\ '^\

sS-^^c

v.^

vO^X'^^^.V

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

|50 ■■■

2.2

I.I

lit

1^ P-0

11.25

1.4 ii.6

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

33 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80

(7!i) 87i2-4503

r/i

«^

A*^'

r\^

'V^

^\x^^

^1^*

'^i)

.f^ J!^^ .. ^vf

U.s

CmM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHiVI/ICiVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de micror jproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notas techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available foi filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in tie
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

r~n Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagie

□ Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicul^e

□ Cover title missing/
Le titre de couverture manque

□ Coloured maps/
Cartes giographiques en couleur

□ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre s,ue bleue ou noire)

□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

□ Bound with other material/
ReliA avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

Lareliure serrde peut causer de I'ombro ou de la
distorsion le long de la marge interieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6x6 film^es.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppldmentaires:

L'lnstitut a microfilm* le meilleur axemplaire
quil lui a «t« possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique. qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la m«thode normale de filmage
sont indiquAs ci-dessous.

I 1 Coloured pages/

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endomniag^es

Pages restored and/oi

Pages restauries et/ou pelliculdes

Pages discoloured, stained or foxsu.
Pages ddcolor^es, tachet^es ou piqudes

Pages detached/
Pages d^tachies

I I Pages damaged/

I I Pages restored and/or laminated/

I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxsd/

I I Pages detached/

0Showthrough/
Tri

ransparence

□ Quality of print varies/
Quality indgale de I'impression

□ Includes supplementary material/
Comorend du material «iinniAi<...

Comprend du materiel supplementaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc.. ont dt* filmies 6 nouveau de facon d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu« ci-dessous.

JOX 14X 18X 22X

26X

12X

16X

30X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Douglas Library
Queen's University

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol — ^- (meaning "CON-
TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

IMaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams iiiustrste the
method:

L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce 6 la
gAnArosit* de:

Douglas Library
Queen's University

Les images suivantes ont 4t6 reproduites avec ie
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettetA de l'exemplaire filmd, et en
cortformit* avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim«e sont filnr\«s en commenpant
par Ie premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second
plat, selon Ie cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont fiim^s en commenpant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, seion Ie
cas: Ie symbols —^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", Ie
symbols V signifie "FIN".

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
fiimds A des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque ie document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir
de "angle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant Ie nombre
d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la m^thode.

mmmm

FACTS

AND

¥*»

DOCUMENTS,

RELATING TO THE

STATE OF THE CONTROVERSY,

BETWEEN

i MERIC A AND GREAT BRITAIN ; .

AMP THfi

DISPOSITIONS

OF THfi

TWO CABIJ^ETS TO MAKE F RACE,

Collected for the use of the America^, j^ople.

JBec

BY A FRIEND OF TRUTH,

AND OF HONORABLE PEACE.

BOSTON ;

TRUE & ROWE PRINTERS.
1813.

E_3si.ri^

l^ '

FACTS AND nOCUaiENTS, *;c.

Extract of a letter from Thomas Jefferson, Esq. secretary of state, under the i't-
rrctiofi 0/ George Washington, President of the United States, to 7T>omas
Pinckvey, minister plenipotentiary of the United States at London, dated

"DEPARTMENT OF STATE— JFUI^Y U, 1792,

"THE peculiar custom in England of Impressing Sea-
men on every appearance of war, will occasionally expose
our seamen to peculiar oppressions and vexations. It wUl be
expedient that you take proper opportunities, in the mean
time, of conferring with the minister on this subject, \sk or-
der to form some arrangement for the protection of our sea-
I men on those occasions. We entirely reject the nM)de which
was the subject of a conversation between Mr. Morris and him,
which was, that our seamen should always carry about them
certificates of their citizenship : This is a condition never yet
submitted to by any nation s one with which seamen would
never have the precaution to comply : the casualties of their
calling would expose them to the constant destruction or loss
of this paper evidence, and thus the British government would
be armed with iegal authority to impress the whole of our
seamen. The simplest rule will be, that the vessel being A-
merican, shall be evidence that the seamen on board her are
such. If they apprehend that our vessels might thus become
asylums for the fugitives of their own nation from impress
gangs, the number of men to be protected by a vessel may
be limited by her tonnage, and one or two officers only be
permitted to enter the vessel in order to examine the number
on board ; but no press gang should be allowed ever to go
on board an American vessel, till after it shall be found that
there are more than their stipulated number on board, nor till
4ifter the master shall have refused to deliver the supernume-
raries (to be named by himself) to the press officer who has
come on board for that purpose ; and even then the Amerittin
consul shall be called in. In order to urge a settlement of
this point before a new occasion may arise, it may not be
amiss to draw their attention to the peculiar irritation excited on
the last ocvasiofty and the difficulty of avoiding our making
immediate ret>risnh on their seamefi here^ You will be so good
as to communicate to me what shall pass on this subject, and
it may be made an article of convention to be entered inta
either there or here."

176015

^t,!?.." r",*!?- ''°". * "P'' "'' * '"'" f™™ Mcffrs. Blow & Melhaddo m.r
coait ot Atriea, by the commander of a Britifh armed vefTe) q« J^ •

a«> oM.r nation. No law forbids the seamen of any couJrZ
engage, m time of peace, on board a foreign -vestel ; no law
""hor.ses such seaman to break his contract, nor the armed -^Z
sets of his nation to interpose force for his rescue."*

^fffract from the instructions given bv Timothv P'irh/>,;«rr «,^ •

«A.on, the angles left una'^^Jf l^L^oiMn^-erea^.^l^tre
on^th?!, V^P'f "2 of American feamen. Mr, Pinckney ,vas fnftruaed

Briufh imprefTes, prove that the fubjed is in its nature difficult.

«; i f *"* j""P^^ft "»^^» as remarked to Mr. Pinckney, would be, that t/je t,es

hnfi^ nf \" •"^P"''^^"' P°'»t g-'^'n'^d, if, on the /S;]^^ seas, our flag can proted
z^tfrZ """"'^T'^'r^^^^^^^^ ^"^ for th:s,hur^a„ity as u^l -

the r flfl^v P'^T'"^""^ Pj^^''- J^^^'-'^.h^"^ vefTels c.rry no more ha.^s than
exDofe ho7h T ' T'^"'^- T^-A^hdraw any of chem on the ocean, is to
pea tha^ThVr-V'.'^ ^"""^'''^ '° deftruaion. We have a right then to ex.
pea that the British government will make no difficulty in acceding to this
very ,ntereft,ng provifion Aud the fame r.otives fhould operaTe. wfth nea
ly equal force, to procure for us the like exemption in all ii Brit (hco oT^
but efpeaally in the Weft Indies. la the latter, the confeoue ce of H^^^^

ddtroyed by the worms, and the remnant of the crewr cxpofcd to the fatal
5:!'^Lll^f-f- Hence a longer detention eniue's ; the vovl.e he
^•^-.=..= .nprt^iiraole, ir not runious to the merchant, and liumanitv c'enlores
the loft of many valuable lives. But there is another cogenTSon fc t V
abfolute exemption from rmpreffes in the Britifh colonies. S^hattheV:^^^

, as 1. always has been, attended with inonftrous abufes : and the" ia.

premt
even 1
zens,
nies, r
any a(
In th(
found
contrc
promj
be mi,

Mr. p

»'I(

. folk, r

candoi

(Wem

an enc

fixed i

tion ar

quiries

seamer

J to mak

iiess to

rights,

British

tion of

the ide

and TE

,^ other tl

any res

f will ev£

;^ The sul

' but tiie

your spi

Rufus I

* Byth

.ialso presid

i oi the opii

J tries, upyn

will

'State, under
ted States, to
i at London,

liaddo, mer-
ilors, on the
So many jn-
Vl their gov-
difavow and
)r to obtain
ft likely to
: protedlion
need from
".ountry to
y no law
rmed ves-

roN, when he
ipute between
ind to impress
d.

Secretary of
ited States^

8, 1796.
ing nature
5 inftrucRed
prefcrihed
reprohi^ted.
;hem from

\^tthe 'ves-
ucJ!>. But
an protedl
ity as well •
aiids than
:ean, is to
ben to ex-
ig to this
^ith near-
I colonits,
:3f an im-
njiircd or

the fatal
)Vaye he-

deplores
1 for the

practice
d the-liu

preme power is fo remote, the evils become irremediable before rcdrefi can
even be fought for. To guard againft abufe. on the part of American I?
/.ens, every mafter of a vefTel, on his arrival in any port of he Br Scob
n.es. may be required to report his crew at the proper office If a erward;
any addmon be made to them by Briti/h fuhjccl ihefe may be taken away

fn, H ^K f ^'"'n- ?"'"•" ^^"^ ^^^'^"^' ^he impref. of BrS TbUcU
found on board our veffels muft doubtlefs be admitted. But thraXodd U
controlled by regulations to p.event infults and injuries, and to adm nider
prompt rehef where Amencan citizens (which will alfuredly iLptn tal
be miilaken for Btitifh fubjects. ^ "appen; man

Mr. ftckertng under the dnecthn of president Washington, to Mr Kin^
al «„ /'^'^''-"''"ARTMENT OF STATE. September 10. ,796 ^'

fl T '' ^^T^'^'^^ Francis S. Taylor/deputy collector of Nor-
folk relative to four impressed seamen. It appears to be written with
candor, and merits attention. If, as the captain of the Prevovrnte
(Wemyss) s.yst).e dignity of the British government will not perm '
.n enquiry on board their ships for AmerLn seamen, terrdoon"
fixed lor the war : and thus the rights of an independent neuSn a
tlonare to be sacrificed Xo British dt^ty i Justice requires harsucMn
quines and examinations should be made, because the libe atTon of our"
seamen will otherwise be impossible. For the British government then

ri.l . , • f •'"' '"^ y^' ^^""y *'^^ °"^y '"^^n« of ascertaining thofe
nghts IS an insulting tantalism. If such orders have been given^o the
British commanders, (and Mr. Liston's communication, in the conversa
jon of which I sent you a copy in my letter of the 31st i t oltenance;
the Idea) the agency of Col. Talbot and Mr. Trumbull wi^be Se«

and THE SOONER WE KNOW IT THE BETTFR * R.,^/ "" ''\5V^"\"eSS,

other ,hi„gs, and if .heBrithh g^nrnlh^^e .n'^'eLr.o o-" '1^
any respec. for our nation, .nd place any value on'^ur Kendsh fhev

r> r zr- (J^'gne^^) TIMOTHY PICKERINP

^ Rufus King, Esq. esV. eSJV. rn^JllLKliNG.

