6G0 



ANNUAL REGISTER, 1809. 



peace hnrdly interrupted by tran- 

 sient hostilities, and of prosperity 

 unparalleled in the history of na- 

 tions ; the United States are for the 

 first time since the treaty which ter- 

 minated the revolutionary war, pla- 

 ced in a situation equally difficult, 

 critical and dangerous. 



Those principles recognized by 

 the civilized world, under the name 

 of Law of Nations, which hereto- 

 fore controlled belligerent powers, 

 regulated the duties of neutrals, and 

 protected their rights, are now 

 avowedly disregarded or forgotten 

 by Great Britain and France. Each 

 of those two nations captures and 

 COTidemnsall American vessels trad- 

 ing with her enemies or her ene- 

 my's allies, and every European 

 power having become a parly in the 

 contest, tlie whole of our commerce 

 with Europe and European colo- 

 nies, becomes liable to capture by 

 either one or the other. If there 

 beany nominal exception, itismade 

 on a condition of tribute, which 

 only adds insult to the injury. 



The only plea urged in justifica- 

 tion of those hostilities, is that of 

 retaliation, grounded on a presumed 

 acquiescence of the United Statesin 

 previous aggressions by the other 

 party. Waving a discussion of the 

 correctness of the principle of reta- 

 liation, a principle doubtful in itself, 

 and altogether inadmissible to the 

 extent to which it has been carried, 

 and when operating on the neutral 

 rather than on the enemy: it is al- 

 together untrue that the United 

 States havevoluntarilyacquiesced in 

 the unlawful aggressions of either 

 nation; omitted or delayed any 

 measures calculated to obtain re- 

 dress, or in any respect deviated 

 from that impartiality to which they 

 were bound by their neutrality 



France has alluded to the violations 

 of the national flag, and of the so- 

 vereignty of the United States, in 

 the instances of Pierce's murder, of 

 the outrage on the Chesapeake, and 

 of the destruction of the Impetuous. 

 The measures taken to obtain re- 

 dress in those cases are of public no- 

 toriety, and it may be added, that 

 with the exception of the last, those 

 aggressions on the sovereignty of 

 the United States did not aifect their 

 neutrality, and gave no right to 

 France either of complaint or inter- 

 ference. Setting aside irregulari- 

 ties of less importance, and equally 

 chargeable to both nations, such as 

 the British order of June 1803, and 

 the decree of the French General 

 Ferrand; the principal violations by 

 England of the neutral rights of 

 America, prior to the Berlin decree 

 of November 1806, and which if ac- 

 quiesced in might havegivengrounds 

 of complaint to France are the cap- 

 ture of American vessels laden with 

 colonial produce, founded on a re- 

 newal of that pretended principle 

 generally called * the Rule of 1756,' 

 the impressment of American sea- 

 men, compelled thereby to become 

 the auxiliaries of Enghind against 

 France, and proclamation of nomi- 

 nal blockades, particularly that of 

 the coast from the river Elbe to 

 Brest notified in May 1806. 



It will not be asserted that the 

 United States have ever taraely ac- 

 quiesed in either of those preten- 

 sions. It will not be denied, that 

 with respect to the two first, the 

 most strenuous efforts were inces- 

 santly made to procure an alteration 

 of the British system. 



It is true that to the nominal 

 proclamation blockades of England, 

 the United States had opposed only 

 spirited andrepeatedremonstrances, 



and 



