were signalized by the uncommon zeal and acuteness of the advocates on both sides; and an account of them, in the order in which they occurred, will, it is believed, form an interesting subject to introduce the history of the war, and will tend to exhibit the agitated state of the public mind on this question, at this period in Great Britain; and show from whence the American government inferred the extreme poverty of the British mercantile and manufacturing interests, from the effect of those edicts.

CHAPTER IV.

An extremely hostile Disposition manifested towards Great Britain by the President and Congress of the United States-Affectation of Impartiality in the Discussions of the American Congress, on the Conduct of Great Britain and France-Effect produced on the public Mind in England, in Consequence of the hostile Attitude America had assumed-Serious affair between the crews of two French Privateers &American Seamen at the Port of Savannah-Vaunting Language of America-Implicit Confidence of the British Government in the Loyalty and firm Attachment of the People of Canada-That Confidence confirmed-Various Discussions in England on the Propriety or impropriety of going to War with America.

ALTHOUGH the question arising out of the Orders in Council formed, at first, the chief subjct of dispute between Great Britain and America, yet many other points, in the course of discussion, were introduced, scarcely less dfficult of arrangement. At the meeting of the American congress, in the end of the preceding year, the speech delivered by the president gave evident indications of a very hostile spirit towards Great Britain; and as this speech was followed by a report of the select committee of congress for foreign affairs, which was no less warlike, the hopes which had been entertained of an amicable arrangement seemed to vanish. The committee, with a wonderful affectation of impartiality, began by a general complaint as to the wrongs which America had sustained, both from France and England, in the seizure of the property of the citizens of the United States, when peaceably pursuing their lawful commerce on the high seas; and reprobated the defence which had been offered by each party, that its acts

of violence were merely retaliatory, on similar acts committed by its antagonist. The Americans, it was said, violently assailed, by both these European States, withdrew their citizens and property from the ocean, expecting redress from the justice of the belligerents; but having failed in this object, they had recourse to the non-intercourse and non-importation laws. To induce the European powers to return to a system of justice, they had offered commercial advantages to the belligerent which should first revoke its commercial edicts; and had to impose more severe restrictions on the other. But here did the mask fall to the ground; here did all semblance of impartiality cease, from the report; which proceeded to announce that France, profiting by the friendly offers of the United States, had, on the 1st November, 1810, declared the repeal of the decree of Berlin; that the British were thus bound to have revoked their Orders in Council, but instead of this, they had advanced still bolder pretensions; they had affected to deny the practical extinction of the French decrees, and had insisted that France should renounce the whole system of her commercial warfare against Great Britain, of which these decrees originally formed a part. That the exclusion of British produce and manufactures from France and the states in alliance with her, was a means of commercial warfare with which the United States had no concern; and that France would never concede to the unauthorised demands of America, those rights which she considered as the most powerful engine of the war; that the outrages of England had not been confined to the commerce alone of the United states; that by the seizure of American seamen, which was still carried on with unabated rigor and severity, the greatest insult was offered to America; and that the only question now was, whether the Americans should tamely submit, or resist by those means which circumstances had placed within their reach. That it had now become the sacred duty of Congress to call forth the patriotism and resources of the country; and the committee, therefore,

earnestly recommended, "That the United States be immediately put in an armour and attitude demanded by the crisis, and corresponding with the national spirit and expectations."

As soon as the accounts of the warlike preparations in America were made known in Great Britain, it became an universal opinion that war with that country was now inevitable. The report of the committee of Congress certainly breathed an uncommonly hostile spirit towards England, and left no room to expect an amicable or conciliatory arrangement. Its reasonings were wholly founded on the assumption that the prohibitory decrees of France had really been repealed, whilst the daily conduct of that power, and the experience of the government of America, positively and peremptorily contradicted that assumption.* The committee attempted to avail themselves of a captious and quibbling distinction between the international law asserted by France, and the municipal regulations established for the government of the commerce of that country; still the French government continued to declare that no British goods

*The justice and fairness which have been evinced on the part of the United States towards France, both before and since the revocation of her decrees, authorised an expectation that her government would have followed up that measure by all such others as were due to our reasonable claims, as well as dictated by its amicable professions. No proof, however, is yet given of an intention to repair the wrongs done to the United States; and particularly to restore the great amount of American property seized and condemned under edicts, which, though not affecting our neniral relations, and therefore not entering into the question between the United States and other belligerents, were nevertheless founded in such unjust principles that the reparation ought to have been prompt and ample.

In addition to this, and other demands of strict right, on that nation, the United States have much reason to be dissatisfied with the rigorous and unexpected restrictions to which their trade with the French dominions had been subjected.

President's Messuye to Congress, 5th Nov. 1811.

should be admitted into French ports, notwithstanding that these goods may have become the property of neutrals; thus were the Americans completely shut out from a branch of commerce, of the peaceful enjoyment of which they had long been in possession, and in which, of course, they had an undoubted right to engage. Even though the Berlin and Milan decrees had, as far as regarded their practical operation on the great high way af nations, been fairly revoked, yet their principle was still retained, to a degree which not only called upon neutrals generally to protest against them, but on account of their practical bearing on America, particularly, demanded from tltem a firm and decided resistance. The British government did not insist, as was vainly affected to be believed by the committee, that America should at any time interfere with the domestic regulations of France; but she certainly insisted that America should not, by lending herself to the enemy, or by passively submitting to conditions which had never until now been imposed upon any neutral nation on earth. Nothing could, probably, more forcibly exhibit the hostile disposition of America towards Great Britain, and her servile duplicity towards the ruler of France, than her submission to the blockade of the British Islands—an act of the French emperor which America herself had declared to be an open violation of the public law of nations, and when France did not employ a single vessel to enforce it. Even though the decrees of France had therefore been rescinded, that repeal must have been totally nugatory, since, by a municipal regulation which America strenuously defended, a palpable violation of the rights of neutral nations was still committed; neutrals were still compelled to comply with the measures of France, to the injury of British commerce; thus proclaiming to the world a principle of a description altogether new and extravagant. From all these it may be fairly seen that America had no grounds whatever, except her base traffic with the French ruler, for declaring war against Great Britain; nor were they warranted by