■ 1* ■

:{^ni^ opinion, tha aCoSt J W S , "'"/T *!'' ^«" «-« -"tte„. we.eboth
..^tries, upon the subject of l^„,T' ' ^ "°"" ''''' ^'^^ •^^^"'^^" *''« »-" ----'

■i

'i* " I fhmU ^ -^ '^«'5'/— OEPAKTMENT OF STATE, October 26 1 79fi

Or«/.; . i lUA HAVE EVEN SOMETIMES IMPRESSED FRENCH-

MEN. If there should be time to make out a copy of a protest lately re-
ceived, it shall be enclosed, describing the impress of a Dane and a Portu-
^guese- This surely is an abuse easy to correct. They cannot pretend an
inability to distinguish these foreigners from their own subjects: and they
may with as much reason rob American vessels of the property or mer-
chandize of Swedes, Danes and Portuguese, as seize and detain in their
service the subjects of those nations found on boa* d American vessels.
The president is extremely anxious to have this uusiness of impresses
placed on a reasonable footing."

£.xtraetof a letter frnm Mr. Pickering, secretary of state, under the dircahn of
■president Adams, to Silas falbot, esquire.

»«DEPARTMENT OF STATE AugUSt 15, 1797.

«»I was pleased with your success in obtaining relief for so many A-
merican seamen, as mentioned in your several letters : but your laft,
containing the orders of Admiral Parker to his captains m lottger to obey
the writs of habeas corpus^ gave me much tmeasiness. Yesterday I gave
those letters to the British minister, Mr. Liston ; and wish he may do
something to afford you a prospect of further success : but I fear, not-
withstanding he is perfectly well disposed to administer relief, that his
remonftrances or requefts will have too little effect. I ihall transmit
copies of these letters to Mr. King, our minister in London, to lay be-
fore the British ministry, if any naval officers shall have committed such
an outrage on any American seaman as to bring them to the gatigwayy as
you mention, or to inflict any kind of punishment on the i, especially
for seeking opportunities to inform you f thar situation^ for the purpose of
obtaining the just relief to which they are entitled, pray endeavor to
get proper proofs of the fa£l, that I may make it the subject of a spe-
cial representation to the British governmem."

Extract of a letter to R\iia% King, esquire, frefn tie secretary tf slate, dated-^

"TRENTON, October 8 1797,
"Lord Grenville's observations on the a^ of Congress for the relief
and protection of American seamen, present difficuhies which demand
consideration at the ensuing seffion. But your reasoning, in your let-
ter to his lordship of the 30th of laft November, is conclusive against
the British pretences to retain real American seamen who are married in
their dominions, or who have voluntarily entered on board British ves-
sels. // behoves the honor and faith of the Britlh government to adhere to
iheir principle on natural allegiance ivholly^ or to renounce it ivhotly : and an
answer on this point would have become his lordship's candor.

I consider colonel Talbot's agency in the West Indies to be no

longer verv imnnrf-anf.

agency

1 no rtrrirl mnrlni-f r»r orli-riirol c!r Hw/^o

er, (who from the beginning has thrown obftacles in the way) leaves
but little room to get our seamen released. The oppofition of the of-
f cers in general, induced col. Talbot to take out writs of habeas cor-

pus at
ed the
time p
lalbot
ATTEl^
TION.

not to
their \
every <
are a tic

The Sec

The
Mr.
treaty ft
retary i
Mr. Lil
express
quently

* Byt
ering '■'un
of a treaty

■and Mput

Extract
King, ■

"The

liitude, ■■

\ "This

who eng

'I "No r

|hey are i

|he evide

to serve,

iThese mi

In the m

if the U,

foreign se

|heir disci

th unrelii
ijurious i
' "It is tl
aeasures

test lately rc-
' and a Portu-
ot pretend an
sets: and they
perty or mer-
etain in their
irican vessels,
of impresses

he direerhn of

15, 1797.,
' so many A-
ut your laft,
I longer to obey
erday I gave
L he may do
I fear, not-
ief, that his
lall transmit
I, to lay be-
nmitted such
^angwayf as
I, especially
; purpose of
endeavor to
;ct of a spe-

8 1797,

or the relief
ich demand
in your let-
isive against
e married in
British ves-
t to adhere to
tly : and an
)r.
ies to be no

Kzy) leaves
1 of the of-
habeas cor-

pus at Jamaica, by which, directly, or in their consequences, he obtairr-
ed the discharge of near fifty seamen ; but admiral Parker has seme
time paj} prbidden ha officers to pay any obedien,-e to such -writs ; and coL
lalbot informs me that some of our seamen have been punished for

ATTEMPTING TO SEND LETTERS TO HIM TO INFORM OF THEIR SITUA-

•riON. Mr. Lifton has aflured me that the Britifh officers have orders
not to impress any American seamen, and of course not to retain againft
their will any already impressed : but if they perfift in obftruainc
every channel of information and proof of their citizenihip, such orders
are and w/// continue deceptive^*

Tht Secretary of State to the Pre/, dent of the United ^/«/^j.-department oir

STATE—Fcbniary, 20, 1800.
Ihe secretary has the honor to lay before the prefident—
Mr. Lifton's note of the *th February, together with his project of a
treaty for the reciprocal delivery of deserters ; which appears to thesec>-
Texzvy utterly ttiadtnijfihk, unless it would put an end to impressments, which
Mr. Lifton seemed to imagine, while the 7th paragraph of his project
expressly recognizes the right of imprefling Britifh subjects, and conse-
quently American citizens, as at present.

(Signed) TIMOTHY PICKERING.*

\rL -^.SiL**/""!1 """ *''"! "'^ *'"*^ ^'"^ ^"g'''"^ '^'^"'^ ^ satisfHctory to Mr. Pick- '
SaieatC^^ w,r»h^^'V'" r'^r"^'''^-'^ ^"^ "'"' in hi. opinion, every ''project

Binact Df a letter frtn Jchti Marshall, esaulre' tecreiarv o/,,^,- .. d r

K,„g, „>,i„er t'enip,ten,Ury oftte' ule/st/tesTio/dTjJ'e^^l'""
■ „TL„ • , "DEPAHTMEKT OF 8TATE— September 20, 1800

"lhe.mpressmentof our seamen i. an injury oi very serious ma„

«itude, wh,ch deeply affefts the feelings and the honor^ "naS"
j^ "Th,s valuable class of men is composed of natives and foreigner;
, who engage voluntarily in our service. "reigners

^ "No right has been asserted to impress the natives of America Yet
|hey are .mpressed, they ara dragged on board British shiprof wa „Tth
|he evidence of citizenship in their hands, and forced by xllence there

Tl-tr'' «""' T''"""'^f'*''"'>"'^'= °f "'"' birth can^be obra?ned I!
These mull mod generally be sought for on this side the Athm^
|n he mean t.me acknowledged violence is practised on "c Wz „"

"It IS the duty as well as the right of a frien.lly nation, to require that
.«sures be taken by the British govern„,e„t to preven't "he continued

I'?

If]

l^e|ietUion of such violence by its agents. This can only be clone bv
punishing and frowning on those who perpetrate it. The mere release
of the injured, after a long course of service and of sulicring, is no
compensation for the pafl, and no security for the future. It is impos-
sible not to believe, that the decisive interference of the government in
this respe<i\, would prevent a prafkice, the continuance of nviyuh muji in-
evitably produce discord beiween two nations which ought to be the friends
of each other.

"Those seamen who, born in a foreign country, have been adopted
by this, were cither the subje£ls of Britain or some other power.

"The right to impress those who were Britilh subjedls has been as-
serted, and the right to impress those of every other nation has not
been disclaimed.

" Neither the one practice nor the other can be jujlijied.

" With the naturalization of foreigners, no other nation can inter-
fere further than the rights of that other are affected. The rights of
Britain are certainly not affected by the naturalization of other than
British subjects. Consequently those persons who, according to bur
laws, are citizens, muft be so considered by Britain, and by every other
power not having a conflicting claim to the person.

"The UnitcdStates therefore require positively, that their seamen,
wIk) are not British subjeilts, whether born in America or elsewhere,
shall be exempt from imprelTments.

"The case of Britifh subjects, Avhether naturalized or not, is more
queftionable ; but the right even to impress th^m is denied. The prac-
tice of the Britijh government itself may certainly in. a controversy ^ with
that government f be relied on. The privileges it claims and exercises ought to
be ceded to others. To deny this would be to deny the equality of nations, and
to make it a question of power and not of right.

*« If the practice of the British government may be quoted, that practice is
to maintain and defend in their sea service, all those, of any nation, who have
voluntarily engaged in it, or who, according to their laws, have become Brit if*
subjects,

" Alien seamen, not Britifh subjects, engaged in our merchant ser-
vice, ought to be equally exempt with citizens from imprefTments : we
have a right to engage them, and have a right to and an interefk in their
persons to the extent of the service contracted to be performed. Britain
has no pretext of right to their persons or to their service. To tear
them, then, from our pofTeftion, is at the same time an insult and an in-
jury. It is an act of violence for which there exifls no paliative.

" We know well that the difficulty of distinguifhing between native
Americans and Britifh subjects has been used, with respect to natives,
as an apology for the injuries complained of. It is not pretended that
this apology can be extended to the case of foi'eigners, and even with
respect to natives we doubt the exiftence of the difficulty alleged. We
know well that amono" that class of neonle who are seamen, wg can
readily diflinguifh between a native American and a person raisedHo
manhood in Great Britain or Ireland ; and we do not perceive any reas-;
he capacity of making this diflinction Ihould not be pofTefTedj

7 be clone bv
mere release
fcring, is no
It is impos-
overnnient in
which intiji in-
)e the friends

been adopted

lower.

1 has been as-

ition has not

ion can mter-
rhe rights of
f other than
rding to bur
r every other

their seamen,
or elsewhere,

not, is more
d. The prac.
roversyj with
frcises ought to '
f natiens, and

hat practice is f
tioftj nvhohave.
become BritiJI-f .

nerchant ser-
siTments : we
tereft in their
Tied. Britain
ice. To tear
lit and an in-
liative.

Jtween native
ict to natives,
retended. that
id even with
lUeged. We
men. wg can.
son raisedHo
eive any reas-
t be pofTeiTedl

•'If, tliereforc, no regulation can be formad which (hall efFectually
secure all seamen on board American merchantmen, we have a rirrht to
expect from the justice of tl BritiOi government, from its regard for
the fnendlhip of the United States and its own honor, that it will man-
ifeft the sincerity of its willies to repress this offence, by nunifhinc
those who commit it. Jib

«* We hope, however, that an agreement may be entered into satis-
factory and beneficial to both parties. The article which appears to
have been transmitted by mypredeceiror, while it satisfies this country,
will probably restore to the naval service of Britain a greater number of
seamen than will be loft by It. Should we even be miftaken in this
calculation.yetthe difterence cannot be put in competition witfi the mis-
chief which may result from the irritation juftly excited, by this prac-
tice, throughout the United States. The extent and the juftice of the
resentments it produces, may be eftimated, in Britain, by inquiring
what impreffions would be made on them by similar conduct en the
part of this government.

