Newspapers / The Raleigh Minerva (Raleigh, … / June 26, 1812, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Raleigh Minerva (Raleigh, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
. --w vif- ' -v . . -.. "vs " .- . - ti . ' P . - - -f. - , ' . . . . . . . - i 1 TSSt , Csie3 it to be tny Mf not suffer the transaction shotM or vjiould not jgrant 9 p?iftl rTI AirtA 1 StAtriC " pa?s unnoted." Tbi wM'i 't5w from ;O)iit0n;$f Mt Hw4:I. W- I Wfi'.T " '.- - - more nor Irt than the ft ihe-Adrtiiraltv.Court, learning from the Dofcc ol JJasino, Uiat 'ft , iKtrihpr- , i.rncpr or thf Ki-fhrh vnvemwent; a; m t&e Miff uooaifiienti-ditnt De.carrieo 1 ' ,v FtiAuii. Man 19. ' s J ,.'1 I ' HAtnn oil n5 th n"iWrtt frt wl.irTi I -w not shot h eirs f of m Intended dUlara. Cu&tollooiofficer, under atCof Coiigress ihc greferfK 10 the Jaw oi the J&ire What ihtiuld we aay tor fc' libel yf ' ve6si by th&lstrtct :Aiidt nty.ofthe' Onhed States, or Jjsefttoe Df.ihe exemption tffied b?,Mr pecutary Fox on tlUbrtnaplt f tbt .arDe, letter io .blocMjCI be -justifiable pc wjiJ unless itbe - the f aiei suprteo bf ntQequaie jforc flcaiunsd t maift I l before ? taio it end H-cxpoie to baxafd ill vtsstlj anemot. - V th CottBcil of JMass,(!;Mr EiUselKw'rthts to er ing to to mettiiotC'3 or wai tht MtiVado ' , cure thta caae, JFfora tV inguffuclout mode ori announced; b?';'t fcad sr,U6'Sed.imelf by a com. rfir6cft2tiir $ that is frflrtl the bpeiatioo of the law. 'ttoft Mbodar nexti -Uh closerfdoof atid wh had been repealed I : The whole pfrtrts cor mailed hlta'W malce :last?eiW'ti rescue inei Vr'v - 'T " r7 I r .. r ' w T .bK;;ti i, uit ed tindtr the restrondenee proves unequivocally tnat neither .tne rr n rii s La iiuv - jr" ' r ' .... ' . - . . - ' - . m 1 'r.vTHftiiaa falliidine a motion W adiournl Custom Hpo pacers, me uourta Qt Law, nor Lued him o ma1ce: aUitne-the UJ notTVmtoStinnOoi tJic ln or arc..if w ine.aac w inc HwoUld'eMea' vesel4?srerea ana w py nrsrppenai qu Cndinc ovet ItSlife bad propoauon to'atib- fiit.tne -T.i7'.' "- -r it v.i .r ni t-t if the nation. "He conceded imnseJt monsirancc wt mr. uaru v rpii 11 iu.Lt.K v it - . 1 r j 1 . forward.- He L.. 'cratB-'af (JUCCiXJCl)y htUM - afar 1T1ITI' wIIIkw UAiSJU VM,H!imH iww.m , . , k . eVery ruin devoted the. causof this emln public function, who are directeo to pat iS-Miii thit.Uatoe.bul incvew rank thetrt in force. -The only authorities to whom ha ,cquuii;i -V'" t -n. - . i.Vi.. .;-- h-fnfal ftf these decrees was to be a rule of action theruitftrs, courts 8nd olSccers of the custcps rernained p'rofounrtly ignorant of the fact. It iy to ber&and no where but in the proclamation of the President of the United States, of the 2d Nrvem ber,&6f. 44 To have, waited for the receipt of this proclamation (says Mr. Russell) in rder to make use of it for the liberation of the New-Orleans Packet, Appeared to me a preposterous and unworthy cPUrse of proceeding ; and ta be nothing better than absurdly and basely emptying th de claration of the Presidtnt, that the Berlin and Mi lan decrees had been revoked, as ike means of ob taining their revocation," They were then not re voked, or surely Our minister-would not standin nsed of any means fur obtaining their revocatioiu , Proofs multiply on proofs. ... ., " The Custotrt House Officers of Bordeaux-commenced unlading the New.Orleans Packet on the 10th December and completed that work on the 20th, as appears by their proem verbal of those dates. That of the 20th expressly declares that the property was to be pursy ed before the Imperial Whf f If Ihc. law. so dreaded tv as re bealcd ? .A)ifrb time tp tim (he contittuesl infer, reeld myelf 9ftH r6ceedxngs,fin rrgard to the taptured vesseisiWul jiscertauied th'e fact that tht duke cl Bass'nojhad made, ajreport in relaiiorji t them'. ;Thft itmpsrorf U iVptacs, -however, still merci.? Whatl to ttuoV if h9 decrees of iJeriii and Milti Were reWked I .Was bis majesty icner !