MmL 
 
 ^ 
 
 i xai a sf!! BS iassais*sissBSicase'i( 
 
 RARY OF CONGRESS. % 
 
 Chap. 
 Shelf 
 
 T-S-^L 
 
 i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 
 

 LETTER / ■ (ex 
 
 TO THE y 
 
 HONORABLE HARRISON GRAY OTIS, 
 
 A MEMBER OF THE SENATE OF MASSACHUSETTS, 
 ON THE 
 
 PRESENT STATE OF OUR NATIONAL AFFAIRS ; 
 
 WITH REMARKS UPOS 
 
 Wit* picfemng'^ Hettec ^ 
 
 TO THE 
 
 GOVERNOR OF THE COxMMONWEALTH, 
 BY JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 
 
 # 
 VAsm? 
 
 NORTHAMPTON: 
 
 VRINTi-D BY GRAVES & CLAP, 
 
 April ISQg. 
 
TO THE READER. 
 
 TO the lovers of truth and the real friends of American Independence^ no 
 opology can be nccejfaryfor the puhlicat'ton of the letter of Air. Adams It 
 ivillbe read lu'itb avidity and txiith profit by all p: fie of this dejcriptiun to 
 ivhaiever political party they may belong. Although it was adcireffed to a 
 diftingiajhid leader of the federal party ^ Mr. Otis ; yet, as the author avo'zvs 
 his nvijh that it n light be publi/hedyit may be corijidered in the nature of an 
 appeal /o/^^ good sxnss oi- the community. 
 
 The integrity of Mr. Adams has never been impeached — His talents no 
 one doubts — as a poUtisian he has food high in the ranks of the federal par- 
 iy ; on the great queftions hoivever^ in difpute betnveen foreign poir- 
 f.RS and this country he has uniformly efpoufed the American side He 
 is not the apolog'ijl of France or England ; but a bold and able defender 
 of American rights against French i^iolencs and British ovt- 
 
 %iiGE. 
 
 ^ The letter of Mr. Adams is a compleat defence of the meafures of our 
 government and particularly of the meafure of the Embargo It is pub- 
 I'tfbed at a time and under circumflanccs favorable to candid invejligation 
 and fair difcvjft«n. The eleSion contefl is over — The voice of truth cannot 
 noiv be drowned in the conft fed roar of heated party "zealots. 
 
 The letter of Mr. Pickering was evidently intended by the writer as a 
 defence of the unjuft pretenfions of Great Britain — that it was a mofl 
 virulent attack upon our O'wn government will not be denied — coming oui 
 as it did at the eve of an important eledion the purity of his motives 
 might be juflly JnfpeSed. 
 
 The letter of Mr. Adams, a colleague of Mr. Pickering in the Senate of 
 the' United States, is now before the public- Let the letters of both be read 
 with attention — Let the flatements and reafoning of both be weighed in the 
 fame balance and the merits ef loth betefled by the fame rule Let them, to 
 vfe the words of Mr. Adams, " Fall BY THEIR OWN WEAKNESS OR 
 STAND BY THEIR OWN STRENGTH,'? 
 

 LETTER. 
 
 OF THE 
 
 HON. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 
 
 y 
 
 IVAsBiNCTONi March 31, 1808. 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 'I HAVE received from one of iny fr<ends in Bofton, a copy 
 of a printed pamplilet, containing a letter from Mr, Pickering to the 
 Governor of the CornmonAvealth, intended for commtmitation to 
 the Legiflature of the State, during the Seffion, recently concluded. 
 But this object: not having been accompliflied, it appears to have 
 been publifhed by fome friend of the writer, v/hofe inducement vi 
 ftated, no doubt truly, to have been the importance of the matter 
 difcuffed in it, and the high refpeft ability of the author. 
 
 Thefubjects of this letter are the. Embargo, and the difFerenrp:; 
 in contuoverfy between our country and Great Britain — fubj;^k^i;s- 
 upon which it is my snisfortune, in the difrharge of my duties as a 
 Senator of the United States, to differ from the opinion of mv col- 
 league. The place where the queftion upon the ii:ll of thcmj in 
 common with others of great national concern, Vv'as betv/een him 
 and me, in our official capacities, a proper objeft of difcufTion, was 
 the Senate of the Union. There it was difcuffed, and, as far as 
 the conftitutional authority of that body extended, there it was de- 
 cided. Having obtained alike the concurrence of the other branch 
 of the National Legiflature, and the approbation of the Prefident, 
 it became the Lavv^ of the Land, and as fuch I have confidered it 
 entitled to theiefped and obedienceof every virtuous citizen. 
 
