Supplemental Journal.—Additional Brigadier Generals.—Prohibition of Exports. The report was read; when, on motion of Mr. BASSETT, the injunction of secrecy imposed on the proceedings relating to this inquiry, was taken off.. The doors were then opened, and sundry other proceedings were had in relation to the inquiry aforesaid, which are stated at large on the public Journal of this day. WEDNESDAY, April 8. On motion of Mr. GRUNDY, the injunction of secrecy imposed by this House on their proceedings relating to the bill, entitled "An act in addition to the act, entitled 'An act to raise an additional military force," passed the eleventh day of January, 1812," was now removed. The House resumed the consideration of the bill authorizing the President of the United States to appoint additional Brigadier Generals in certain cases; and the question whether the provisions contained in the bill were of such a nature as to require secrecy in the discussion and consideration thereof, was again stated; and, being taken, it was determined in the negative-yeas 5, nays 102, as follows: YEAS-William Blackledge, Bolling Hall, Hugh Nelson, Jonathan Roberts. Charles Turner, jr. And the question thereon being taken, it was determined in the negative-yeas 47, nays 59, as follows: YEAS-Ezekiel Bacon, John Baker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, Adam Boyd, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, John Davenport, jr., William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. Gold, Richard Jackson, junior, Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key, Joseph Lewis, junior, Nathaniel Macon, Archibald McBryde, Samuel McKee, Arunah Metcalf, James Milnor, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jonathan O. Moseley, Thomas Newbold, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jun., Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, William Rodman, Adam Seybert, Daniel Sheffey, Richard Stanford, Silas Stow, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Pierre Van Cortlandt, jun., Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, David R. Williams, and Thomas Wilson. John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, John The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the said bill; and, after some time spent therein, Mr. SPEAKER resumed the Chair, and Mr. NELSON reported that the Committee had had the said bill under consideration, and made some amendments thereto; which he delivered in at the Clerk's table, where they were again read. NAYS-Willis Alston, jun., William Anderson, David Bard, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John Clopton, Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, William Findley, James William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Fisk, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, William R. King, Abner Lacock, JoNAYS-Willis Alston, jun., William Anderson, Eze- seph Lefever, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron kiel Bacon, John Baker, David Bard, William W. Bibb, Lyle, William McCoy, Alexander McKim, Jeremiah Harmanus Bleecker, Adam Boyd, James Breckenridge, Morrow, Hugh Nelson, Anthony New, Thomas NewElijah Brigham, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, ton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Epaphroditus Cham-James Pleasants, junior, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, pion, Langdon Cheves, Martin Chittenden, John Clopton, William Crawford, John Davenport, jun., Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Ely, James Emott, Wm. Findley, James Fisk, Asa Fitch, Thomas Gholson, Thomas R. Gold, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Obed Hall, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard Jackson, junior, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Joseph Lewis, jr., Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, Archibald McBryde, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, A. McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jeremiah Morrow, Jonathan O. Moseley, Anthony New, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, Timothy Pitkin, junior, James Pleasants, junior, Benjamin Pond, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, Henry M. Ridgely, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, William Rodman, Ebe-". nezer Sage, E. Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, S. Shaw, Daniel Sheffey, John Smilie, George Smith, John Smith, R. Stanford, Philip Stuart, Silas Stow, William Strong, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, John Taliaferro, Benjamin Tallmadge, Uri Tracy, Geo. YEAS-Willis Alston, junior, Ezekiel Bacon, David M. Troup, Pierre Van Cortlandt, junior, Laban Whea-Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William ton, Leonard White, Robert Whitehill, David R. Wil- Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, William Butliams, William Widgery, Thomas Wilson, and Richard ler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John Clopton, chard William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, Wm. Findley, James Fisk, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, I. L. Green, Felix Grundy, B. Hall, Obed Hall, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle. William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Jeremiah Morrow, Winn. The House then resumed the consideration of the bill to prohibit the exportation of specie. goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time: When, a motion was made by Mr. GOLD that the injunction of secrecy imposed on the proceedings relating to the said bill be now taken off: And, on the question to concur with the Committee of the whole House in their first amendment, which proposes to insert, after the word "if," in the seventh line, and before the words 'any specie, goods," the words "any person shall, with intent to evade this law, export or attempt to export," being taken, it passed in the affirmative-yeas 67, nays 33, as follows: Supplemental Journal.-Prohibition of Exports. Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, NAIS-John Baker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, John Davenport, junior, William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. Gold, Richard Jackson, jun., Joseph Lewis, jun., Archibald McBryde, James Milnor, Jonathan O. Moseley, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jr., Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, William Rodman, Daniel Sheffey, Richard Stanford, Philip Stuart, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, and Thomas Wilson. The residue of the said amendments were again read, and concurred in by the House. A motion was then made by Mr. RANDOLPH to amend the said bill by striking out the words "ten thousand," before the word “dollars,” in the first section of the bill. And the question thereon being taken, it was determined in the negative-yeas 35, nays 66, as follows: YEAS-John Baker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, Adam Boyd, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, John Davenport, junior, William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. Gold, Richard Jackson, junior, Joseph Lewis, junior, Archibald McBryde, James Milnor, Jonathan O. Moseley, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, junior, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, William Rodman, Daniel Sheffey, Richard Stanford, Philip Stuart, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, and Thomas Wilson. the eighth line; and the words, "specie, goods, wares, or merchandise," in the last line. And the question thereon being taken, it was determined in the negative-yeas 33, nays 64, as follows: YEAS-John Baker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, John Davenport, jr., William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. Gold, Richard Jackson, jr., Joseph Lewis, jr., Archibald McBryde, James Milnor, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jr., Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, William Rodman, Daniel Sheffey, Richard Stanford, Philip Stuart, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, and Thomas Wilson. NAYS-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. CalBibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, houn, Langdon Cheves, John Clopton, William Crawford, Roger Davis, Joseph Desha, William Findley, James Fisk, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph, Lefever, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, William McCoy, Sam'l McKee, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Alexander McKim, Samuel L. Mitchill, Hugh Nelson, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Pleasants, jun., Benjamin Pond, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, John Smilie, George Smith, John Smith, William Strong, Charles Turner, jr., Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, and Richard Winn. THURSDAY, April 9. NAYS-Willis Alston, junior, William Anderson, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William An engrossed bill to prohibit the exportation of W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Robert Brown, William specie, goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limButler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John ited time, was read the third time; and, on the Clopton, William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Daw-question that the same do pass, it was determined son, Joseph Desha, Wm. Findley, James Fisk, Thomas in the affirmative-yeas 69, nays 36, as follows: Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jeremiah Morrow, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, William Piper, James Pleasants, jr., Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, John Smilie, George Smith, John Smith, William Strong, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jun., Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, and Richard Winn. A motion was made by Mr. PITKIN, to amend the second section of the said bill by striking out the words, "or the illegal exportation of any specie, or of any goods, wares, or merchandise," in kiel Bacon, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, WilYEAS-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Ezeliam Blackledge, Robert Brown, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John Clopton, William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Findley, James Fisk, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hewes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, Wm. McCoy Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, John Smilie, George Smith, John Smith, William Strong, John Taliaferro, Geo. M. Troup, Charles Supplemental Journal.-President's Message. Turner, junior. Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, ah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James PleasNAYS- John Baker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus ants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Samuel Ringgold, John Bleecker, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Wil- Rhea, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer liam A. Burwell, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, Chittenden, John Davenport, jr., William Ely, James George Smith, William Strong, John Taliaferro, Geo. Emott, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. Gold, Richard Jackson, M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., Robert Whitehill, Dajunior, Philip B. Key, Joseph Lewis, junior, Archibald vid R. Williams, Richard Winn, and Robert Wright. McBryde, James Milnor, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh The question was then taken to concur in the Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Joseph Pearson, Timothy said amendments, and passed in the affirmative. Pitkin, jr., Elisha R. Potter, John Randolph, William Mr. SMILIE and Mr. PLEASANTS were appointReed, Henry M. Ridgely, William Rodman, Richard ed a committee to deliver a message to the