-r muI don ol ute. tnrouenom uw.aw. - 1 , . t . - i .1.'-... .4. (T.. I The motion wuicn n 'sw w uuci tut of certain propositions, whitb he pledged him- 'selftb prove nay, wunoui an aouse ox me wrm, Tbe first of these propositons was tnat tne uerr lin sad Milan decrcea ware n 01 oiwy rciimcu, Trut that our govetnfnerit had furnished tp the house Jand to the worlil unequivocal evidence of the fact frhe iifficultyta demonstrattng this proposition a. rather, fi-btn' hia embarrassment in selecting (from the Hit tnaiss cfvidence before him, than1 Jio any deficiency olvproot ; tor 11 ne were to ue 'gU the testirhoDy that rhiglit be adduced, he fear led his disdPUrae would grow tp a bulk not interior lothe Vplurhe which he held'in his hand. He would Vefer the Hodse to the correspondence, generally, Jof Mr, Russell, our agent UVris, accompanying Ithe Presidetkta message of thferesent session. He Ireferred 'to the uchedulepf American vessels taVen Tiy French, privateers since '.the - first of Npvember I18IO, (the period, of the alledged repeal of the "French decrees of Berhn fcnd MilafiJ a ot .theae, It WaS tvorthy of rettxark, that Vthe RoUnsPnova, 'forh Norfolk 10 JPhdon, with tobacco, cotton anu favA - the iVfirv. Anfai'frorri Charleston to Loh- !don, with cotton and rice ; the General Eaton, irorhlbndcltio Charleston, In b&Uait ; the Nep kne from London to Charleston, also in ballast ; hheClio, frofft tdndob t.o Philadelphia, With Eng rant f tW; fact 7 V.C.ah,ttonfeer evidence be addui ciff thi,i they wert b forc i ff can, Uie release (not hef H c&mSkyi baf.pexclitttc intef fcrenceY under fltcvJiararckmstanut, and .af- ter alongdeteution forfviolatin those decrees, of a ymgU vetfeV ebtabjisn the fact oftheir repeal. Cm the. contrary ought not the solitary exception (granting it to. be one) to fortify (lie general -rule, ; In pastiirlg, it was well worthy of remark, that the French rntnister, being interrogated by Mr. Russell pa the subject of our future commercial intercocrse with France, " replied that no such communication would be made at Paris, but thai Mr. Serrurlcr would be fjillr instructed on this head." l ite House would recollect how much; when had -been, expected from Mr. iSerrurier on his ai "ri-1 No Briti val and how much had been obtained. An Ex- Admiralty foseeesed the meaaa, 8c would emBlor them, of watching tKa whole toast from ttreat ta t.lbe nd. ot etftctaa.iy eniorciog int 0Jpckade,; .,M,The blockade of Maf, 1805, according to that doctrine ptauMatned try Ore at Britain, was just uft ' - lawfu.1 inlt Prig;it because it wuppofted botbr in intention Mid wtt by ift ade'au'ait naval force.' tti a stitjseoaPI ipinflKt iamg lettf U is div , v, tioctljTavawedrtiat J that blockade was. tftsintawr , - tsfjjWtoriUt1air ' eiathCsfsa donlf (says ie FostrrdtrV'Wfifcuricik : ctfil¬ cmtinurtin&r wtr,itfylto'tf,iSir tavr ; ' h' by a due efiiUeatiofi 'mv't-napSoferee?:" t f lhe same idrwssibn ' wUffce.' The 4toast of Frittifroiest tCtjXii Of x X what, sekmeh call: an'jroii-iipbiiti uast tvfcas be'cfr blockaded in ve?y war durirjfe the i&V iJttitUry,-. ; that 1 knon r penoa 01 inc Aipencan mrar xceDiea. England loast the Wiiiery of the'thanneL ' sh minister Woi be . eufferpdtp hold hes suffered to hold place who should fail strictly to Witith ie PnpP- uie coast or r ranee.;": wrest, ner principal naval arsenal, protruded -Wi)ttBt4theCAt)anti.)Ceatfy,- Secretary of State even had the temerity to charge the President with havinc conn:blel him to dcW ist from putting any interrogatories to the French ! Confessed th'e; aiittr sqi table. harttort foirlp , .- minister on his arrival. 