" Should we impress from the merchant service of Britain, not only
Americans but foreigners, and even Britifli subjefts, how long woula
such a course of injury unredressed be permitted to pass unrevenged .?
How long would the government be content with unsuccessful remon-
ftrance and unav .iling memorials ? I believe, sir, that only the most
prompt correaion of, compensation for, the abuse, would be admitted
as satisfaction in such a case.

"If the principles of this government forbid it to retaliate by impress-
ments, there is yet another mode which might be resorted to. We
might authorize our ships of war, though not to impress, yet to recruit
sailors on board British merchantmen. Such are the inducements to
enter into our naval service that wc believe even this praftice would
very seriously afFe<St the navigation of Britain. How, sir, would it be
received by the Britiih nation .?

«« Is it not more advisable to defift from, and to take effectual meas-
ures to prevent, an acknowledged wrong, than by perseverance in that
^ wrong to excite again/} themselves the well founded resentments of America,
and force our government into measures which may very pojftbly terminate in
an open rupture" ^ ^^.u j

Extraa of a nete from Mr. King, minlfter plenipotentiary of the United States
at London, to lord Grenville, dated—*' London, Great Cumberland Place-
November 30, 179v
« Ih your lordfhip's letter of the 21ft of September, in ?nswer to my
application for the discharge of Maxwell, an American citizen, impres-
sed and detained on board his- majefty's fhip Sandwich, the reason as-
signed agaiaft his discharge is «« that he is married and settled at Bris-
tol i ' anu I underftand that the orders of the lords commiflioners of
the admiralty for the discharge of American teamen usually contain a
proviso, that the discharge is not to operate in favor of any person who
has entered on board of any of liis majesty's ftiips, or who is married or
settled within any of his majesty's dominions. Without admitting, or
contesting, on this occasion, the rule of English lawt that a subiea can-

.10

not divest himself of his natural allegiance, I take the liberty to requeft
your lordship's attention to the diversity of pra<?ace, so much to the dis-
advantage Of the American citizens, that prcva)\s in the eophcation of

«If Great Britain requires the acquiescence of foreign -^f t^<^"f ;" J}"^
law. so far as regards the requisition of her subjefts married and settled
IbT; d, or voluntarily engaged in foreign service, rj she not bound to h
serve it in like manner herself, in respect to the suhjeBs of foretgn powers,
under similar circumstances, in her service or within her dominions? It to
Z demand of a foreigner in her service by the -^J^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
belongs, Great Britain answers, that such foreigner cannot be delivered,
b aufe he has voluntarily engaged to serve his jnajefty, or i^s marred
or is settled within his majesty's -iomlnions, is she not bound by her
own principles to admk the validity of the same answer trom such ^^^^^^^
eign nation, when she requires the surrender of British ^ubjf s f^^^^^^^
in a fimilar predicament in ihe service or within the ^ /ritory of such
foreign natiin ? Justice, which is always impartial, furnishes the prop-

er answer to these questions. ^ a

"Sting, then, that the vok .tary contract of an American oti-
zen to e"ve oA board a British ship, or the marriage or settlement of
"ch : ddzen within his majefty's dLinions, is the foun toon f^^^^
in his majefty's government to refuse the requifition of the IJnited
States o" America, that such citizen should be discharged from his ma-
iefty's service, do we not thereby establish a principle that at once condem..
indpJZe^ld to the practice of his.najestfs naval cffic^s m entenng A-
merican ships, in search of and for the purpose of i^preffing Bntj^
Samen, fmce all seam.n found on board such ships are there of choice
ui>d by volumary contract to serve in the American employ ."

«But if neither of these <jircu instances can be considered as )^fl^^'
ing a right to his majesty's government to refule the ^'^^^harge of Amer
can citizens, does it not refuk .hat the ufu.l provifo -««"f^f/^ ^^^'^^^^
orders for the difcharge of fuch citizens, and which >s afiigned as a rea-
fon againft the difcharge of John Maxwell, is without any juft foun .
t'ont^and confequemly operates to the difadvantage and injury of tU^
American citizens.

Euract of a letter from Rufus Hing, esrahe tnthe secretary of state, datedj^

'•LONDON, April 13, i7y7. '

«.Tt was before my arrival that lord GrenviUe had expreffed to Mr
Pinckney a diffiitisf action with the practice of granting pioteaions t*.
American seamen by our consuls. rrP^vJllp had

writtrmVa^lTtt^rrin which this branch of the conlular power is de-
S Tnd notice given to us that the practice muft be dilcontinued A
cipy of this letter, and of mine tranfmitting it to our feveral coniuls. I
ha'd'the honor to fond you with my letter of the ^^th of December- >.
Pre ous to the commiinication of this rcfolution ot the Br.t.fh gov
ernment, it had been notified to Mr. Pinckney. that ^^/Pjf-^^^^^^^
the difcharge of American foamen imprefled into the Bnti(h iervice.

from the American confuls, as had beeii cuftomary. One conlequence
of this regulation has been, that the fubjeft in all its details has come
under my oblervation, and its importance, I confefs, is much greater
than Ihad supposed it. Injiead ofaftnv, and those in many injlances equtv-
ocal cases, I have, fince the month of July pnji * made apphcatton for the
discharge from the Britifh men of Huar of 271 seamen, 'who, fiatmgthert^
seh»s to be Americans, have claimed my interference : Of thts number 86
have been ordered bv the admiralty to be discharged ; 37 more have been ae-
tained as British subjeBs, or as American volunteers, or for nvantofprooj
that they are Americans ; and to my applicatic.is for the discharge \}'^' ^'T
maining 148, 1 have received no answer ; the ships on board of ivhich these
seamen ivere detained, having in many inflancesy sailed before an exanmatton
sew made irt comequence of my applications .\

"It is certain that Ibme of thole who have applied to me are not a-
merican citizens, but ihe exceptions are, in my opinion, few, and tne
evidence, exclufive oi certificates, has been fuch as, mmoftcales, to
fatisfy me, that the applicants were real Americans, who have Deen
forced into the Britifti fervice, and who, with Angular conftancy, nave
generally perfev^red in refufing pay and bounty, though m tome m-
ftances they have been in fervice more than two years. As the appli-
cations for my aid feemed to increafe, after the fufpenfion of the con-
fular power to grant proteftions (owing to the expofed fituatiop ot our
feamen in confequence of the denial of this power,) I judged it advila-
ble, though 1 faw little profpeft of any permanent agreement, to attempt
to obtain the confent of this government, that, under certain regula-
tions, our confuU fnould again be authorifed to grant certificates ot
citizenftiip to our feamen. My letter to lord GrenviUe and his aniwer

you have enclofed, i • u t i „«« ^o

"I likewife fend you the copy of another letter, to which 1 have re-
ceived no anfwer, that I wrote to lord GrenviUe in order to expole the
inconfiftency with the laws and principles of British flegiance of a rule
by which av-knowledged Americans are detained in the Bntilh lervice.

•A Detiod of about eight montln only. ' , .u^. j,^,

tByf^port of the Lretary of state, to congre.s dat^ Jan. 15. 1812. j;^/^;^^^^
n.ent9 and e^^dence then before congress ; it appeared ^hat at that time the.e were SIX
THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY SEVEN impressed Americans .n tl«
service of fc.ngland.

Extract nf a letter from Rufus King, Esq. minister plenipotentiary of the Uni-
ted States, to the Secretary of Siate, dated

"LONDON, MARCH 15. *799' -

*'I then mentioned our diflatisfaaion with the continuation of the
praaice of talking out of our Itips, met on the main ocean, fuch of ttieir
crews as did not poiTefs certificates of American citizenfhip ; rf^^)'*^!:.
a<! T had often done in former conferences upon the fame fubjedt, any
right on the part of Great Britain upon niyhicb the praaice coula irejounueu^
and suggefling that ourfhips of war, by permijfton of our government, might
with equal right pursue the same praaice ^, wards their merchantmen,

"That not only feamen who fpoke the Englilh language, and wfta
were evidently Engliih or American fubjeas, but alfo all Damjb, Hm^

difby andjther foreign seamen, who could not receive American prcfea ions,
•were indiscriminately taken from their voluntary service in our neutral enu
ploy and forced into the war in the naval service of Great Britain.

" Ihat on this fubjeft we had again and again offered to concur in a
eonvention, which we thought pradicable to be formed, and which
mould lettle thefe queftions in a manner that would be fafe for En-
gland, and fatisfaftory to us.

"That to decline fuch convention, and to perfift in a praflice which
we were perfuaded could not be vindicated, efpecially to the extent to
Which It was earned, feemed lefs equitable and moderate than we tho't
we had a right to expeft.

**Lord Grenville stated no precise principle upon ivhich he supposed this
praBtce could be jujiifed, and the converfation upon this point, like many
others Upon the fame fubjea, ended without a profpea of fatisfaftion.
J.t^ex<re.nch and ^aniardty and every other nation, might pursue the same
conduct as rightfully as Great Britain does. With refpeft to foreign fea-
men in our employ, this government has, if I recoiled, yielded the
point, though their officers continue the praftice. We ar* aiTured that •
ail Americans fhall be difcharged on application for that purpofe, and •
that orders to this effeft have been given to their naval commanders ;
therik^^ falisfaaion-indeed, ^. acquiesce in it, Js to give up

REMABK.

l^rom these Letters, it appears, that the extent of the inju-
ly of IMPRESSMENT was "much greater" to America, than Mr.
^ing, or the American People generally, " had supposed it ;"
Wiat the practice of England militates with her own princi-
pies, in demanding men naturalized by other nations, while
She refuses to give up those naturalized by herself— That al-
though the cabinet of Great Britain can assign no ^^ princi-
pie to justify her claim of impressments from on board our
ships, yet they are determined to continue the practice in its
Whole extent and with all its aggravations, and our minister
aespairs of obtaining any satisfaction ; that all further nego-
ciation upon the subject would be futile; and that America
must forever submit to this novel and unprincipled claim,
this intolerable injury, insult and degradation, or make the
last and glorious appeal in defence of its honor and indepen-
dence, and of the equality of nations.

