Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

the dictate of principle. That the frigate has brought this proclamation there is good cause to suppose, from the .-time when she left the United States, being a few days subsequent to the period when the. Berlin and 'Milan decrees were to cease to operate. If she has brought this proclamation, it will, without doubt, render absolute the revocation of those decrees, whatever uncertainty might have before attended it. There are probably, then, but a few days left in which the repeal of the British orders can appear to be the spontaneous act of the ministry; and I sincerely hope, that by properly improving this short period, they may do, with a good grace, what cannot be done afterwards in a way either to save their pride or deserve our friendship.

Agreeably to your request, I shall change the file of the Journal de l'empire, which I intended for you, for that of the Moniteur.

I am, sir, &c.

JONA. RUSSELL.

His Excellency William Pinkney, &c.

Mr. Russell to Mr. Pinkney. Paris, December 27, 1810. SIR,-I have received your letters of the 5th and 6th of this month, by Mr. Bowdoin and Mr. Wells.

The vessel you mention, the Charles, having on board a large quantity of turpentine, which is considered here as naval stores, will probably be condemned for carrying contraband of war to an enemy, without any reference to the Berlin and Milan decrees.

On the other hand, the American vessels which have been permitted to land their outward cargoes in the ports. of France, and take in return cargoes to the United States, are, as far as I can learn, but two in number, and in fact arrived before the first of November, and to them the decrees were not applicable. The other vessels which have taken away cargoes arrived here in ballast, and were recommended by special circumstances to the consideration of this government.

Nothing can therefore be inferred either for or against the revocation of the French edicts, from the facts referred to in your letter of the 6th instant.

Since I last wrote, however, I have learnt the seizure and capture of two or three American vessels, but the course which this government will pursue in relation to them, being marked out by the letters of the minister of justice to the president of the council of prizes, and from the minister of finance to the director general of the customs, which you will find in the Moniteurs which I herewith send to you, it is unnecessary to enter into a particular detail of the circumstances which attended these

cases.

I am willing to believe that what this government has done, although it may not be entirely satisfactory to the United States, will at least be sufficient to procure from the British government a repeal of the orders in council, and the restoration of all American property taken under them since the first of November.

It is possible that the French cruisers may hereafter continue their depredations, but abuses of this kind are very distinct from the operation of the Berlin and Milan decrees, and cannot, by the most extravagant construction of the law of retortion, afford a pretext for the continuance of the British orders.

I am, sir, &c. &c.

JONA. RUSSELL.

His Excellency William Pinkney, &c.

Mr. Russell to Mr. Pinkney. Paris, Dec. 30, 1810. SIR, A gentleman called on me last evening from the duke of Cadore, to inform me that the American schooner, the Grace Ann Greene, had been released.

This vessel arrived at Marseilles since the first of November, and was last from Gibraltar, where she had remained some time. As she came clearly within the Berlin and Milan decrees, her release may be considered as conclusive evidence of their revocation.

I am, sir, &c.

His Excellency Wm. Pinkney, &c.

JONA. RUSSELL.

CORRESPONDENCE OF MR. JOHN SPEAR SMITH.

Extract of a Letter from J. S. Smith, Esq. to the Secretary of State. London, May 25, 1811.

"I HAD yesterday for the first time, an interview with lord Wellesley, and presented to him the letters of introduction that Mr. Pinkney had given me, and he received me in the most polite manner."

Mr. J. S. Smith to Marquis Wellesley. London, May 27,

1811.

MY LORD, I have the honour to inform your lordship (from official information, this day received by me from Paris,) that all the American vessels which have voluntarily arrived in France, since the first of November, have been admitted. This (if any additional evidence of the repeal of the Berlin and Milan decrees were wanting,) will sufficiently establish the fact of their revocation, as most of the vessels now admitted, would otherwise have been subject to their operation.

I have the honour to be, &c.

J. S. SMITH. The Most Noble the Marquis Wellesley, &c.

Extract of a Letter from Mr. John S. Smith to the Secretary of State. London, June 8, 1811.

"ENCLOSED is the copy of a letter which I addressed to lord Wellesley on the 5th instant. I had delayed making this communication in the hope that I should do it at the interview which he had promised me, and which I again requested on the 3d instant. I did not consider it necessary to enter at length into a subject which has been so often and so ably discussed, and on which nothing has been left to add. I shall, however, enter into any expla nations that may be necessary when I again see his lordship."

Mr. J. S. Smith to Lord Wellesley. Bentinck Street, June 5, 1811.

MY LORD, I have the honour to communicate to your lordship the copy of an act passed during the last session of Congress, which, though it renews certain parts of the non-intercourse law against this country, yet it carefully gives to the President the authority to repeal it "when Great Britain shall so revoke or modify her edicts as that they shall cease to violate the neutral commerce of the United States." In this, as well as in the other provisions of the act, his majesty's government cannot fail to observe the invariable disposition of the United States to preserve harmony with Great Britain, and to re-establish that hapру intercourse between the two nations, which it is so much the interest of both to cultivate; and the President confidently expects that his majesty will not hesitate to abandon a system, always urged to be merely retaliatory, now that its causes have ceased to exist.

I have the honour to inform your lordship that the gentleman who will be the bearer of my despatches to the United States, in the John Adams, will leave town on Friday evening, and that I shall be happy to forward by the same occasion any despatches that your lordship may wish to send to the United States.

I have the honour to be, &c.

The Most Noble the Marquis Wellesley.

J. S. SMITH.

Mr. Smith, Charge d'Affaires at London to the Secretary of State of the United States. London, June 6, 1811.

SIR, I have the honour to enclose a report of the trial of the Fox and others.

The John Adams will leave Cowes this week; the messenger goes down to-morrow evening.

I have the honour to be, &c.

J. S. SMITH.

The Honourable the Secretary of State, &c.

COURT OF ADMIRALTY, THURSDAY, MAY 30, 1311.

FOX AND OTHERS.

JUDGMENT.

SIR WILLIAM SCOTT.-This was the case of an American vessel which was taken on the 15th of November, 1810, on a voyage from Boston to Cherbourg. It is contended on the part of the captors, that, under the order in council of the 26th April, 1809, this ship and cargo, being destined to a port of France, are liable to confiscation. On the part of the claimants it has been replied, that the ship and cargo are not confiscable under the orders in council; first, because these orders have in fact become extinct, being professedly founded upon measures which the enemy had retracted; and secondly, that if the orders in council are to be considered as existing, there are circumstances of equity in the present case, and in the others that follow, which ought to induce the court to hold them exonerated from the penal effect of these orders.

In the course of the discussion a question has been started, what would be the duty of the court under orders in council that were repugnant to the law of nations? It has been contended on one side, that the court would at all events be bound to enforce the orders in council: on the other, that the court would be bound to apply the rule of the law of nations applying to the particular case, in disregard of the orders in council. I have not observed, however, that these orders in council, in their retaliatory character, have been described in the argument as at all repugnant to the law of nations, however liable to be so described if merely original and abstract; and therefore it is rather to correct possible misapprehension on the subject than from the sense of any obligation which the present discussion imposes upon me, that I observe that this court is bound to administer the law of nations to the subjects of other countries in the different relations in which they may be placed towards this country and its government. This is what other countries have a right to demand for their subjects, and to complain if they receive it not. This is its unwritten law evidenced in the course of its decisions, and collected from the common usage of civilized states. At

« ForrigeFortsett »