Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

Jay's treaty-Mr. Madison's resolutions, intended to produce war-colonel Monroe's submission to the French directory, his recal and disgrace-above all, the whiskey insurrection, which constitute some of the items in the account of the character of the opposition made to us while in power. I gladly turn from the disgusting pic

ture.

Tedious and desultory as my remarks have been, Mr. Chairman; worn out as your patience must be, and as is my strength, I must nevertheless claim further indulgence, while I offer a few remarks upon the subject of an armistice. As such an event is now ardently desired, certainly by the people, if it is not expected by government, it is proper to show how administration has met this question on former occasions. So shall we arrive at the probable result of our negotiation for such an object. I mean to show, how administration has made and met advances for an armistice, as it may have an important bearing on events which will sooner or later engage our attention.

Eight days after the declaration of war, 26th June, instructions were sent to Mr. Russell, from which I ask the indulgence of the house, while I read an extract:-" If the orders in council are repealed, and no illegal blockades substituted to them, and orders are given to discontinue the impressment of seamen (mark! British or not, naturalized or not) from our vessels, and to restore those already impressed, there is no reason why hostilities should not immediately cease-securing these objects, you are authorized to stipulate an armistice."

Such were the conditions upon which a cessation of hostilities would be consented to by Mr. Madison. An actual renunciation of the practice of impressment must precede even an armistice. Great Britain, as a condition pre-requisite even to a suspension of hostilities, must

relinquish the exercise of a practice which she claims as an essential right. It may be thought impossible that our government betrayed so much presumption and folly as this demand presupposes, but let us see how Mr. Russell understood and construed his instruction. In his letter of 24th August, 1812, to Lord Castlereagh, he says, "he is authorized to stipulate with his Britannic majesty's government an armistice, on condition that the orders in council be repealed, &c. and that orders are immediately given to discontinue the impressment of persons (not American citizens, but persons, deserters or others) from American vessels." In other words, sir, as a condition precedent to a suspension of arms, Great Britain is, in the outset of the contest, to give up every thing for which she has been contending, as absolutely as though she were beaten in battle, and conquered. A proposition for a truce would neither be made nor listened to by our haughty, proud cabinet, unless England yielded, surrendered unconditionally, and passed under the yoke. The power of England was considered still in the wane-our imperial ally was yet in the plenitude of his greatness. I need not enlarge upon this topic. Whatever relates to it is now understood, and begins to be felt by the whole body of people.

We may inquire impatiently-well! how did Lord Castlereagh answer this demand of Mr. Russell, made in the language of his instructions? As was expected, desired, and no doubt foreknown by our rulers, if after all their experience they have yet learnt any thing of the English character. I will read his lordship's reply—“ I cannot refrain on one single point from expressing my surprise, that as a condition preliminary even to a susPENSION OF HOSTILITIES, the United States have thought fit to demand that the British government should desist from its ancient and accustomed practice of im

pressing British seamen from merchant ships, simply on the assurance that a law shall hereafter be passed," &c. Thus, sir, Mr. Madison was once more disappointed in the attempt to extort from the fears of England what she could not otherwise be induced to concede, as endangering her existence. Will the same language be held at Gottenburg? It depends upon another question-how fares it with the great belligerents? will there be a general peace? have dissentions sprung up among the allies? is the "Great Napoleon" stripped of his power and renown? are we to be no longer dazzled by the lustre of his foreign conquests?

But governor Prevost offered us an armistice. It was instantly rejected by Mr. Madison. In a letter from Mr. Monroe to Mr. Russell, August 21st, 1812, he says"As a principal object of the war is to obtain redress against the British practice of impressment, an agreement to suspend hostilities even before the British government is heard from on that subject, might be considered a relinquishment of that claim." And yet Great Britain was to relinquish all her claims, abandon all she contended for to obtain a truce. This kind of reasoning at once puts an end to all armistices. An armistice implies submission by neither party, nor the abandonment of any point.

Another correspondence upon the subject of an armistice took place with admiral Warren, showing on the part of Great Britain a continued desire for peace, on terms honourable to both nations, and compatible with the safety of her people. As further proof of the pretensions of Mr. Madison, I ask leave to read a short extract from a letter of col. Monroe to admiral Warren-He says, “that a suspension of impressment during the armistice seems to be a necessary consequence. It cannot be presumed, while the parties are negotiating, that the United States

would admit the right, or acquiesce in the practice of the opposite party." To remove all doubts of the pretensions and demands of our government which they required to be gratified before a suspension of arms would be agreed to, I will read one more extract. It is from the closing paragraph of Mr. Monroe's letter to admiral Warren. "If there is no objection to accommodation relating to impressment other than the suspension of the British claim to impressment during the armistice, there can be none to proceeding WITHOUT AN ARMISTICE to the discussion and arrangement of that subject-The great question being satisfactorily adjusted, the way will be open

to an armistice." First settle what we are, or we say we are, fighting for; give up your claim of impressment; acknowledge yourself in the wrong; concede what we demand, and then we will agree to a truce. In other words, there shall be no suspension of arms until the objects of the war on our part are fully obtained and completed. What were we to relinquish in return for such a concession of essential and vital importance to England? Comparatively nothing-in fact nothing upon which England placed the value of a farthing. Will the same tone be preserved at Gottenburg? How fares it with the continent? . Is Philip sick?

To agree now to an armistice, which is not preceded by, or does not include an arrangement of the question of impressment, upon terms consistent with former pretensions, will be submission, not on the part of the country, but by Mr. Madison-It will be hauling down the colours of administration.

Every moment, sir, that this war has been continued since the armistice agreed on between governor Prevost and general Dearborn, it has been under a new character, whatever may be said of its justice when declared. The policy, necessity, and justice of the war was a settled

made captive within the dominions of their sovereign, where the arm of protection cannot be extended, but if the armies of the enemy crossed the lines and invaded us in turn, and made prisoner a Briton in arms against Britain, he is as much a traitor as if taken in the heart of the British empire. If by the laws of England her subjects cannot throw off their allegiance, and are taken in arms, no matter where, they must answer to the offended laws of their native country for the parricidal act. I can see no assignable difference in the cases, according to the laws of England, and who is born in that political society, is bound by its primary laws and regulations. They are not to be annulled, or altered, for the convenience of an individual, or the few, to the imminent danger or destruction of the many. Our naturalization laws can have no more binding effect upon other nations, than any other municipal regulation. By claiming to give them an extended operation to other countries, we interfere in their internal government. We set up the lofty and high sounding pretension of legislating for the whole worldof making our acts grafts upon the public law of nations

of incorporating our municipal acts into the great code of nations. If we mean and are able to contend against a world in arms, this new and towering pretension may be persisted in, as similar innovations have been by invincible conquerors, who know no laws human or divine, that assign bounds to their ambition. Upon no principle, neither according to the previous admissions and practice of our own government, nor the long established principles of other nations, can we maintain such a claim. It is hardly necessary to detain the house by reciting the circumstances of Clark's case, who was taken as a spy and discharged by Mr. Madison. The case of Williams, decided by Judge Ellsworth, in Connecticut, also shows by our laws, as well as those of Great Britain, that allegiance

« AnteriorContinuar »