This claim of Great Britain was first in-vented by her, to be
applied to this country after its emancipation and acknowl^
edged independence ; and undoubtedly arose from a dpsirp,
^e^f^TrlT' °^ 'V.'".^ something from the pieces of the wreck
^Ive u.Z7'7^"'V^'" ''^™^^ ^'^^^^^^ to its base. She ■
h^rLnZ i'l '^'^^""'^ "P"" '^' ^^^'^' ^'hile. contrary to
^^x ex^rm acknowledgment, she continued to compel and se-

cure our services upon the ocean. Washington saw the ten

ag '• Lit inir '" -'■°-'^«g'»datio„, and re^o^Zfi
aga mst it ; m his opinion we were then too feeble to wae-e
another war. Adams saw it, and remomt rated Z^Z
kewisa saw It, and remonstrated. In the mean time ™a
on revived from the distresses and privations of The Revo
lutionary war ; it encreased in numbers and oppulence and"
became powerful ; circumstances in Europe changed, and
the policy of our government changed with them tronf
prospects of success reviv> d the hopes of America • and ^
remained for President MADISON to take that" ten In onr
national policy, which .« his predecessors sZ^2' Zal
betaken, and ardently longed for the time, when by reason
of the increasing strength of our nation and a change of cir
cumstances, it could be taken with a reasonable exp^ectat on
of an honorable peace. What the fathers of our cOnnfrv
Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and their copatriots to™
prophesied as essential to the complete emancipaHorof Ame
nca, our present Congress have had the policy and com
o declare, a war nvith Great Britain. And, by thi. measure
<hey have only met the war on one side, which EngS his
been so long unjustly wagingagainst this country: ^

Practical Operation of Impressments,

IS Julv to 30.1, Stpiember, i8,o inclusively ' * ' ''"•"•"^ ""■ *">«'

Proteftions from Confuls
and^iceConfuls H

Notarial affidavits made in
Uie United States

S -SJ
28 ^^ "^ .5 . Do. do. England

1 s ^ §

.;i • A^o. ao. iLngiand
•g 1 CoIIeaor.s Proteftions

Admiralty Prote<^ions

Indentures

Documents from the De-

Bischarged and ordered to be dif.
charged
"Having no documents
Being Natives of the United

Kingdo; .
Do. Weft Indies
Do. Africa
Do Impofters 5i s <: -

eivenr h^ defcnpuon ^ Cannot afcertain the names of the
Hi^^^^X::^:^ 1^^ ;^;P- board of which .en are

^'T±%^^' "^^"^'^ '" ^he U. S Not on board the ftips as ftated
^"^'"-^°'" 3(^Deferted *^

S Drowned

2 S Killed

1 (, Invalided ^

1 ;^ On board fhips on foreign ftations 59

2 ^, Applications unanfwered 1

Having been taken in priva-
te 3 of the enemy
No reafon affigned
Being a deferier
Being a native of Pruffia
LNot being Amerieanai

9
8
2
1
1

2
1
S

Clerk^sOjtce, Houfe ef Representatives of the United States.
1 certify, that the foregoing is a true copy of the ahftraft G. contained in
the mefliige from the Prefident of the United States tranfmilting a report
ftom the Secretary of State, ou the fubjefts of imprefTmenta, of the loth Jan.
1^12, the original whereof is now on file in my office.
In nv'itnefi •whereof^ I have hereunto set my hand and nfiixed the feal of my
office, the 12th November, in the year of our Lord one ihoufand
(seal) eight hi-nJred and twelve, and of the Independence of the United
States the thirty-feventh.

- P. MAGRUDER, c. h. r. u. s.

It will be observed that this number of 325 Mariners were
all impressed from on board of American vessels, during the
short period of THREfi months. And if the operation of the
British practice of Impressment be so destructi-ve upon our
fellow-citizens, in the short space of three months, what would
it be in the course of years,during the whole continuance of a
"vyar, and upon our posterity forever ? Let the honest and
indignant feelings of our happy Yeomanry, who love justice
between nations as well as individuals, determine.

Extract of the Prnclamatinn of the President restoring commercial imercoursc
with Great Britain, and leaving our statute of Nonintercourse in for<e as to
France, agreeably tw the arrangement made with Mr. Erskine, the minister
Plenipotentiary ot Great Britain.

By the President of the United States of America.
A PROCLAMATION. — Whereas the honourable David Montague Erf-
kine, his Britannic majefty's envoy extraordinary and miniCJter plenipo-
tentiary, has, by the order and in the name of his fovereign, declared to
this government, that the Britifh orders in council of January and
November 1807, will have been withdrawn as refpeds the United
States, on the tenHi day of June next. Now, therefore, I James Mad-
ison, preHdent of the Unhed States, do hereby proclaim, that the orders
in council aforefaid will have been withdrawn on the faid tenth day
of June next ; after whith day the trade of the United States with
Great Britain, as fufpended by the aft of Congrefs above mentioned,
and an aft laving an embargo on all fliips and veffels in the ports and
harbours of the United States, and the feveral aas fupplementary there-
to, may be renewed.

Given under my hand and feal of the United States, at Wafhingf
the nineteenth day of April, in tiie year of our Lord, <
L. s. thoufand eight hundred and nine, and of the Independence of
the Unhed States, the thirty-third.

JAMES MADISON.

By the Frcfidmt — Rt. Smitk, Secretary of State.

Tlie arrangement made with Mr. Erlkine, and this proclamation of
the Prefident, ilTued conformably to that arrangement, fhow clearly
the difpofition of the American Cabinet to conclude a treaty with Great

Britain, whenever It can be done tonfiftently vith the interefts, safety^
and honor of America i & even to go to war 'with France ^ if fuch a meas-
ure lliould be neceflary, to obtain indemnity for French fpoliations upon
our commerce, and to fecureour maritime rights. Atvd which arrange-
ment, had it been ratified and carried into effe<5l in good faith and hon-
eily by Great Britain, would without doubt, have eventuated in a final
and (atisfaitory fettlenient, with England, of all our differences, and in
a vigorous war with the French Empire. This delire, in tlie American
executive, of a fettlement and peace whh England, fo fatisfa£torily ex-
emplified by the readiness with which this arrangement was entered in-
to on our part, is incontrovertible proof, and mufl latisfy every candid
mind, of the impartiality of the American Cabinet toward the bellige-
rents ; and of the groundlefs nature and abfurdity of the accufations of
French alliance^ French partiality ^ secret understanding ivith Napoleonf pre"
j Lidice againji England^ and the whole (Iring of invectives which have
been To illiberally beftowed upon our Government by unprincipled hire-
lings throughout the Union. And why was not this arrangement carried
into effedl in good faith ? Ask the Britijfj Cabinet ; for George the
3d alone can anlwer the queftion. He put art end to the arrangement,
and he alone is the caufe, why America is not now at peace with Eng-
land and at war with the French Emperor. The American Cabinet
has never been accufed of infidelity or a defire of breaking over this ar-
rangement, fo Iblemniy and amicably concluded. ,

Extract from Mr, Kent's speech in the last Congress, on the Army Bill.

What Jiave been the propofitions heretofore made by our govern-
ment to Great Britain upon this fubject ? I find, by a recyrrejice to
the correfpondence of McfTrs. Munroe and Pinckney with that govern-
ment in 1806, that we made the following propofitions. Here Mr. K.
-I'ead the following popofals from the public documents of 1807-8. We
offered —

1ft. To afford no refuge or proteftion to Britifh Teamen.

2d. To deliver them up if they took refuge among us.

3d. To make laws for reftoring them.

4th, To aid in fearching for, feizing and refloring them.

5th. To keep them in our prifons when requefled.

6th. To prohibit our citizens from carrying them off.

7th. To prohibit their employment.

8th. To make penal laws forpun f -ing their employers.

9th. To make it our duty to reflore them.

10th. To extend the foregoing provifions not only to deferters, buC
to all fea-faring people.

Thefe propolitions went completely to fecure to Great Britain the
fervices of all her lea-faring fubjeAs, except fuch as were naturalized
under our laws, which amounted to but few indeed j thirteen hundred(
Britiih i'eamen only having been naturalized fince the commencement,
of our government, and in all probability an equal number of our fea-*

Dritfain during the fame period. — \

, Yet to my aftoniihment have I heard it iVated during this debate, that
our government had made no ferious propofitions to lecuie to Great
Britain the fervices of her feamen.

But equitable as theie propoiitions were, they were reje<Sted. Not-
withftanding, fir, our government, anxious in their purluit after peace,
have gone ftill further i they have, through our late Charge des Affaires
in London (Mr. Ruflell) propofed to Great Britain to excude from our
naval fervice (as well public as private) all her feamen, including thole
which may hereafter be ?iaturalized, ind notwithftandingthe liberality
and juftice of this propofal, it, Hke all others, has been made without
producing the defired efFeft : And what more, fir, could have been ask-
ed of us, required, or granted, than is contained in thefe offers ? No-
thing more j unlefs, indeed, they had asked for our independence, and,
yielding to the requifition, we had granted it. When an American vef-
lel is at fea, it is. amenable to no laws but thofe of its own country and
the laws of nations -, and where in either of thole v/ill the advocates for
imprefTment find their juftification ? Sir, had not the practice of im-
preflment been treated as a cafual, a trivi.^l circu'mftance, during this de-
bate, I fhould not have prefumecl to trouble the Houfe with my dcful-
tory remarks, and my principle objedl in addrefling the Houfe was to
ask their attention to a document which appears to have been overlook-
ed, and which, if neceflary, will place the abomination of that pradlice
in colours too ftrong to be mistaken.

Here Mr. K. read the following extract of a letter from the Secreta-
ry of State to Mr. Monroe, dated January 4, 1804 —

"The whole number of applications made by imprefled feamen to our
Cooful in London between the month of June '97 and September 1801, were
two tlioufand and fifty nine. Of this number an hundred and two leamen
only were detained as Britiih fubjefts ; which is lefs than one-twentieth of the
whole number imprefled. Eleven hundred and forty-two were difcharged,
or ordered to be fo, and eight liundred and five were detained for further
proof with the ftrongeft prefumption that the greater part, if not the whole
were Americans, or othsr aliens whofe proof of citizenlhip had been lofl or
dettroyed."

It is then evident from this document, that for every Britifh feanian
obtained by this violent proceeding, a number of Americans or other
aliens with whom Great Britain has no right to meddle, not lefs than
twenty for one, have been the vidims to it. Sir, have we become fo
loft to the real independence and fovereignty of the country, that we
are prepared to yield to this degrading, debafing and humiliating badge
of valTalage. «

The Romans of old had a practice of making the governors of thofe
countries they conquered pafs annually beneath their yoke as a mark
nf r.iKrt-.;-fTi^«^ J-.,.f .i.o Anr\r•^'^'\ *-<^ K!i'T'!l»''t'''^p f'^T crrpc\tpr^ are made to

pafs daily, nay hourly, beneath one much more galling.

REJECTED TREATY.
By fome it is faid thsit all our evils, if we have evils to corapl 'n of;
flow from the fingle circynirtance of the rejeftion of the Treaty smug-»
led into this country in the year 1806. by the Britiih Miniilry. A

mere examination of* that Treaty will fatisfy eVery Americiin of the ru-
inous confequences that would have refulted to this Country fromitf
ratification ; and that the Preiident afted as duty to his country requi-
required, in rejecting it. Let us Only look at the.circUmftances under
which that treaty was formed, the fentintiehts of our Ministers in En-
gland, then exprefTed to the BHtifh Comiiiiflloners, concerning it }
and above all the highly objectionable, and indeed inadmillible,. note
of the Britifh cabinet which accompanied it to America and which was
to be deemed a part of the treaty if ratified by the two governmetlts.

