, maxim, or custom, then the the documents of this kind, issued about case is different; and then, indeed, the offer six-and-thirty years ago. However, the of a legislative provision is a proof of a sin- style is none the worse for being old; cere desire to accommodate. - If my view though one cannot but recollect the occaof the matter be right, and I verily believe sion upon which it was formerly used. it is, this is the light in which that offer I regret, however, to find, in this solemn ought to be viewed; and I most deeply document, a distinct charge against the lament that it was not thus viewed American Government of " subserviency to by the ministers. These lamenta- " the Ruler of France ;' because, after a tions, however, are now useless. The very attentive perusal of all the correspondsound of war is gone forth : statement and ence between the American and French reasoning are exhausted: the sword is to Governments, I do not find any thing, decide whetirer England is, or is not, to which, in my opinion, justifies the charge. impress, „at the discretion of her naval The truth is, that "the Ruler of France" officers, persons on board American mer- gave way in the most material point to the chant ships on the high seas. -There is remonstrances of America ; and, I have one passage more in the “ DECLARATION," never yet read a Message of Mr. Madison, upon which I cannot refrain from submit at the opening of a Session of Congress, in ting a remark or two. After stating, that which he did not complain of the conduct America has made only seeble remonstrances of France. The Americans abhor an al
liance with France; and, if they form remember that it was urged with great such an alliance, it will have been occa- force in favour of American submission to sioned by this war with us. - This charge be taxed by an Euglish parliament; but, of subserviency to Buonaparte has a thou- as the result showed, with as little effect sand times been preferred against Mr. Ma- as it possibly can be upon this occasion. dison, but never, that I have seen, once -There is one thing in this « calling proved. It is, indeed, the charge which“ cousin,” as the saying is, that I do not we have been in the habit of preferring much like. The calling cousin always against all those powers, who have been al proceeds from us. The Americans never, war with us : Spain, Holland, Prussia, remind us, that we are of the same origin Denmark, Sweden, and, though last not with them. This is a bad sign on our least, Russia, as will be seen by a refer- side. It is we, and not they, who tell ence to Mr. Canning's answer to the pro- the world of the relationship. In short, positions from Tilsit." Subserviency it is well enough for a news-paper to re" to the Ruler of France !” We stop the mind them of their origin; but, I would American Merchantmen upon the high not have done it in a solemn Declaration ; seas ; we take out many of their own na especially when I was accusing them of tive seamen; we force them on board of being the willing instrument and abettor our men of war; we send them away 10 of our enemy. 66 Common interest." the East Indies, the West Indies, or the That, indeed, was a point to dwell on ; : Mediterranean; we expose them to all the but, then, it was necessary to produce hardships of such a life and all the dangers something, at least, in support of the proof battle, in a war in which they have no position. The Americans will query the concern : all this we do, for we do not faci ; and, indeed, they will flatly deny deny it; and, when, after MANY it. They will say, for they have said, YEARS of remonstrances, the American that it is not for their interest, that we Government arms and sends forth its sol. should have more power than we now have diers and sailors to compel us to desist, over the sea; and, that they have much we accuse that Government of " subser - more to dread from a great naval power, , "s viency to the Ruler of France," who, than from an overgrown power on the Conwhatever else he may lrave done, has not, tinent of Europe. They are in no fear of that I have ever heard, given the Ameri- the Emperor Napoleon, whose fleets they cans reason to complain of impressments are now a match for; but, they are in from on board their ships, Many unjust some fear of us; and, therefore, they do acts he appears to have committed towards not wish to see us stronger.