SenStanford, Philip Stuart, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Laban Wheaton, Leon-ate, and inform them that the House of Repreard White, and Thomas Wilson. Ordered, That the title be, "An act to prohibit the exportation of specie, goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time." Mr. SMILIE and Mr. PLEASANTS were appointed a committee to carry the said bill to the Senate, and to inform them that the House of Representatives have passed the same, under the injunction of secresy, and to desire their concurrence in the said bill. The doors were then opened. MONDAY, April 13. sentatives have concurred in their amendment to the bill aforesaid. The doors were then opened. TUESDAY, April 14. Mr. CRAWFORD, from the Joint Committee for Enrolled Bills, reported that the committee had examined an enrolled bill "to prohibit the exportation of specie, goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time," and had found the same to be truly enrolled: When, the SPEAKER signed the said bill. Mr. CRAWFORD and Mr. TURNER were appointed a committee to carry the said bill to the Senate for the signature of their President. A confidential message was received from the Senate by a committee of that body appointed for the purpose, consisting of Mr. VARNUM and The doors were then opened; and having reMr. ANDERSON, notifying the House that the mained so for some time, they were again closed: Senate have passed the bill, entitled “An act to When, Mr. TURNER, from the abovementioned prohibit the exportation of specie, goods, wares, committee, reported that the committee had preand merchandise, for a limited time," with amend-sented to the President of the United States the ments; in which they desire the concurrence of the House. The said amendments were read at the Clerk's table: When a motion was made by Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH that the said bill be postponed indefinitely: And the question thereon being taken, it was determined in the negative-yeas 35, nays 62, as follows: said bill, and that they were instructed by the President to inform the two Houses that he had approved and signed the same. On motion of Mr. CALHOUN, the injunction of secrecy imposed upon the said bill and the proceedings thereon, were then removed. The doors were then opened. MONDAY, June 1. YEAS-John Baker, Harmanus Bleecker, James A confidential Message, in writing, was received from the President of the United States, by Mr. Coles, his Secretary; which he delivered in at the Speaker's table. NAYS-Willis Alston, jr., Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John Clopton, William Crawford, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, William Findley, James Fisk, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Peter Little, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, Thomas Moore, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jeremi The House was then cleared of all persons, except the Members, Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, and Doorkeeper, and the doors were closed; and the said Message was read, and is as follows: [Confidential.] Representatives of the United States: I communicate to Congress certain documents, being a continuation of those heretofore laid before them on the subject of our affairs with Great Britain. Without going back beyond the renewal, in one thousand eight hundred and three, of the war in which Great Britain is engaged, and omitting un repaired wrongs of inferior magnitude, the conduct of her Government presents a series of acts, hostile to the United States as an independent and neutral nation. British cruisers have been in the continued practice of violating the American flag on the great highway of nations, and of seizing and carrying off persons sail Supplemental Journal.—President's Message. ing under it; not in the exercise of a belligerent right, founded on the law of nations against an enemy, but a municipal prerogative over British subjects. British jurisdiction is thus extended to neutral vessels, in a situation where no laws can operate but the law of nations, and the laws of the country to which the vessels belong; and a self-redress is assumed, which, if British subjects were wrongfully detained and alone concerned, is that substitution of force, for a resort to the responsible Sovereign, which falls within the definition of war. Could the seizure of British subjects, in such cases, be regarded as within the exercise of a belligerent right, the acknowledged laws of war, which forbid an article of captured property to be adjudged, without a regular investigation before a competent tribunal, would imperiously demand the fairest trial, where the sacred rights of persons were at issue. In place of such a trial, these rights are subjected to the will of every petty commander. The practice, hence, is so far from affecting British subjects alone, that, under the pretext of searching for these, thousands of American citizens, under the safeguard of public law, and of their national flag, have been torn from their country, and from everything dear to them; have been dragged on board ships of war of a foreign nation, and exposed, under the severities of their discipline, to be exiled to the most distant and deadly climes, to risk their lives in the battles of their oppressors, and to be melancholy instruments of taking away those of their own brethren. Against this crying enormity which Great Britain would be so prompt to avenge if committed against herself, the United States have in vain exhausted remonstrances and expostulations; and that no proof might be wanting of their conciliatory dispositions, and no pretext left for a continuance of the practice, the British Government was formally assured of the readiness of the United States to enter into arrangements, such as could not be rejected, if the recovery of British subjects were the real and the sole object. The communication passed without effect. British cruisers have been in the practice also of violating the right and the peace of our