Extracts of a letter from the Secretary of State to MeflVs. MoKkOe and Pink.
N£Y, our Miniftcrs at Lbndoiii dated May ao, 1807.

The prefiCtent continues to regard this fubje^t in the light in whieh it hff
been prefTed on the juilice and friendfhip of Gn^ftt Britain. He caanot rcw
concile it with his duty to our fea-faring cicizciis, or writh the fenfibility or
fovcreiguty of the nation, to recognize even condrudtively* a principlf that
would expofe on the high leas, their libeity, their lives, every thing in*
word, that is dearcil to the human heart, to the capricious or intefefted fen*
tences which may be pronounced againfl> their allegiance, by ofilcera o£ a
foreign government, whom neither the law of nations, nor eveij the laws of
that government, will allow to decide on the ownerftiip or chancer of the
ainuteft article of property found in a like fituatioq. ,

IF ithout a provision agaimt mpressmentst fubftantially fuch as is contemplated
in your original inftrudtions, no treaty is to be cohcldded.

From this communication^ and from the letter of Mein*s. Monroe and
Pinkne}^, publifhed by order of Congrefs, with the documents (contain-
ing the treaty which was rejedted and the correfpondence relating to it,)
it would appear, that pofitive inftrudtions had beeu given to our minifif
ters, not to conclude a treaty, unlefs a provifion ihould be vcyaAe againft.;
impreffments. And yet in their letter dated 3d Jan 1^07, upon the-
fubjedt of the treaty fent out to America, they hy--^**Jf^e ar^ sorry Uadd
that this treaty contains no provisions against the impressment of our seamen J^-

The Britidi commifiioners refufed to infert a provifion againft im-"^
preflliients in the treaty; but in a note ligned by Lords Holland and-
Auckland, dire<fted to our minifters and dated Nov. 8, 1806, they give
the American minifters the mo^ positive assurances that a provifion againft
impreflinents fhall be made, such as will come within the puriiew cftheif
original instruEiions. Public Documents p. 11 7^ •

Upon the fu'ije£l of thefe aflTurances of the Britifti commifipiofiers
Meffrs. Monroe and Pinkney fay, "The time at which this note wast
prefented to us, and the circumftances under which it was prefented»-
being when the negociation was abfolutely at a ftand on this very quel-'
tion and we had informed the Britifh commifiioners, that we could do-
nothing if it was not provided for^ give to this ACT a peculiar degree sf sO'-
Itmnity and obligation. It was fent to us as a public pajyer, and intended
that we fiiould fo confider it, and with the knowledge and approbatioa
of the cabinet. It ought, therefore to be held as obligatory on the gov- ■
ernment, in its juft import, 2s if the fubftance had been ftipulated in a
treaty." And in that view of it, the American Minifi:ers' figited the trea-
ty. And in a letter dated December 27, 1806, they exprelfed a confi-

clence, that the arrangement would meet the approbation of their got-
ernment. But, to the aftoniftiment of every real American, the Amer^
lean minifters have to announce to their government, and to the world,
the bad faith of the hritijh cabinet in itEFUSING THE ABOVE REASONA-
BLE ARRANGEMENT. In their letter dated April 22, 1807, they fay,
**We had many conferences with the Britifh commiffioners, previous to
the late change, upon the fubjedt of impreflments, in which they inva-
riably declared to us, that the pradlice of their government would be
ftriftly conformable to the fpirit of the article, which they had fettled
with us } and ivhich was afterwards JiEJECTED hY THE CABINET.
They dated that the prejudice of the navy,and of the country generally,
was fo ftrong in favour of their pretensions that the miniflry could not
encoynter it in a diredt form, and that, in truth, the fupport of Parlia-
ment could not have been relied on, in fuch a caseT

Who, after this candid developement of fadts, can fay, that Great
Britain has always been ready honorably to fettle the important difpute
which relates to the impreffment of American Seamen ? Who can now
wonder, that the treaty was rejefted, when the faith of the Britifh cabi-
net was fo fhamefuUy violated ? Where is the man,in whofe bofom beats
an American heart, who cari believe that the American government
would ratify the treaty, when Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinkney are both
led to doubt. In their letter, lait quoted, they fay, "We ftated, how-
ever, (to Mr. Canning in converfation) that we had great reason to be-
lieve that the treaty would not be ratified in its prefent form, for caufes
which were well known to his majefty's late government. We then
communicated to him fully all the circumftances on which that remark
was founded} particularly the naturaof our inftrudlions, relative to im-
preiTments; the knowledge which the Britifh commiffioners had of
them ; the entire fufpenfion of the negociation at a certain period, on
the failure with* the Cabinet, of a projed^ of an article for the regulation
of that point. And finally, the condition on which we did proceed in
the bufinefs, that is, that our government would not be bound to ratify the
treaty^ if it fhould not be fatisfied with the fubftitute for fuch an article
oiFered in that note.*'

The Britifh Commiffioners having been thus expressly notified, that
our minifters had not afted conformably to their inftrudtions, in fig-n-
inga treaty, without a ftipulation againft the impreffinent of our fea-
men, and alfo an exprefs refervation having been made at the time of
fuch iignature, " that the American government would not be bound
to ratify the treaty if it fhould not be fatisfied with the fubftitute" offered
in the note*, the Britifh Cabinet have therefore, no reafon to complain,
on their part, of the rejedlion of the treaty by our government. And
this very note propofed by the Britifh Commiffioners, as a fubftitute for
an article in the treaty, upon the fubjedl of impreffinents, having been
diftivowed and rejedied by the minijlry of Great Britain, left this moft
important fubje£t of impreiTment wholly without ftipulation. And if
the treaty had been ratified by our government, under fuch circumftan-
cas, our mariners would have been altogether abandoned to the mercy
of England, arid her pretended right to imprefs men, from on board our

fhips at lla, thereby, acknoivledgeJ. And fuch acknowledgment wa$
undoubtedly the great object of the Britilh Cabinet, during the whole
tr in of \.\\\'Aj}ratige and equivocal negociation. And it is due to the great
forefight, dircernment,andpatriotifmof the American Cabinet, that this
treaty has been rejected, and that our fellow citizens have POt be^a
abandoned. ^ '

Another caufe, however, and if poflible a more important one, for the
reje(Stionof this treaty, yet remains to be confidered. An objection to
the treaty altogether insurmountable. Juft before the treaty was fent out
to America for ratificj^tion, Lords Holland and Auckland communicated
to our minifters a written note, <?f which the following is an extra«ft.

London, December 31, \%o6.

The underfigned Henry Richaid Vaflall Lord Holland, and William
Lord Auckland, plenipotentiaries of his Britannic majefty, have the honor to
inform James Monroe and Willianf. Pinkney, commiffioners extraordinary and
plenipotentiaries of the United States of AmeJca, that they are now ready
to proceed to the flgnatnre of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation^
on the articles of which they have mutually agreed.

But at the fame time, they have it in command from his majefty, to caU
the attention of, the commiffioners of the United States, to fome extraordi-
nary proceedings which have lately taken place on the continent of Europe,
and to communicate to them officially the sentiments of his majefty's govern-
encnt thereupon.

The proceedings alluded to are certain declarations and orders of the
French government iffued at Berlin on the 21 ft of November last.

If however the enemy (hould carry thefe threats into execution, and if
neutral nations, contrary to all expectation, ftiould acquiefce in fuch ufur»
pations, his majefty might probably be compelled, however reluaantjy, to
retaliate in his juft defence, flwi /o od^'ptt in regard to the commerce of neutral
nations nvith his eneviies^ tke same mtamres which those nations shall have permitted to
be enforced against their commerce nvith his Subjects. The commiffioners of the
United States will therefore feel, that at a moment when his majefty and aUl
neutral nations are threatened with fuch an exienfjon of the belligerent pre*.
tenfions of his enemies, he cannot enter into the ftipulations of the prefen^:
treaty, without an explanation from the United States, of their intentions, or
a reservation on t e part of his majeity in the case abavementionedi if it should ever
occur.

The underfigned confidering that the diftance of the American govern-
ment renders an immediate explanation on this fubject impofllble, and ani-
mated by a defire of forwarding the beneficial work in which they are engag-
ed, are authorized by his majefty to conclude the treaty without delay.
Thq^r proceed to the fignature under the full perfuafion that before the treaty
ftiall be returned from America with the ratification of the United States, the
enemy will either have formally abandoned or tacitly relinquifhed hisunjuft
pretentions, ar that the government of the United States, by its conduft or
ajlurances, will have given fecurity to his majefty that It will not fubmit to

jucn mnovaciuua lu luc ciiaumncu lyvicm vi isi«i!i.«!.c .«■" . ~t.». «»?»- *"

fignedhaveprefented this note from an anxious wifti that it fliould be clear-
ly ui>derftood on both fide^, that tolthout sv'- an .abandonment on the part of
the enemy t or su,:h assurances, or such condui.. .i the part rf the United States ^

his majesty will not consider himself bound by the present sig^

nature of his commissioners to ratify the treaty^ or precluded
from adopting such measures as may seem necessary for coifn-

teracting the designs cf his enemy.

. .. : 1 A,.. ... VASSAL HOLLAND,

(SignedJ AUCKLAND.

To Jatnes Monroe, bSc. ftfc. i^c.
. William Pinkney, Wr. Vc. Gfr.

In what view our minifters at London cpniidered this note, will ap^
pear by their liptfer to our government.

Extras of a letter fyom Meffrs. Monroe and Phtkney, dated ^an. 3, J 807,
VVe-repHcd in very explicit ierm« to the BFitishcomrtiissioners mat nv^ consid-
ered thair proposition ifittgether inadmissible on our part, and not likely to ac-
complrslf, if tue €Ould agree to if, the object nuhich they contemplated by it : that
such a proposition toourgoverninent, under the circumstances atiendmg it, would
arnou\ir» in ^gbstance./p <i« offer to it of the alter naf I've between the treaty, and
a nuar naitb France, since if our go'vernment refused to gi-ve the satisfaction
tubich they defired, the treaty nuould be lost : and if such satisfaction was given
and th« treaty concluded, and France should persist to execuip her Hecrep, .ap-
Cording to the construction given of it here, war seemed tq be inevitable.

In transmitting to you thii paper, it is our dtuy to observe that 'uoe do not con-
sider ourselves mpqrty to. it, or as paving given it in any the slightest degree
our sanftion.. . .^., .