'But be hat as it mav, war in the channel r! tvhilfi from Fhinouthi JPons-'. : one mtng is certain, mat appucatron having been mourn c me mou'n 01 tne a oamei, itw pppouc coast is easily watchea tXM overs WeC. r from. V Calais to the hlbe the coast Is Jo, flat and ahtf; ing, difficult f access,' offof ding Tew 6o ialetsi i ;' indeed bone except the Scheldt. The blockade.:" made to the. minister of .the requisiiion of the Sen ate rfufing the present session, he had beclared an entirejgnorance of every thing relating to the .sub. ject. . ' 1 -- .. . To dissipate the last shadow of doubt on the question of the repeal of the French itccreesj Mr. Serrurier, in his letter of July 23, 1611, to the Secretary of State, expressly declares, that " the Council of Prizes' the Court of Adrpiialtj: J at ineif difiouions oi our government, expressed in Parisv'accrding to the decree's of the 2Sd Novem jthc'tuppl .rntntary act of the 2d March lauy hay ber, and 17th December, 1806, or in other words j ing beeiK,fiicial!y communicated, to his cour his under the decrees' of Milan." Mr. Russell's reraon. J impirjal majesty, as soon as he was made acquaint etrancer wav submitted to the council of commerce! ed vith thenii directed that the American vessels and further .proceedings agahs the New Orleans I aeijiestered in r!ie ports of France iince the 2d oj raCKet auspuwuea nu jivjiera vjerc not hum- mittedto the council of prizes, nor a pnj?f c'mion in French decrerand et'W iince the ZdJWhiiMer, 1810, bad.ruSitae irisueda ih-4tk 4VW 'Ust t"?tbdTbat the PlfllWb vessels named in that Schedule, which bad been testored vCt.the lwo- Krothers. from Boston to'St. Mafb, and the Star, fcomSatem to Naples (the dne a port in France, the other virtually a French pdrtj did hot come Within the Scope at, the Berlin and MUa.n decrees, indeed, the only cases relied upon by Mr. Mon- Voe to prove the repeal of the French decreet, are hoaeofthe GraceAhn Crecn, and the NewUr- leans Packet. Ati the fa st of these no great stress Is laid because, tieing opUired by a British crui- ttr, she Was retaken by her own crew anu carnea Into Marseilles, where consequently the captors becartie Frebch prisoners of war. : As well might ,lttecfijdV4hat in lease of War between the U. AStateYknd pjiteS info French ports, should be proceeded a. gainst ttrtder thftse decrees, tt was therefore, oh 'tbe cWe tft1e New-Orleans Packet that the prin pal reliance yas plided, to shew the repeal of the Obnoxious -decrees. , But e ven this case establish tl. bnntiA thA ftossibilitv of doubt, that the Mdan of the 23d November, and 17th December, 1607, were.in force subsequently to the period of l)et..allcdged repeal. iTbis vessel hearing at Gi braltarjwbere she had disposed of a part of her Cargdi Pf the tetter 6f the Duke of Cadore of the 3thof August, 18 lQj suspended her sales, and the supercate-o alter hainj? 'consulted with Mr. Hack- , , theJVmerican consul at.Cadii, determined, on the faith of that insiduous letter to proceed witn he-i3ematnder of his cargo to Bordeaux He took the, precaution however, fb delay his voyage, so that he might ribt arrive in France before ihe 1st of NoVe'riber, he day pn which the Biri lhd Milan decree were to ceiSe to, pper&te, stituted .before -that tiibunal ; whiih piOves'oAly hat the prosecution at Id w was suspended, fiot that ibe laws" were repealed-' and ihe vessel and car. position ol the consignees, on giving oonet to pay tha eitrmated amount, should it definitively ce de cfded that a confiscation should take place." l?e A ovrmber, -should be released : orders were at the tank time to be given to admit American vctielt, ladtri vith American produce !" Tinder th-se circumstances, whatever difference of opinion might . Wst as ihe propriety of the could be none as to.it6 