-It is in the Americans ; but he has wisely abstain- vain to tell them, thaç we are fighting in ed from impressments, which, as I have defence of the " liberties of the world." all along said, was the only ground upon They understand this matter full as well which ihe people of America could have as we do, and, perhaps, a little better. I. been prevailed upon to enter heartilý into should like to see this proposition attempta war with any power: it is a populared to be proved. I should like to hear ground: the war is in the cause of the my Lord Castlereagh, beginning with the people: accordingly, we find the motto 10 Declaration against the Republicans of the war is: “ Liberly of the seas and sea- France, continue on the history of our " men's rights."-1, therefore, regret hostilities to the present day, taking in exceedingly, that the “DECLARATION" those of India by way of episode, and constyles America a willing instrument and cluding with the war for the right of imsi abellor of French tyranny." It is a pressment, make it out, how we have been heavy charge; it is one that will stick and are defending the liberlies of the world, close to the memory of those who support I dare say that his Lordship could . the war; it will tend to inflame, rather make it out clearly enough. I do not than allay, the angry passions ; and, of pretend to question the fact or his ability; course, it will tend to kill all hopes of a but, it would be at once instructive and enterspeedy reconciliation. As to what the taining to hear how he would do it.
DECLARATION" is pleased to say about " Froin their professed principles of freethe “common origin of the two nations, dom, From these the “ DECLARAif of any weight, it might be urged, I sup. " TION" says, that His Royal Highness pose, with full as much propriety by the expected the United States would have Americans against our impressments, as it been the last power to become a willing, is now urged against their resistance, instrument of French tyranny. Very true:
of French tyranny: but, that did not distance ; but, they are a reading and an hinder him from expecting them to be the observing and a calculating people ; aud, enemy of impressing men from on board I'll engage, that there is not a farmer in their ships; and, it should have been the back States who is not able to give a shown how this disposition proved them to pretty good account of the blessings of be a willing instrument of French tyranny, - English liberty." Besides, leaving or of any tyranny at all. It is use this quite out of the question ; supposing less to revile; it is useless to Ay off that the Americans should think us freemeu to other matter. We impress men on and the French slaves, why should that board of American ships upon the high circumstance prevent them from leaning to seas; we take out (110 matter whether the side of France ? What examples of by mistake or otherwise) American sea- the effect of such morality amongst nations nien as well as English; we force them to have the Regent's ministers to produce ? fight on board our ships ; .we punish them How often have we seen close alliances beif they disobey. And, when they, after tween free and despotic states against states years of complaints and remonstrances, either free or despotic? How often have take up arms in the way
of resistance, we we been on the side of despots against free tell them that they show themselves the States ? England was once in offensive willing instruments and abettors of French alliance with France against Holland; Holtyranny.--I wish sincerely that this land and France against England; and, it passage had been omitted, There are ought never to be forgotten, that England, other parts of the “ Declaration” that I not many years ago, favoured the invasion do not like; but this part appears to me of Holland and the subjugation of the States likely to excite a great deal of ill-will; of General by a Prussian army. Have we lasting, of ruoted, ill-will. I do not not formed alliances with Prússia, Austria, like the word “professed;" as applied to Russia, Spain, Naples, and all the petty the American principles of freedom. The princes of Germany against the Republic meaning of that word, as here applied, of France ? Nay, have we refused, in cannot be equivocal, and assuredly would that war, the co-operation of Turkey and have been better left out, especially as we Algiers? And, as for the old Papa of never see, in any of the American docu- Rone, “ the Whore of Babylon," as our ments, any expressions of the kind applied teachers call him, his alliance has been to us and to our Governinent.- -But, to accounted holy by us, and his person an take another view of the matter, why object of our peculiar care and protection. should His Royal Highness expect the -Why, then, are we to expect, that Americans to be disinclined towards France, America is to refrain from consulting her because they profess principles of freedom? interests, if they be favoured by a leaning Why should he, on this account, expect towards France ? Why is she to be shut that they would lean to our side in the out from the liberty of forming connexions war?-Does the Declaration mean to with a despotism, supposing a despotisin say, that the Government of France is more now to exist in France ?The truth is, tyrannical than was that monarchy, for the that, in this respect, as in private life, it restoration of which a league was made in is interest alone that guides and that must Europe in the years 1792 and 1793 ? From guide; and, in my mind, it' is not more its tone, the Declaration may be construed reasonable to expect America to lean on to mean, that our Government is more free our side on account of the nature of the than that of France, and that, therefore, Government of our enemy, than it would we might have expected the Americans, be to expect a Presbyterian to sell his sugar who prosess principles of freedom, to be to a Churchman, because the only man on our side in a contest against “ French that bade him a higher price was à Ca“ lyranny." Hem! Mum --Well, tholic.--Here I should stop; but, an well! We will say nothing about the article, upon the same subject, in the matter ; but, it must be clear to every Morning Chronicle of the 13th instant, one, that the Americans may have their calls for observation.--Upon the falseown opinion upon the subject; and, they hoods and impudence of the Times and the may express il too, until we can get at Courier, that is to say, the principal prints them with an Er-Officio. They may have on the side of the Wellesley party and that their own opinion upon the matter ; and of the Ministers, I have remarked often their opinion may possibly differ from enough. I was anxious to hear what the ours. They are, to be sure, at a great Whigs had to say, and here we have it.