' Ha4 ^^e proposition contained in this forma] note of the
Britisli Commissioners been sanctioned by our government,
as it would have been by a ratification of the treaty, the Ar
merio^n Cabinet would thereby have expressly recognized the
pretended right, claimed by Great Britain, of retaliating
THRouOH NEUTRALS the wrougs of the belligerents. Which is
the very preposterous doctrine lately advanced by England,
that a neutral who is compelled to suffer a wrong from one
of the belligerents, thereby gives a right to the other belligerent
to inflict upon the same neutral a similar or an equal wrong. A
monstrous doctrine, which no neutral will ever recognisse or sub-
mit to, who has any sens^ of Justice ; any regard to her own
iionor; or any power to defend her rights. The recognition of
such a principle, wopld be, to place neutrals, on all occasions,at
the mercy of other ndktions, without the right of complaining ;
and to make them, as it were, Foot-ballsyto be beaten and buf-
feted on both side^, and kicked tp and fro, for the sport of the

belligerents. ^

Since the Declaration of War, to evince their fincere defire of an hon-
orable peace with England, and in order if poflxble to obtain fp impor-
tant an objeift, our government have at feveral different times, made
propofitionis for an armiftice, on reasottahle and fair term, through the
ptedium ofiheir iagentfi Qi>e of which will appear by the loiiowing,

EsctraB of a letter frofti JJf r. Rttfell to Lord Cafilereagh, dated

London, 24fth Auguft, 1812.
JW> Lerd—h is only ncceffary, I truft, to call the attention of your Lordship
fa a review of the coniludl of the government of the United States, to prove jn<

controvcrJibly its uncrafinj; anxiety to maintain the relations of peace and frhfn^-
<hip wiih Great Bniain. In patience in futfering the many, wrongs which it hts
received, and its perfevcrance in endeavoring by amicable means to obtaiti /e„
dref» are known to tlie world, Pefpairing, ar length, of recetvinn this redrefs
from thejiinicc of the Sritifli Rovernment, to which it iiad fo often applied in vain,
and fcelini; that a further foibearance would be a virtual (iirrender of intereffsand
rights eflential to the profpcrity and independence of the nation confided ro its
proteclion, it has been compelled to difchargc its high duty by an appeal to arms.
While, however, it regards this courfe as the only one which rentained for it to
purfue, with a hope of preferving any portion of that kind of character whicii
ponflitutes the vital Hrength of every nation ; yet, it is ffill willing to give anoth.
er proof of the fpirit which has uniformly di/finguifhed its proceedings, (>y feek-

ing to arreff, on terms confiftent with juflice and honor, the calamities of war.

It has, therefore, authorifed me to ftipulate with his Britannic Majeffy's govern-
ment an armiftice, to commence at or before tlie expiration of fixty days after the
/ignatnre of the inffrument providing for it, on condition that the orders in coun-
ril be repealed, ?nd no illegal blockades be fubftituted to them, and that orders
be immediately given to difcpntinue the impreirment of perfona from American
vefTels, and t#» reHore the citiren of the United States already impreffed ; it being
rnoreovcr well underflood, that the Britifh government will alTent to enter into
definitive arrangements, as foon as may be, on thofe and every other difTcrence,
by a treaty to be concluded either at London or Wafhington, as, on an impartial
confideration of exifling circumflancei fhall be deemed moft expedient.

As an inducement to Great Britain to difcontinue the practice of imprefTment
from American yeffels, I am authorifed to give afTurance that a law fhall ht
pafled (to be reciprocal) to prohibit the employment of Britifh feamen in the
public or commercial fervice of the United States.

It is finderely believed, that fuch an arrangement would prove more efiicacioui
in feiruring to Great Britain her feamen, than the practice of tmpreirment, fo de.
rogatory to ihe fovereign attributes of the United States, and fo incompatible
with the perfonal rights of their citizens. [ This propofition was rejeded by tljc
^ritifh Cab'net.;)

REPORT
Cf the Committee of Foreign Relations,

In fhe house of Representatives of the United States, Jan. 29, 1813.

EXTRACTS.

^ The U. States having engaged in the war for the folc purpofe of
vindicating their rights and honor, that motive alone fhould animate
them to its clofe. It becomes a free and virtuous people to give an ufe-
ful example to the world. It is the duly of a reprefentativc govern-
ment to render a faithful account of its conduct to its conftituents.
A juft fenfibility to great and unprovoked wrongs and indignities will
nillify an appeal to arms ; an honorable reparation &ould reftore the
bleflings of peace -, every ftep which they take, (hould be guided by a
facred regard to principle.

Your committee has feen with much fatisfaction that at the moment
of the declaration of war, the attention of the Executive was engag-
ed in an effort to bring it #3 a fpeedy and honorable termination. As
early as the'twentv-fixth of Tune laft. tlie Charo-n dps AfFaJrs of i-hf TT.
btates at London wasmflructed to propofc to the Britifh government an
armiftice, to take an immediate effect, on conditions which it it believed
the iiripartial world will confider faf> honorable and advantageous to G.
Britain. They were few in number and limited to ppfitive wrongs d^i-
ly practifed. That the orders in council fhould be repealed, and that

s 22

our flag (hould protect our fcamcn, were the only indifpenable ccndi-
tiom infiftcd on. Other wrongs, however great, were poilponed tor
liable ne^^^^^^ As an mducement to the Britifli government to

forbear the f« wrongs, it was propofed to repeal the nun. importation law,
and to prohibit the employment of iiritilh fcamen,in the publtcand pn-
vate veSels of the U. States j particular care was taken that thclc pro-
Bofitions ihould be made ui a form as conciliatory, as they were amica-

Vou^committce cannot avoid exprelhng its aftoniniment at the man.
ncr in which they were teccived. It was not luincient to rej^c /h^
propofed armiftice i terms of peculiar uprcach aud tnjuU were adopted ta

make the reje5lion ojfetifive, ' , ,. i .u^rr ^;M^^Q af-

It happened, th it almoft on the fame day, m which the U, States, al-
ter having been worn out with accumulated wrongs, had rclorted to tlie
laftan.l only remaining honorable alternative in fupport oi their rigius,
the Britilh government had repealed, conditionally, its orders m
council. That mcafure was unexpected, bccaufe every application tor
it had failed, although repeated to the very moment it was decided on.
Conditional as the repeal was, it was admitted to have removed a great
obitacle to accommodation. . r- tr ^ u^rccnrn.

The other only remained : the practice of imprelTment. It was pro-
pofed to the Britlfh gorernment to open an amicable negociation to pro-
vide a fubftitute to it, which fhould be confidcred an ample equivtilent.
The subftitute propofed was defined,and of a character fo comprehenlive*
as to have removed, as wis prefumed, every P««"'b'«,°^J^^^*;?,^n\"^' '^^^^
commodation. The propofition before made to exclude ^^^^h fcamen
from our fervice ivas ettlarged.fo as to comprehend all naUv.e •^/'¥-' /' *;
jeai mi already naturalized or entitled to naturalization under the lanvi oj the
U. S. s this was likewife rejtited.

Your committee have fought with anxiety fome proof ^^ » .d»^P°5'-'?"
in the BritiOi government, to accommodate on any tair condition the im-
portant difference between the two nations, relative to ^n^f^A^^^^^^^^
[hey have fought in vain , none is to be found either m the communi-
cations of thelSritilh minider to the Amencau Charge des Affairs a
London, or in thofe of tlie commander o*. the Brmfl. naval forces at
Halifax made bv order of his government to the Ueiv.utment ot Mate. .
?Sy Lve f^en wTth regret, tf at although I^rd CaiU.reaoh profefied a
willLnefs in his government to receive ami diicufs amicably any pro-
pof Kaving In view either to check abufe in the practice of impreff-
ment or to prSvide a fubftitute to it, he not only decUued entering ^nioa
negociationforthepurpofe.but d^fcountenanced ^^^'^,y/'^^^f^%f^j,^.;(^, {"^f'
tute could be propofed, which his government ivuild accept It merits notice
alfo. tWh it ceafed to be a t.ufe of furprize, that m the communtca-
tbn of Admiral Warren to the !>-> ittment of State, the fubject of mi-

preffment was not even alluded ai ^ i «f fi,^

Had the Executive confemc...or^^nmftice on ^he 'repeal ot the

orders in council, without a fail^factory provifion againft impreiiment,
or a clear and diftinct underftanding with the i3ritiiii governmenc lu .au.
effect, in fome mode entitled to confidence, your committee would not
have hefitated to difapprove it. . ., r ^ ^ • •

The impreffment of our feamen being defervedly confuered a princi-
pal caufe of the war, the war ought to be profecutcd until that caufe be

« ^

the

not

removed. To appeal to arms in defence of a right and to lay thcnn
down without fecuring it, or a fatistactory evidence of a good difpofition
in the oppofite party to fecurc it, would be confidered in no other light,
than a relinquilhmcnt of it. To attempt to negociate afterwards, for
the fecurity of fuch right, in the expectation that any of the arguments,
which have been urged before the declaration of war and been rejected,
would have more weight, after that experiment had been made in vain,
would be an act of foUy which would not fail to expofc us to the fcorn
and deririon of the britiih nation an'' ot the world.

On a full view therefore of the conduct of the Executive in its tranf-
actions with the Britifti government fince the declaration of war, the
committee confider it their duty to exprefs their etittre approbation of it.
1 hey perceive in it a firm refoluticn to fupport the rights and honor of their
country^ with afncere and covimcndahle liifpoftuon to promote peace^ on fuch
jujl and honorable conditirns as the U. S. may iviih/afety accept.

Itrcn.ains therefore for the U. States to take their final attitude with
G Britain, and to maintain it with confiltency, and with unfhaiven hrm-
net"'^ md conftancy.

The British government has infifted that every American citizen
fhould carry with him tlie tvidcnce of his citizenfhip, and all thofe not
pofleffed of it might be imprefled. This criterion, if not otherwife ob-
jectionable, would be fo, as the document might be loft, deftroyed or
taken from the party to whom it was granted, nor might it in all cafes
be entitled to refpect, as it might be counterfeited, transferred, or grant-
ed to improper perfons. But this rule is liable to other and much Itrong-
er objections. On what p»-inciple does the Britifti government claim of
the U. States fo great andjhamefu/a degradation ? Ought the free citizens
of an independent power to carry with them on the main ocean, and in their
own vejfclsi the evidence cf their freedom F ^nd are all to be conjidered Britifh
fubjeils and liable t» impreffntnt who do not bear with them that badge ? Is
it not moie confiftent with every idea both of public as well as ofprivate
right, that the party fctting up a claim to any intereft, whether it be to
perfons or property, fliouM prove his right ? What would be the con-
duct of G. Britain under fimilar circumftances ? Would fhe permit the
public fliips of any other power, difregarding the rights of their flag, to
enter on board her merchant vcflels, take from them fuch part of their
crews, as the boarding officers thought fit, often her own fubjects, ex-
pofing by means thereof their veflels to dcftruction ^. Would ihe fufFer
fu ;h m ulurpation to derive any fanction from her patient forbearance ?