 From thefe decifions however, the letter in queftion is to be con- 
 fidered in the nature of an appeal ; in the firft inftance, to our com- 
 mon conftituents, the Legiflature of the State — and in the fecond, 
 by the publication, to the people. To both of thefe tribunds I 
 Siall always hold myfelf accountable for every aft of my public life. 
 
Yet, were my own political charader alone implicated in the courfe 
 which has in thib inftaiice bem purlued, 1 ihould have fr-i borne all 
 notice ot the proceeding, and have left my condud in this, as in 
 Other cafes, to the candor and dilcretion ol my country. 
 
 But to this fpecies of appeal, thus conduced there are fome ob- 
 jedion;- on conftitutional grounds, which I deem it my duty to men- 
 tion for the :onfideration of the public On a ftarement of circum- 
 flances attending a very \m\ ortant a<5l (f national legiflation, a 
 ftatement wnich the writer undoubtedly believed to be true, but 
 which comes only from one fide of the quellion. and which 1 expeft 
 to prove, in the moll eflential points, erroneous, the writer with the 
 moil: animated tone of energy calls for the interpojtiion of the com- 
 mercial ft ites and aff-rts that " nothirg but their ft-nfe, clearly and 
 emjhatically eiprefled, will fave them from ruin " This lolemn 
 and alarming invocation is addrefft d to the Legiflature of MafTa- 
 chufetts, at lo late a period of their feffion, that had it been receiv- 
 ed by them, they muft have been compelled either to ad upon the 
 views of this reprefentation, wif^hout hearing the counter ilatement 
 of the orher fide, or feemingly to difregard the preffing inteielt of 
 the conftituents by negUding an admonition of the moft ferious 
 complexion Confideiing the application as a preceden;, its ten- 
 dency is dangerous to the public Foi on the firft fuppofition, ihat 
 the Leg'flature had been precipirated to adl on the fpur o{ fuch an 
 inftigatif^n, they mult have aded on imperled information, and un- 
 der an excitement, not remarkably adapted to the crmpofure of 
 fafe deliberation. On the fecond, they would have been expofed 
 to unjnft imputations, which at ihe eve of an ele<51ion might have 
 operated in the moft inequitable manner upon the charaders of in- 
 dividual members. 
 
 The interpofifion of one or move State Legiflatures, to controul 
 the exercife of the powers vefteu by the general conftituiion in the 
 Congrefs of the United Slates, is at leaft of qutftionable policy. — 
 The view.s of a ftate Legiflature are naturally and properly limited 
 in a cordderable degiee to the particular mterefts o^ the Srate. 
 The very objed ard formation of the A'^a/iona/ deliberative aflem- 
 blies was fo? the compromife and concliation of the inteiefts of all 
 — of the whole nation. If the appeal irom the regular, legitimate 
 meaiures of the body where (he whole nation is reprcfented, be 
 proper to one State Legiflature, it muft be fo to another. If the 
 commercial States are called to interpole on one hand, will not the 
 agiicultural States be with equal propriety fummoned to interpofe 
 on the orher: If the Eaft is ftimulated againft die Weft, and the 
 N<^ir':hern and Southern Sedinns are urged into collifion with each 
 other, by appeal- from the ads of Congrefs to tlierefpedive States 
 —in what are thefe appeals to end ? 
 
 It is undoubt-^dly tlie right, and may often become the duty of a 
 State Legiflature to addrefs that ot the atton, with the expreffion of 
 its wifhes, in regard to interefts peculiarly concerning the Stale it- 
 felf Nor fhall I queftion the right of every member of the great 
 federative conipad to declare its own fenie of meafuies interefling 
 
to the nation at large. But whenever the cafe occurs that this 
 fenil- fhoiild be "cleirly and emphatically" exprciled. it cnghc lone- 
 ly CO be predicated upon a iuU and impartial confideratioi; ot (he 
 whole fubjt dl — not under the ftimuius of a one fidec repiefenta- 
 tion — far lefs u >on the impulft of conjedures and fufpicions It is 
 not through the medium ol perfonal ieniibiiity, noi ot parly bias, 
 nor of proteflional occupation, Mor oi geogiaphical pofition, tl'.ai. the 
 <whole truth can be difcerned, ol queiiions involvirg tht rightb and 
 intereftb of this extenfive Union VViien their difculllon is ur^-r-d 
 upon a State Legdlature, the fiTfl: call upon its members llu'clc. be 
 to caft ali their reelings aid interclls as ihe ciiizen.s of a fmgie Slats 
 into t)ie common (tock oi the nniu.nal concern. 
 