Mr. Pousonby and Mr. Brougham had “because summary, and because it is subpledged themselves to support the wat, ject to no revisal-to no adjudicationif America was not satisfied with the repeal" and because the individual seized has no of the Orders in Council; and here we means of redress. By this sort of reahave the grounds of that support. On soning there is a tacit admission on the this account the article is interesting, and," part of America, that it is not to the act of course, worthy of an attentive perusal." itself which they object so much as
- Notwithstanding the tedious length" to the manner of the act; and accord" of the papers on both sides, the question " ingly we see various suggestions made by “ between the Court of London and the “ Americans, for entering into an amicable “ Government of the United States is sim- " discussion on the means of getting over “ply the right of impressment of seamen on “ the outrageous way in which the right is " board trading ships—and this is in truth “ exercised, and of giving security to both " the sole cause of the war.-If we were to“ nations against the abuse in question. " examine the value of this cause to the “ Ou the other side, Lord Castlereagh de“ two parties, it cannot be denied but that “ clares the readiness of the British Goa “ to the Americans it is exceedingly slight, "vernment to receive and discuss any pro
and to the British highly material. The position on this subject coming from the " Americans cannot regard it as an insult, “ American Government; though he would " because it is a right which has been at all " not enter into a negociation, a prelimi. " limés asserted and acquiesced in by Sove" nary to which should be the concession “ reign Stales respectively. Then yiewed " of this right, and so far we think he was
as an injury what is it? That they shall " clearly right. But is it not monstrous
go to war to prevent British subjects who " that two people of common origin, and of " have forfeited their allegiance, abandon“ almost inseparable interests, should re“ed their country, and left their families " main at war on a point upon which there “probably starving, from being impressed " is so little difference between them?
board their merchant vessels--that is “ Surely without any sacrifice of etiquette " to say; they claim the right to afford an “ on either side, the expedients might be
asylum and employ the refuse of the Bri- 66 canvassed, by which this inighty cause of “tish navy-men without principle, for it " war 'might be removed. Let each party " is only the profligate that are likely to be “ promulgate their thoughts on the subject,
come the objects of their protection. In " and if there be an honest disposition to 6 this view, then, the point is of little peace, it must fcelow.--The argument
consequence to the Americans, but it is both sides is short, and may be put interesting to the British to assert the " in a few words. The agreement ought power
inherent in every State to reclaim “ to be so drawn as to make it most dan“ its subjects; and the time may come gerous to the Captain of an American “ when the principle would be equally im- " ship to employ a British seaman on board; 46
portant to America herself.—But, say " and, on the other side, to inake it equally " the American Ministers, it is not so “dangerous for a British Captain to seize “ much the right itself, as the violent and " and carry off an American seaman, under
insulting mode of exercising it that we pretext of his being a British subject.
complain of; for we have upon reflection " Or, in other words, it ought to be made 6 agreed in the principle of international “ their interest to abstain from those two " law, that free bottoms do not make free " causes of national offence. Various modes
goods, and therefore we have no objec- “ have been suggested for this purpose.