With the Britifli claim to imprefs Britifh feamen, the U. States have
no right to interfere, provided it be in Britifli veflels or any other than
.thofe of the U. States *i hat Americftn citizens JJjould be exempt from its
cperaiiony is all that they demand. Experience has (liewn that this cannot
be fecured otherwife, than by the veflel in which they fail. Take from
the American citizens this harrier ^ which ought to be held farredy and there is
nrthing to protect them againfl the rapacious grafp of the Briu/h navy. This
then 13 the extent of the demand of the U. States, a demand fo juft in
itielf, io confident and inieparabie from their rights, as an independent
nation, that it has been a caufe of aftonifhmeiit, that it fhould ever
have been called in queftion. The foundation of the Britifli claim is,
that Britifh feamen find employment in the fervice of the U. States ;
this is reprefented as an evil affecting effentially the great interefts of

'*he iritifti nation. This compliment would have more ^veight if fane-
tnfd bTth'f Britifh example. !t is known on the contrary, that it is
niect^repugnancetoit. G. Britain Hoes not fcruple to rec.ivc into
her ftrv ce alfwho enter into it voluntarily. If ihe confined herfelf
tlthin that 1 imu controvcrfy would not exift. Heretofore

rAb ects oTeien the moft dcfpotic powers have be.n left at hbert)
toVurfie their 6wn happiness, by honeft induftry, wherever their inch-

""'fTe^Biit^^^^^^^ refufes to its feamen that privilege. Let not

this thenVbe a ground of controverfy with that nation. Let it be dif-

ttcdfund^^^^^^ ^%"^^^^' ^t

ween the two nations, whereby each fhould exclude from its fei vice the
Sizen and^fubjectsof tl^^ the principles and conditions above

Serthat thishoufe will be prepared, fo far as depends on it, to give
it effect and for that purpofe to enact laws, with fuch regulations and
;en!?t "will be ad'equate- With this pledge, it is -tperceived on
what cround the Britiih government can perfift m its claim. If Britith
Smef are excluded fromShe fcrvice of the J. States as may be eflec-
tuaUv done'^he foundation of the claim muft ceafe. When it is known
twLt one Britiih feaman could be found o^ American v.iTeis,

f ITld bTaE to urge that fact as a motive for fuch impreffment.
In declaring a willingnefs to give effect to the propofed arrangemenc,
vourrommitree confidlr it equally the duty of the houfe to dectare m
SmsX moft decifive, thatihould the Bniifti government ftill decline
t ?nd per?^ere in the practice of impreftinent from American veffels,
the U States will never acquiefe in that practice, but wil refill it un-
langlywfrall their for^ It is not neceffary to !n<l^V'%KT oVert
iou would have b..n with refpect t impreffmcnt, in cafe the orders
in coun. ^ad been repealed before the declaration of war-or how long
the practice • " =mpreffment would have been borne, m the hope that
tK^^^^^^^ followed by a fatisfactory aTrangement w.th ref-

^%,':^^^Z:n A^cUre^, and the cafe of imprcffment being -ceffa-
rilv included as one of the moft important caufes, it is evident tha it
muirbe provided for m the pacification. The omSon of tt j» a treaty/
ifceXo^ddntt Uaveit on it: former ground ; it 'Would:n efff bean atjo-
^Z rlZllhrnent, an idea at '.vhich the feelings of every ^,«.;-..vm ^««/?
TeLlh feamen of the U. S. have a clattn on ihetr country fir proteBion,
andLmu/beprctekd. Ifafingleftiip istaken at fea, and the property
San imerican citizen arretted from him unjuftly,. loufes the indig-
nation o?the country. How much more deeply then ought we to be
€scked when we behold fo many of this g.llant and highly meritorious
claTof our fellow citizens fnatched from tlielr families and country and
carried into a cruel and afflicting bondage. It is an evil which ou^t not,
whkh cTnnot be longer toleratJd. Without dwelling on the fuftenngs

wnicn cannot uc lunj^t* ^ x.n-^^r. r.rh\rh \t fnrparfs amonc

of the victims, or on tne wiac i^c.^;. ut ^....... ....... : ,-^;y ; , ^ i • i"

their telatives through the country, the practice is m itfelf in the high-
esrSe degrading to the U. States as a nation. It is incompatible with
SeirfSlnty--kisfubverriveofthemain pillars of their maepen-
dence. The^foJbearance of the U. States under it has been miilaken for

^"mBtidlh pret^nfion was maturing faft into a right. Hadrefiftanc*

X. - ««*. Everv admifttratiqr^
been longer delayed, it f«^g^^ ^^V^^jf^XJ^'the gr^^^^
remonftrated againft k, m a ^Iccs proS effect, 'u was.J^or,
nf the country? Their remonftrancps P'^o^^^^^r . u ^^e vticc of his
1 tL i Sous leader of our arm;e., -^^^^^^^^^^ repommen^

coLtry to the head of the go^^^^^f^^'^Cv had recovered from .the
to hi ellow-citizens a "^w war before tl^Y had ^^.^^^ ^^ ^^

calamities of the late one. It ^J^/ 7//^^^^ government would gain
follow his example. I" P^^?^ ^ ^'^^^* V'^^^^^^^ But at the laft

ftrcngth, and our happy union ^econ^e conlqUdate^ be no longer juf-
Mof., tke period had -rived when orbe^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ject in cQnnex.or,
tified. It was the duty of fongrels o m P^^j^^^^ ^^d to feek re- ^
with the other great ^^^"g? fc^^^^h^^^ of a tree peo-

arefs in the only "^^«<i^,\^^l^S^o arm^, and that appeal will be
pie —They have done fo by appeahng to arms,

Supported by their conftituents. • ..^.fting crifis has arrived in the ,

Your committee are aware that f ^^"J^f^^^^^^^^ ^f its confequences. '!
U. States, but they have no paipfuUpprehe^^^^^ ^ ^^^,^

The covjrfe before them is dirept. It is P^"^^^^. ^ i?we iurfuait with |
cfthelUr, the rights and mer^^^^^

firmnefs and vigor, relying on the aid Qhc^v , ^^^ a

Our refources arc abundan ^^^P^^I^^^ ^ ^^f.^t navy befpeaks our
their fpiritunbrokep. ^^^ g^"^""' V.i,^. of our troops when led to
crow ng greatnefs pn that element, and that of our ro p^

EXTRACTS OF THE MO.T ^'^^J^'^^^f^To} .1" "«!'"'
v^hhin the United States, ^^'^^ »'"?* .°/; "^nt on to ^

r„ t Sued under the sa« «Ha';°"/' '"^J:, ,^^S «b.m >ucl. obj«..»n)
proofs of the nativity or citiienship <•! tue person , ..

may have been made, shall be invesiigafed by sucli commander or collector.

And be it furthrr enacted^ That if any ccrnmander of a public vessel of tJie
United States, shall employ, or permit to be employed, or shall admit or receive,
or permit to be admitted, or received on board his vessel, any person whose em-
ployrnent or admission is prohibited by the provisions of this act, he shall, on
conviction thereof, forfeit and pay the sum of one thousand dollars for each
person thus unlawfully employed, or admitted on board such vessel.

And be it further enacted^ That the provisions of this act, shall have no effect
or operation with respect to the employment as seamen, of the subjects or citizens
of any toreijrn nation, which shall not have forbidden on board her public and
private vessels the employment as seamen or other vfise of native citizens of the
United States j or who shall permit the commanders of her public vessels to im-
press or take away from on board any vessel sailing under the flag of the United
States, any seaman or any other person, not being a soldier or otherwise in the
employment of an enemy of such nation.

REMARK.
It is a little remarkable that this Bill, whose only objeft and tendency is
a refloration of peace with England, fhould have been prepared by the /?<?-
pubUcnn Committee of Foreign Relations ; and that in the Houfa of Repre-
fentatives, it was fupported and paffed by a large majority of Republican
members. And, when the bill was confidered in the Senate a federal member*
moved a poftponment to the next Congrefs, which is well known to mean,
in other words, a total rejedion of it ; and, upon that queftion, ftrange as it
may appear, every member of the Federal party 'voted against the bill. And is
not this demonftration, that at leaft many of the Federalifts, contrary to
their profeffions, are not the friends of peace ; and that the republicans are
defirous of an accommodation with England, fo foon as it can be made,
without a facrifice of the vital interefts and honor of the American Repub-
lic. The bill, however, pafTed in the Senate, notwithftanding Federal op-
pofition. *Mr. Lloyd from Maffachufetts.

Extracts from Mr. Clay's Speech^ in the last Congress^ on the

new Army Bill.

The war was declared becaufe Great Britian arrogated to herfelf the
pretention of regulating our foreign trade, under the delufive name of
retaliatory orders in council — a pretention by which fhe undertook to
proclaim to American enterprize, « Thus far fhalt thou go, and no far-
ther," — orders which fhe refufed to revoke after the alledged caufe of
their enacStment had' ceafed i becaufe Ihe perfifted in the practice of
imprefling American feamen j becaufe Ihe had inftigated the Indians to
commit hoftilities againft us ; and becaufe fhe refufed indemnity for her
paft injuries upon our commerce. I throw out of the queflion other
wrongs. The war in fa«Sl: was announced, on our part, to meet the war
which fhe was waging, on her part. So undeniable were the caufes of

<-Vio «Ti*.^_^r,-. r"^-"--^--! J- J ■ti-s— t- f-.l-!-£i/^ 4-1 /"-i ^~ ^t- - r--i; -r iU_

whole American people, that when the bill was pending before this
Houfe, gentlemen in the oppofition, although provoked to debate,
would not, or could not, utter one fyllable againft it It is true they
wrapped themfelves up in fullen lllence, pretending that they did not
ehoofe to debate fuch a queftion in fecret feflion. Whilft fp«aking of

)

the proceedings on that occafion, I beg to be permitted to advert to an-
other ha that transpired —an important faa, material for the nation to
know, and which I have often regretted had not been fpread upon our
journals. My honorable colleague (Mr. M'Kee) moved, m committee
of the whole, to comprehend France in the war; and when the quel-
tion was taken upon the propofition, there appeared but ten votes in iup-
port of it, of whom seven belonged to this fide of the House, and three only to

the other.* . , . ., ,

I am far from acknowledging, that had the orders in council been
refcinded, as they have been, before the war was declared, the decla-
ration would have been prevented. In a body fo numerous as this,
from which the declaration emanated, it is impoffible to fay with any
decree of certainty, what would have been the efFea of fuch a repeal.
Each member muft anfwer for himfelf. I have no hefitation then in
faying, that I have always confidered the impreffment of American lea-
men as much th« moil ierious aggreffion. But, fir, how have thofe or-
ders at laft been repealed ? Great Britain, it is true, has intimated a
willingnefs to fufpend their praftical operation, but fhe ftill arrogates to
herfelf the right to revive them upon certain contingencies, of which
fhe conftitutes herfelf the fole judge. She waves the temporary ule ot
the rod, but fhe fufpends it in terrorem over our heads, buppohng it
was conceded to gentlemen, that fuch a repeal of the orders m council
as took place on the 23d of June laft, exceptionable as it is, being known
before the war, would have prevented the war, does it follow that it
ought to induce us to lay down our arms, without the redrefs of any
other injury ? Does it follow, in all cafes that that which would have
prevented the war, in the firft inftance, Oiould terminate the war ? By
no means. It requires a great ftruggle for a nation,prone to peace as this
is, to burft through its habits and encounter the difficulties of wan-
Such a nation ought but feldom to go to war. /When it does, it fhou d
be for clear and effential rights alone, and it fhould hrmly relolve to
extort, at all hazards, their recognition.