 Should the occnricnce upon which an appeal is made from the 
 Councils ofrhe na'ion, to thofe of a fmgle Slate be one, upon which 
 the repTeUntt'ion oi the (iaie had bten divided, and the member 
 who tound iiimleli in the minoriry, felt himft-lf irripelled by a i'd'cX'Q 
 oi dury, to mvoke the inic-rpi^filion of his conftituents, it would 
 feem that both \\x jalHce to them, and in candor to his colleague, 
 fome notic':' of fuch intention ihould be given to liim. ~hat he loo 
 jnig.'n be prepared lo exhibit his views of tht fubjtd; upon which 
 the diiF*rence of opinion had ca'>fen place ; or at 'euft that the re- 
 fort fhoiild be hh1, al i'uch a period of lime as would leave it wich- 
 in the reach oi piffibility for his reprefentation s to be received, by 
 tht ir common conllituent , before they would be compelled to de- 
 cide on the merits of the cafe. 
 
 The fairneis and propriety of this courfe of pioceeding mufi be 
 fo bvious, that it is diiBcult to conceive of the propriety of any 
 other Yet it pre'ents another inconvenience v.'hich mult necefiari- 
 ly lefult from this piadtice of appellate legiflation. When one of 
 the Senator-- from a State proclaims to his conftituents that a par- 
 ticular meafure, or fyilem of men lures which has received the vote 
 and fupport of his colleague, are pernicious and deftructive to thofe 
 interefts which both are bound by the moft facred of ties, with zeal 
 and lidelity to promote, the denunciation of ihe meafures anuauits 
 to little lefs than a denunciation of the man. The advocate ni a 
 policy thus reprobated muft feel himfelf fummoned by every mo- 
 tive of felf defence to vindicate his conducl : and if his geri-ral 
 fenfe of his official duties wcuid bind him to the indufti ious devo- 
 tion of his whole time to tlie public bufmefs of the feHun, the 
 hours which he might be torcv'd to employ for his own juftification, 
 would of courle be deduded from die difcharge of his more reg- 
 ular and appropriate fun(5lion!.. Should thefe occalions frequently 
 recur, they could not fail to i.-iterfere v.ith the due performance oi 
 the public bufinefs. Kor can I iorbear to remark tht tendency of 
 fuch antagonizing appeals to dii^lrad the Councils of the State in 
 its own LegiflHture, to deftroy iis influence, and expofe it to de- 
 rifion, in the prefence of its filler States, and to produce between 
 tlie colleagues themfclves mutual afperities and rancors until the 
 great concerns >i the nation would degenerate into the puny con- 
 troverfies of pei fonal altercation. 
 