coasts. They hover over and harass our entering and departing commerce. To the most insulting pretensions they have added the most lawless proceedings in our very harbors; and have wantonly spilt American blood within the sanctuary of our territorial jurisdiction. The principles and rules enforced by that nation, when a neutral nation, against armed vessels of belligerents hovering near her coasts and disturbing her commerce, are well known. When called on, nevertheless, by the United States, to punish the greater offences committed by her own vessels, her Government has bestowed on their commanders additional marks of honor and confidence. Under pretended blockades, without the presence of an adequate force, and sometimes without the practicability of applying one, our commerce has been plundered in every sea; the great staples of our country have been cut off from their legitimate markets; and a destructive blow aimed at our agricultural and maritime interests. In aggravation of these predatory measures, they have been considered as in force from the dates of their notification; a retrospective effect being thus added, as has been done in other important cases, to the unlawfulness of the course pursued. And to render the outrage the more signal, those mock blockades have been reiterated and enforced in the face of official communications from the British Government, declaring, as the true definition of a legal blockade, "the particular ports must be actually invested, and previous warning given to vessels bound to them, not to enter." Not content with these occasional expedients for laying waste our neutral trade, the Cabinet of Britain resorted, at length, to the sweeping system of blockades, under the name of Orders in Council; which has been moulded and managed, as might best suit its political views, its commercial jealousies, or the avidity of British cruisers. To our remonstrances against the complicated and transcendent injustice of this innovation, the first reply was, that the orders were reluctantly adopted by Great Britain, as a necessary retaliation on decrees of her enemy, proclaiming a general blockade of the British Isles, at a time when the naval force of that enemy dared not issue from his own ports. She was reminded, without effect, that her own prior blockades, unsupported by an adequate naval force actually applied and continued, were a bar to this plea that executed edicts against millions of our property could not be retaliation on edicts confessedly impossible to be executed: that retaliation, to be just, should fall on the party setting the guilty example, not on an innocent party, which was not even chargeable with an acquiscence in it. When deprived of this flimsy veil for a prohibition of our trade with her enemy, by the repeal of his prohibition of our trade with Great Britain, her Cabinet, instead of their corresponding repeal, or a practical discontinuance of its orders, formally avowed a determination to persist in them against the United States, until the markets of her enemy should be laid open to British products; thus asserting an obligation on a neutral Power to require one belligerent to encourage, by its internal regulations, the trade of another belligerent; contradicting her own practice towards all nations, in peace as well as in war; and betraying the insincerity of those professions which inculcated a belief, that, having resorted to her orders with regret, she was anxious to find an occasion for putting an end to them. Abandoning still more all respect for the neutral rights of the United States, and for its own consistency, the British Government now demands, as pre-requisite to a repeal of its orders as they relate to the United States, that a formality should be observed in the repeal of the French decrees, no wise necessary to their termination, nor examplified by British, usage; and that the French repeal, besides including that portion of the decrees which operate within a territorial jurisdiction, as well as that which operates on the high seas, against the commerce of the United States, should not be a single and special repeal in relation to the United States, but should be extended to whatever other neutral nations, unconnected with them, may be affected by those decrees. And, as an additional insult, they are called on for a formal disavowal of conditions and pretensions advanced by the French Government, for which the United States are so far from having made themselves responsible, that, in official explanations which have been published to the world, and in a correspondence of the American Minister at London with the British Minister for Foreign Affairs, such a responsibility was explicitly and emphatically disclaimed. It has become, indeed, sufficiently certain, that the commerce of the United States is to be sacrificed, not Supplemental Journal.-President's Message. as interfering with the belligerent rights of Great Britain; not as supplying the wants of her enemies, which she herself supplies; but as interfering with the money which she covets for her own commerce and navigation. She carries on a war against the lawful commerce of a friend, that she may the better carry on a commerce with an enemy; a commerce polluted by the forgeries and perjuries, which are for, the most part, the only passports by which it can succeed. ferred and affirmed by the American Plenipotentiary. On the contrary, by representing the blockade to be comprehended in the Orders in Council, the United States were compelled so to regard it, in their subsequent proceedings. There was a period when a favorable change in the policy of the British Cabinet was justly considered as established. The Minister Plenipotentiary of His Britannic Majesty here, proposed an adjustment of the differences more immediately endangering the harmony of the two countries. The proposition was accepted with the promptitude and cordiality corresponding with the invariable professions of this Government. A founconciliation. The prospect, however, quickly vanished. The whole proceeding