The war of the revolution is an example of a war began for one ob-

iea and profecuted for another. It was waged, in its commencement,

acainft the- right aiferted by the parent country to tax the colonies.

Then no one thought of abfolute independence. The idea of inde-

pendence was repelled. -But the Britiih government would have relin-

quifhed the principle of taxation. Thrj founders of our liberties faw,

however, that there was no fecurity Ihort of independence, and they

achieved our independence. When nations are engaged in war, thole

rights in controverfy, which are not acknowleged by the treaty ot peace,

are abandoned. And who is prepared to fay that American feamen

Ihall be furrendered, the victims to the Britiih principle of impreliment .'

And. fir, what is this principle ? She contends that ihe has a nght to

the lervices of her own lubjeas j that, in the exercife of mis nght, ne

may lawfully imprefs them, even ahhough fhe finds them in our velTels.

upon the high feas, without her juriiUiaion. Now, 1 deny tmt she hss

* Seven Republicans und three Tederulifis.

Wtiy right without her JunsdictiofJj to come on hoard our vessels upon the high
ieasijor any other purpose but in pursuit of enemies ^ or their goods ^ or good's
'contraband of war. But fhe further contends, that her fubj efts cannot
denounce their allegiance to her and contract a new obligation to other
'fovereigns. 1 do not mean to go into the general quellion of the right
of expatriation.f If, as is contended, all nations deny it, all nations at
ih6 ifame time admit and practice the right of naturalization. G. Britain
Herfelf does. G. Britain, in the very cafe of foreign feamen, impofes,
perhaps, fewer feftraints upon naturalization than any other nation.
Then, if fubje«^s cannot break their original allegiance, they niay, ac-
cording to univerfal ufage, contract a new allegiance. What is the
eiffeft of this double obligation ? Undoub'tedljr that the fovereign hav-
ing the poffeffion of the fubje(Et would have the right to th6 fervices of
Iheiubject. If he return within the jurifdiftion olF his primitive fov-
ereign, he may relume his right to his fervices, of which the fubjecStby
ills own aa, could not diveft hirnfelf. But this primitive fovereign can
have no right to go in queftof him, oiit of his own jurifdiftion, into the
Jurisdiaioh of another fovereign or upon the high feas, where there exifts
either ho jurifdiaioh, or it belongs to the nation owning the fliip
Navigating them. But, fir, this difcufiion is altogether ufelefs. It
is hot to the Britifli principle, objeaionable as it is, that we are alone
io look— it is to her praaice— ho matter what guife flie puts on —
It is in vain to aliert the inviolability of the obligation of allegiance.—
It is in vain to fet lip the plea of neceffity, ahd to ailed ge that fhe
tannot exift without the imprelTmeht of HER feihien. The naked
truth is, fhe conies, by her prefs-gangi, on board of our vefTels, feizes
bUR native feamen, as well as naturalized, and drags them intd
her fervice. It is the cafe, then, of the alTertion of ah erroneous prin-
ciple — and a praaice not conformable to the principle — a J)rincipie
which, if it were theoretically right muft be for ever praaically wrong.
We are told, by gentlemen in the oppbfitioh, that government has not
"done all that was incumbent oh it to do, to avoid ju'ft caufe of con\-
plaiiU on the part of Great Britain— that, in particular, the certificates
of proteaion, authorifed by the aa of 1796, are fraudulently ufed.—
Sir, government has done too much in granting thofe paper proteaions.
1 can never think of them without being fliocked. They referable the
pafTes which the mafler grants to his negro flaVe, "Let the bearer,
Mungo, pafs and repafs, witnout moleftation." What do they imply ?
That Great Britain has a right to take ail who are not provided with
them. Froln their very nature they muft be liable to abufe on both
fides. If Great Britain defires a mark by which flie can know her own
fubjeas, let her give them an ear mark. The colors that float from
the malt head fhould be the credentials of our feamen. There is no
4\fa.t,T «■« ,ir. ^^A 4-v.^ /,-pr»fl»t>-ion Invo fhpwn it, hilt in the rule that all
who sail under the flag (not being enemies) are proteaed by the flii-g.
It is impoflible that this country fllould ever abandon the gallant tars,
\^ho have won for us fuch fplendid trophies.

a
s

t "cc Note at the end of the paifnphkt for aiitlibrlties on the right of Ekpatria-

REMARK,
th^ pretended claim of Great Britain to Impress liieft bn
board of our ships at sea, is so totally groundless in princi^
pie, that it excites the ridicule even of her own subjects. As
evidence of this, the following is extracted from the late wri-
tings of a distinguished politician of that country :-^

" We have heard (says he) much talking about these inar-
*« itime rights of Great Britain ; but I have never ye^t^eard
«» one man clea ^^ state what he means by them. The A-
" merican Government say, that we have no right to stop
« their -vessels at sea, and take people out of them y and 1
" say that this is a right that Great Britain never before eon-
»* tended for ; and I defy any man to shew that any neutral
" nation in the world ever submitted to such a practice, or
" that such a practice was ever attempted.'

If the subjects of Britain be her slaves, let her treat them
as such. In the language of our Speaker in Congress, "if
She desire a mark, by which she can know them, let her
give them an ear mark. The colcJrs that float from the mast
head should be the credentials oiour seamen."

The practice of enslaving our citizens by impressment, and
of requiring written protections about their persons, are
marks of national degradation, to which America ought not,
and can Hot, longer submit. She has once caused her Inde-
pendence to be acknowledged, and she is now impatient to
be free in reality^ and to assume her equal rank among the
nations of the earth. And we trust in God ! there is a re-
deeming spirit in the people* which, having once triumphed
over England, will not stop short at the acquisition of half
their Independence. Thi? badge of vassalage must be thrown
off; this stain upon our national honor must be wiped away ;
and the time will come, and is fast approaching, when the A-
merican name will be respected throughout the world ; when
our mariners shall sail the ocean without any other pro-
tection than the flag that flies over them ; and when the ex-
clamation "/ am an American ciiizeii' shall ensure, m all parts
of the globe, freedom and safety to every member x)f this ex-
tensive and growing republic.

PI*

taOTE — to page 28.

The foltdwlng are fome among the numerous authorities, proving
the natura'l and twalienablc right of Expatrtatio?t :

An opinion upon the fubject of naturalization has been forntaHy and
judicially pronounced in the Supreme Judicial Court of the U. States,
m the cafe of Talbot vs. Janfon, as follows —

Judge Irfdell. — " Perhaps it is not necessary that it (right
of expatriation) should be expressly decided on this occasion,
but I will freely express my sentiments on liiat subject. That
n man ought not to be a slaue^ that he should not be confined
against his will to a particular spot, because he happened to
draw his first breath upon it ; that he should not be compelled
to continue in a society, to which he is accidentally attached,
when he can better his situation elsewhere, much less when he
must starve in one country, and may live comfortably in an-
other, are positions which I hold as strongly as any man, and
they are such as most nations in the world appear clearly to re-
cognize"

It appears from hiftory, that the Right of Expatriation was clearly
acknowledged and eftablilhed among the moft antient nations.

The law of the Republic of Athens, extracted from Potter's Gr.
An. b. 1, ch. 26.

**It is permitted to every Athenian, after having become
acquainted with the laws and customs of the Republic, if he
dislike them, to retire with his family and goods."

Law of Rome, extracted from the writings of Cicero, the Orator :

*^Glorioi/s and divine right, which we have received from
our ancestors and which is coeval with the Roman name,
that no one of us can be a citizen of more than one common-
wealth, (since different states must of necessity have differ-
ent laws) that none should be compelled to change his country
against his will ; and none against his will to remain in it. —
This is the firmest foundation of our liberty, that every one is

fREE to retain OR DIVEST HIMSELF OF THE RIGHTS OF CITIZENSHIP 1

Extract from the Justinian Code— Dig. Lib. 49. tit. 15.
^'^E'very otte is free to decide for himself to what country he

will belongP

Thefe three authorities are fufficiently conclufive, as to the laws and
practices of the antients — And with the antients agree an the moaera
writers of any eminence upon the law of nature and nations.

Extract from Ptijfendorf, b. 3. ch. 9. iec. 3.

"It is impossible that the 5>ame subject should be capable of

/I
\1

two obligations of the same nature." It has been justly coiit
eluded, therefore, that "Naturalization necessarily annuls his
first allegiance'* ^

Extracts from Vattel,h. I, ch IQ.

♦'A nation or sovereign, who represents it, may grant to a
stranger the quality of a citizen, by admitting him into the
body of the political society. This is called naturalization."

"Every man is born free, the son of a citizen, arrived at
years of discretion, may examine whether i(|be convenient
for him to join in the society for which he was destined by
his birth. If he finds that it will be of no advantage to hint
to remain in it, he is at liberty to leave it, making a return for
what is done in his favor, and preserving as much as his new
engagements will allow him the sentiments of love and grat-
itude he owes it.

"// the so-vereign attempts to stop those, who ha-ve the righi
of emigration, he does them an injury^ and they may lawfully
implore the protection of the power, who would receiue them,

"It appears from several historical facts, particularly in the
history of Switzerland and the neighboring countries, that
the law of nations established there by custom for some ages
past, does not permit a state to receive the subjects of anoth-
er into the number of its citi;zens. This vicious custom had

NO OTHER FOUNDATION THAN THE SLAVERY TO WHICH THE PEOPLE

WERE THEN REDUCED. A prince, a Lord, considered his subject^
in the rank of his property and riches, he calculated their tiurxh
her as he did his flocks y and to the disgrace of human nature
this strange abuse is not yet every where destroyed"

From Grotlus, lib. 1. ch. 3. fee. 4-1.

" It is no violation of amity, to receive subjects individual-
ly, who are desirous of emigrating from one country to ano.-
ther. This, as v/e have formerly shewn, is not only a fiaiu-
ral but a salutary liberty."

According to Bynkershook— In every country that is not
a prison, the right of expatriation is recognized and allowe4.