revocation. v.? soon a w.as asctftaintd, not only from the proceedings cf hei crui.ers on the liih seas, but other courts oi n-. uaafi Vftftmiarirtf fntf-rpH x T'rpnf.h ! law. and of her uovcinment, mat iran?e naa ac. WHtH HIv . . ..j . - - ...... ! ' IV. port oh the fai'.h of the repeal of those decrees- jtert, vialjrae, loaras mis country,- u rciy She is seited and libelled under (hem, but after 'came th duty of the President to recal t)iat pr) J...r,n on tK ftart fth- Amrirnn mini's, t e.lamatiPt. Ue could have nodoubtof his cousti 51 tV VAV I HW4I Vl "" I I . . . . , fpr. hft obtains trom the .1 rencti crovtri ment tuu.viat riowcr w ,iyJt.i, u.mib What ? Proofs of the bona fide revocation of the de-! exercise! it P a case not dissimilar ErskineN ... i i-ai . i .1 i i ? Nothine like it. A discharee of the ves- arranctihent.J i nat proclamation was me oivui crecs selnot at all the bond represents-her ; she stands img line II our policy ; ine root oi our present pledged in her full value in case she should be vil. Frm that tatai proclamation we are tooaie found V come Svitluft "the,,scope of the low ; and our departure fiom that neutral position to vhich - (Ifere Mr. Randolph was. palled to order b. Mr. Vrlgnt, Who said therC-Wal ho moUdn be Core the HonseV The Speaker overrdled Mr. Wiight's ob- iection, s the1 gentleman from Virginia had dc - llurt'd his,tntentioh to make a motion, And it hid oeen usuat W'Pf rmii prctaiory remarss. , ' . Mr. Randolph said he would nroceed in his ar jgumeht whhout deviating is the right or to the left, and would enflcayor w; suppress every, teeling t which the-duestiort was id well1 calculated to ,x titeli ThvesSeraccordiogly arrived In the Gh. ; tonne pd Jthe 1 4th of Novembtr,but did not reach Bordeau tjntil the 3d Pf December. '.-.On the 5th hfihis month ifejfirtctor vfihe customs seiied the new-Orleans packet and her cargo, urper theMi ln decrees of the $ 3d November and i 7th Decern be?, l807,exirty ut Jbnh for haing-come from ".an Lngllsh port, and having been jmi red by a Bn tish vessel of waK" Thus this vessel' havinevo ' tiiniarUrj entcfed French port on the faith of the Upea4jDjjft.deerieS i.WS.'. seized "under the mi, ".attest ractSf'tonunUes Mr. KasSeJII, "hiving neen stattd to the by the supercargo, or the A merican vice-cbrt'sel at Bordeaux, and the priticipa! one,' that of the seizure - tinder tfii ' Milan decrees being established by the 'pfvecs -verbal, put iptpmy yet We riitist believe the law to be repealed ! What sort .of a release is this I Mr. 'Russell makes a meiit of having " TescOed this property from the seizjre v;ith which it has been visited" that is rescued it frovx a court of justice 'and of having placed it in a situation more favorable than that of many other vessels and -cargoes wnich contmneu in a kind of mcrtefnarti, by the suspension ot all pro ceedings in regard to them." And this, letter and case Is adduced as proof of the repeal of the Bei- lih arid Milan decrees, on the 1st of Nbv. 1810, It is true that in a postscript dated the 5 th of uly (a month subsequent to the dale of the letter tP which it ts appended, and seven months after hi remonstrance to the F rench government; Mr. IClss'elt states that orders had been Riven to cancel the bond in question. But surely this s no prool of the revocation of the decrees. Let us see what he says on the I Sth of that month. "Although I. was fully impressed with the importance of an early decision in favor of the captured vessels, none of which had been included in the list above mcti- Uohed"-7-tlof 16 American vessels whose cargoes had been admitted by order of the Enipeiov' 'probably under licence yet I deemed it proper to wait tor a lew uays, oeiorc inauc an Bjijipuvfluui: on the sdbiect. On the 11th however, having earnt at the council ' bfnjes thatiionew order fiad been received : there" (that on tht 1 1th ot July 181 1,. the French admiralty court had no no iier of thereneal of the decrees) " I ludcred it to .