was disavowed by the British Government, without any explanations, which could, at that time, repress the belief, that the disavowal pro. ceeded from a spirit of hostility to the commereial rights and prosperity of the United States. And it has since came into proof, that at the very moment when the public Minister was holding the language of friendship, and inspiring confidence in the sincerity of the negotiation with which he was charged, a secret agent of his Government was employed in intrigues, having for their object a subversion of our Government, and a dismemberment of our happy Union. Anxious to make every experiment short of the last resort of injured nations, the United States have withheld from Great Britain, under successive modifications, the benefits of a free intercourse with their market, the loss of which could not but outweigh the profits ac-dation appeared to be laid for a sincere and lasting recruing from her restrictions of our commerce with other nations. And to entitle these experiments to the more favorable consideration, they were so framed as to enable her to place her adversary under the exclusive operation of them. To these appeals her Government has been equally inflexible, as if willing to make sacrifices of every sort, rather than yield to the claims of justice, or renounce the errors of a false pride. Nay, so far as were the attempts carried to overcome the attachments of the British Cabinet to its unjust edicts, that it received every encouragement within the competence of the Executive branch of our Government, to expect that a repeal of them would be followed by a war betwen the United States and France, unless the French edicts should also be recalled. Even this communication, although silencing forever the plea of a disposition in the United States to acquiesce in those edicts, originally the sole plea for them, received no attention. examples of such interpositions, heretofore furnished by the officers and agents of that Government. In reviewing the conduct of Great Britain towards the United States, our attention is necessarily drawn to the warfare, just renewed by the savages, on one of our extensive frontiers; a warfare which is known to spare neither age nor sex, and to be distinguished by features peculiarly shocking to humanity. It is diffi If no other proof existed of a predetermination of the cult to account for the activity and combinations which British Government against a repeal of its orders, it have for some time been developing themselves among might be found in the correspondence of the Minister tribes in constant intercourse with British traders and Plenipotentiary of the United States at London, and garrisons, without connecting their hostility with that the British Secretary for Foreign Affairs, in one thou-influence, and without recollecting the authenticated sand eight hundred and ten, on the question whether the blockade of May, one thousand eight hundred and six, was considered as in force, or as not in force. It Such is the spectacle of injuries and indignities had been ascertained that the French Government. which have been heaped on our country; and such the which urged this blockade as the ground of its Berlin crisis which its unexampled forbearance and conciliadecree, was willing, in the event of its removal, to re-tory efforts have not been able to avert. It might at peal that decree; which, being followed by alternate repeals of the other offensive edicts, might abolish the whole system on both sides. This inviting opportunity for accomplishing an object so important to the United States, and professed, so often, to be the desire of both the belligerents, was made known to the British Government. As that Government admits that an application of an adequate force is necessary to the existence of a legal blockade, and it was notorious that, if such a force had ever been applied, its long discontinuance had annulled the blockade in question, there could be no sufficient objection on the part of Great Britain to a formal revocation of it; and no imaginable objection to a declaration of the fact that the blockade did not exist. The declaration would have been consistent with her avowed principles of blockade; and would have enabled the United States to demand from France the pledged repeal of her decrees: either with success, in which case the way would have been opened for a general repeal of the belligerent edicts; or without success, in which case the United States would have been justified in turning their measures exclusively against France. The British Government would, however, neither rescind the blockade, nor declare its non-existence; nor permit its non-existence to be in least have been expected, that an enlightened nation, if less urged by moral obligations, or invited by friendly dispositions on the part of the United States, would have found, in its true interest alone, a sufficient motive to respect their rights and their tranquillity on the high seas; that an enlarged policy would have favored that free and general circulation of commerce in which the British nation is at all times interested, and which, in times of war, is the best alleviation of its calamities to herself, as well as to other belligerents; and, more especially, that the British Cabinet would not, for the sake of a precarious and surreptitious intercourse with hostile markets, have persevered in a course of measures which necessarily put at hazard the invaluable market of a great and growing country, disposed to cultivate the mutual advantages of an active commerce. Other councils have prevailed. Our moderation and conciliation have had no other effect than to encourage perseverance and to enlarge pretensions. We behold our seafaring citizens still the daily victims of lawless violence, committed on the great common and highway of nations, even within sight of the country which owes them protection. We behold our vessels, freighted with the products of our soil and industry, or returning with the honest proceeds of them, wrested from their |