tion to the search of our merchant ships “ The most effectual undoubtedly would 6 for contraband of war; but in that case, “ be to ordain by a treaty, that the sub" whenever warlike stores, &c. are found “jects of each power, if found on board s on board an American vessel, she is de- “ the merchants' vessels of the other, “ tained and carried into a port, for adju- should be considered in the nature of con“ dication by a competent Court. Whe“ traband of war, inasmuch as their na" ther the adjudication be always impartial “ tural Sovereign was thereby deprived of " or not is another affair, but in this re- " their service in war, and that that “ spect nations are on an equal footing, and should be a cause to detain the vessel for " these Admiralty Courts, well or ill-con-“ adjudication. By this the American " ducted, are recognized by all maritime " Captain or his owners would most seri$f nations. But with respect to the im- " ously suffer by having British seamen on pressment of seamen,
the act is violent “ board; and, on the other hand, the Bri
"tish Captain would equally suffer, if he America are of nọ value? And, when we " had all the risk and loss to incur of an know, when no man will deny, when “ improper detention. Against this, how- official records of the fact exist, that “ ever, the arguments are strong. The hundreds of native Americans have been “ American Captain may have been impo- impressed and sent to serve on board our 6 sed upon by the similarity of language, ships of war: when this is notorious; when "s &c. ; and when brought into one of our it neither will nor can be denied, what is
ports, where there is a competeņt Court of value to America if this cause be not of "to adjudge the point, a real American value ?-As to the proposition for making "seaman might find it impossible to ad- English seamen “ contraband of war," it “ duce proofs of his nativity. Besides, in is so impudent, it is so shameful, it is even « both events, the penalty would be inor- so horrid, that I will do no more than just " dinate.
Another suggestion has been name it, that it may not escape the reader's ! made, that the British naval officer im- indignation. -- ludeed, there needs 110 more
pressing a seaman on board an American than the reading of this one article to con“ vessel, and vice versa, should be bound vince the Americans, that all the factions “ to make a certificate in duplicate (or in England are, in effect, of one mind upon
what the French call a proces verbal), to the subject of this war; and, I am afraid, “ the fact, one copy of which he should that this conviction will produce conse" deliver to the American Captain, and quences, which we shall have sorely to
transmit the other to the Admiralty to lainent, though I shall, for my own part, " be filed; and that the seaman seized always have the satisfaction to reflect, that " should have his action for damages in the every thing which it was in my power to ** Courts of Law, the certificate to be pro-do, has been done, to prevent those conse“ duced by the Admiralty as proof of the quences. $6 trespass, if the person can prove himself
WM. COBBETT. to be a native of the country that he “pretended to be. We confess we think Botley, 14th January, 1813. " that this ought to satisfy both Govern"ments, for this would make officers cau“ tious in exercising the right which at the
OFFICIAL PAPERS. " same time cannot be safely surrendered." This is poor, paltry Crash. But, it contains
AMERICAN STATES.one assertion, which I declare to be false.
Declaralion of the It is here asserted, that “the right of im
Regent of England against them. pressment of seamen on board of trading The earnest endeavours of the Prince Re
ships, is a right which has, at all times gent to preserve the relations of peace and “ been asserted, and acquiesced in by sove-annity with the United States of America $ reign slales respectively." - I give this an having unfortunately failed, His Royal unqualified denial. I say, that it is a Highness, acting in the name and on the right, which no nalion has before as- behalf of His Majesty, deems it proper serted, and that no nalion ever acquiesced publicly to declare the causes and origin of in. -Let the Morning Chronicle nawe the the war, in which the Government of the nation that has ever done either; let him United States has compelled him to engage. cite the instance of such a practice as we -No desire of conquest, or other ordiinsist upon; let him name the writer, every nary motive of aggression has been, or can English writer, on public law, who has be, with any colour of reaso), in this case, made even an attempt to maintain such a impuled 10 Great Britain : that her comdoctrine ; nay, let him name the writer, mercial interests were on the side of peace, who has laid down any principle, or maxim, if war could have been avoided, without the from which such a right can possibly be sacrifice of her maritime rights, or without deduced. And, if he can do none of these, an injurious submission to France, is a truth what assurance, what a desperate devotion which the American Government will not to faction, must it be to enable a man to deny. His Royal Highness does not, make such an assertion! The assertion of the however, mean to rest on the favourable " value of the cause” being slight to Ame- presumption to which he is entitled. He rica, in comparison to what it is to us, has is prepared, by an exposition of the circumno better foundation. The value! what stances which have led to the present war, is of value, what is of any value at all, to shew that Great Britain has throughout if the liberly and lives of the people of acted towards the United States of America