---... .'.:- .'4 . - mv Hutv no lontrer to remain -sueni. x tnerc Z . , , . ., . f, .... T, I lore on that uay auoressea to ine uurc ui idssa no my note with a Ust ofAmerlcan vessels c?ptu red since the first of November. On the 15th I learnt that he had laid this note witha general re port before the, Emperor, but that his majesty de. dined taking any decision With regard' to it, before ithad been submitted to a 'council ot commerce. ,The house would take into consideration the distinction between the council ot prizes, and ad miralty court; bound to decide according to the lawaofth'e erppire, and the council of. commerce, which was of the nature of a boaMoftrjade : char ged wi'th the general juperintendance of the pon. ccrns of commerce occupied in de vis ing regU' lations, not expounding them ; an institution . ah towether nblitical. bv no means Judicial..-:.. His ma etv then, determined to consult bis council, of we had lo long and so tenaciously adhered and the accomplishment'of the designs of France upon us. Ini4uing the Presidentliad "yield to the deceltfu) OiVfrtures 'pf France; and it; wits worthy of obs"effatiuh how different a construction bad thereby fceen put upon the act of non intercourse (as it was commonly called) i from .that f May, ism Jtho the words or the two acts were the same. In the first casejr a modification of the de cites and orders of the belligerents, so afe that they should cease to violate our neutral rights, wis a. lone retired. In the second, other Ynatter was blnded wi'. li them , although the words of the two acts were identically the same. This greW out of the insidious letter of-thi duke of Cadore; the terms of which were accepted, witb the conditions anhexed, by the fresident ot tne unitea otates These conditions presented two alternatives : ' That Lncland should revoke her orders in cbunci and abolish those principles of blockade which Fiance all edged to be new, or that the U.btates should cause (thcir flag to be respected by the Er- glish" in other words should become partiPp the war on the side of France. In order to know what ihese principles were, the renunciation of which we wjere tu require aT tne-instigauop i France, it-would be necessary to attend to tli lan. uage of the Ft ench decrees. By these it would not beTdenied that principles, heretofore unheard of, were .attempted to be, interpolated into AeF laivs of rations"' Principles diametrically ad verse I to those which the government of the Uf .States hid repeatedly recognised, in their correspondence witn-ipreign powers as wen as in mer puouc ucu liesftd be leiitima'te''' and inccntfestible- The French doctrine ofblc'ckade beine the only-branch of the subject embraced in the duke of Cadbi's leli er ot tne sin n.ug. ioiu, wouia atone uc iiuutcu. These required that the .right, pf. blockade should be restricted to fortified ports, invest d by sea and by land. That it should not extend to the mouths of rivers, harbors or places not tortiheti. T .Under such definition the blockade of May, 1806, otherwisexalled Mr., Fox's blockade, stood! COlTOe.jKeu"Wuc inrji ixaimm.n iiaj iv usaiipuuu in auirming that.blockade to have been legal, a- greeably, totthe long established principles ot na-t tional iawiVsanctionei by the U. States..; In Mr- Foster's letter of the 3d of July last to', Mr. Moru mti by one of the cPnsietees of the careo, 1 con-1 commerce, whether frpro motie of. policy he roe, he says" the blockade of May 1806 was no.' must not bass unnoticed that betJotkadeJirtis ti, . f point of fact," (as appeani from Mrwfoe's eU ters to Mr. Msdisonpf the I7Hh swfsothof Majr, 1506.) limited o the sJraall extent cf the coast be; -v tween HaVrei and Os tend ; .rleutraTi being permit- ! ted to tradej freely t eastward of Okehdy and west. u ward of the mouth of the Seine ' except in artL cles contraband of war J and enemies propeity I.- which are SetJiaMe Wilhoat blockade ' ; And Mr. , Monroe, ib annouiVcirrg this very bfockade! Ma'f 16, laols, to-hirtmm verlime)M,, si-4ksv'oTlt'ai ... a measure hiahly Satistacioty . tfreiMAtQercHt-x' interests Arid yet thfe 'rtboat oi this blockadp against whith, Mj Mpnrjpie iffltt not femoniirate ' ' in the way of thjat arrangement, ot wnicft no no- . - nee was taken in our iproposAion to England lor a mutual abandonment f our erPbargpand her or ders in council is nbv tf J7rench ie vice and cpii- : ; tnvance to be. made . ttine pta non, an indispensa- . ble preliminary tp iSi ctcommodation With Great . V Britain: -V ' . , . ' ; ' Mr. Rhd heurd &' srntere tiatAfacttbb ma ny;, respectable g entlenien in the HPU3e and put of it express a wirdi,- that, by a revocation of the .or 1 oers in couueuxne criusn inuusny ruum putti m the power of uur government to cotne to some ad i justment of our Uifferences wuh England. , ihe position whi ch- he Was about to lay down', and th prool oi vtAicn tne course oi nia argument compelled Wra in sofne degree tP abtieipte, hPW- ' ever it mi ht startle persons ot this descripWon, was nevertheless suscepuoie oi tne'inost cirreci and positive ttldenCe. Utile did thoS: geniierrkii . dream, but such was tbe indisputable fact,fhatihe,- - orders in council had not stood in the way pi ac commodation, and that their removal at this too-, - meut would nbt satisfy Our administration; - In Lord AVcllesley's1 letter to Mr. Pinkfieyof Dec. 29, laio, he says 4 If nothing mbre had been ibY quired of G. Britaifi, for the purpose of seciring the continuation of the repeal of the French de crets, thp the repeal Pf our orders In Council, I , should not feave hesitated to detre thfc perfect ' lre?idiness of ibis governmecUofuJStt ttti these terms the British ijovtTnmem has always: t been serrooidy disposed to repeal thfe orders in '..- council. It appears however, pot omypy the let-, ter of the French minister, but by your eJphna tioti, that tbe repeSl of the ofdei's ifi ebbhcil wilt ' not satisfy either the French pr the AmcHcarCgO" verrilepts. i ne Uil fl govemmrm is lunnr c- quire?4..byjhe letter pf thtr French minister tP rr ' bounce JhoseVpTmcije French government alleges to be new' .. i This fact is placed beyond a doubt, by MrV Pinkney's answer ot the, 14th January, IBM. " U lnmnrchrn'fl the 'other 'Darts' of your lordship'i , letter," sas he, " tbey declare in effect that the irmsu voverruic,i rsu ... ders in council f. and again, t It Is cei tainf trUC that the American govfcrhment has required, as iriv disDensablein theview of its actsbf Inlercbiirse and' ...... i . . i : ,. r .1 r,..:.tt - and non-mtercourscv tne annuimen; oi uic oiuisti blockadeof May ISO?" ' .-" ; Thus, wheft the British government JtoPd pledg; . ed to repeal i;a orders in ctuncil, .a lv. disilhct has been dexterously mincltdith it lb; our discussions with England j the renunciation of i blockade In tbb fate of Mr. Madisoh' 1 construction Pfjfie non intercourse law, and ot Mt j Smith's instructibbs to General Arrristrohg of Ju. ly 5, and 2d.NdKemberb l810, has 4eeh declared lnuispmsaoic ii -iu- - j-?, rji:rz the fullest admission that wrpthah the repearpf : the orders ""in council waa rt qdi red ; Vi. cf tkiU - ?- .--.,- , I' .- .... (.V, . r .. ; : . , ? f ; - . f ;T' ; ;" iT. ; f-, L 'c "v.?. :-. ; . V r -' ?; Ti
The Raleigh Minerva (Raleigh, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
June 26, 1812, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75