It is tlierefore with extreme reluflance that I enter upon this 
 difcuffion. In developing my own views and the principles which 
 have governed my conduft in relation to our foreign affairs, ai;id 
 partieularly to the Embargo, fome very material differences in 
 point of fad as well as of opinion, will be found between my 
 icatements, and thofe of the letter, which alone can apologize for 
 this. They will not, I trufl, be deemed In any degree difrefpeet- 
 ful to the •writer. Far more pleafmg would it have been to me, 
 could that honefl and anxious purfuit of the policy beft calculated 
 to promote the honour and welfare of our country, which, I truft, 
 is felt with equal ardor by us both, have refulted in the fame opin- 
 ions, and have given them the vigour of united exertion There 
 is a candour and liberality of conduft and of fentiment due from 
 afTociates in the fame public charge, towards each other, neceffary 
 to their individual reputation, to their common influence, and to 
 their public ufefulnefs. In our Republican Government, where 
 the power of the nation ccnf:fts ?.lone in the fympath'es of opinion, 
 this reciprocal deference, this open-hearted imputation of honefl 
 intentions, i^ the only adamant at once attraiftive and impenetrable, 
 that can bear, uniliattered, all the thunder of foreign hoflility. — 
 Ever fince I have had the honour of a feat in the National Coun- 
 cils, I have extended it to every department of the Government. 
 However differing in my conclufions, upon queftions of the high- 
 efl moment, from any other man, of whatever party, I have nev- 
 er, upon fufpicion, imputed his condud to corruption. If this con- 
 fidence argues ignorance of public men and public affairs, to that 
 ignorance I muft plead guilty. I knov/, indeed, enough of hu- 
 man nature, to be fenfible that vigilant obfervatlon is at all times, 
 and that fufpicion may occafionally become necefiary, upon the 
 condud of men in power. But I know as well that confidence is 
 the only cement of an eledive government — Eledion is the very 
 tefl of confidence — and its periodical return is the conflitutional 
 check upon its abufe ; of which the eledors mufl: of courfe be the 
 fole judges. For the exercife of power, where man is free, confi- 
 dence is indifpenfable — and when it once totally fails — when the 
 men to whom the people have committed the application of their 
 force, for their benefit, are to be prefumed the vileft of mankind, 
 the very fouiadation of the fecial compad muft be diffolved. To- 
 wards the gentleman whofe ofScial ftation refults from the confi- 
 dence of the fame Legislature, by whofe appointment I have the 
 honor of holding a fmiilar truft, I have thought this confidence pe- 
 culiarly due from me, nor fhould I now notice his letter, notwith- 
 ftanding the difapprobation it fo obvloufly implies at the courfe 
 which I have purfued in relation to the fubjeds of which it treats, 
 did it not appear to m^e calculated to produce upon the mind, im- 
 prefuons unfavorable to the rights and interefts of the nation. 
 
 Having underftood that a motion in the Senate of Maffachufetts 
 was made by you, requefting tlie Governor to tranfmit Mr. Picker- 
 ing's letter to the Legiflature, together with fuch communications, 
 relating to public affairs, as he might have received from me, I 
 
avail myfelf of that circumllance, and of the frlendfhip which hai 
 ib long fubfifted between us, to take the liberty of addreffing thle 
 letter, intended for publication, to you. Very few of the fads 
 which 1 fliali (late will rell upon information peculiar to myfelf. 
 Moil of them will ftand upon the bafis of official documents, or of 
 public and undifputed notoriety. For my opinions, though fully 
 perfaaded, that even where differing from your own, they will meet 
 with a fair and liberal judge in \ou, yet of the public I afk neither 
 favour nor indulgence. Pretending to no extraordinary credit fi om 
 the authority of the writer, I am fenfible chey mull fall by their owa 
 woaknefs, or ftand by their own ftrength. 
 
 The firft remark which obtrudes itfelf upon the mind, on the 
 perufal of Mr. Pickering's letter is, that in enumerating all the/r^- 
 fences (for he thinks there are no caufes) for the Embargo, and for a 
 War with Great B-itain, he has totally omitted the Britifh Orders 
 of Council of November 1 1, 18(T7 — thofe orders, under which mil- 
 lions of the property of our fellow citizens, are now detained in 
 Biitilh hands, or confifcated to Britifh captors — thofe orders, under 
 which tenfold as many miillions of the fame property would have 
 been at this moment in the fame predicament, had they not been 
 faved from expofure to it by the embargo — thofe orders, which if 
 once fubmitted to and carried to the extent of their principles, 
 would not have left an inch of American canvafs upon the ocean, 
 but under Eritilh licence and Britifh taxation. An attentive read- 
 er of the letter, without other information, would not even fufped: 
 their exiftence. They are indeed in one or two pa/fages, faintly, 
 and darkly alluded to under the juftifying defcription of " the or- 
 ders of the Britifh government, retaliating the French imperial de- 
 cree ;" but as caules for the Embargo, or as poflible caufes or even 
 pretences of War with Great Britain, they are r^ot only unnoticed, 
 but their very exiftence is by dired Implication denied. 
 
 It is indeed true, that thefe orders were not officially communi- 
 cated with {he Prefident's Meffage recommending the Embargo. 
 They had not been officially received — but they were announced in 
 federal paragraphs from Londonand Liverpool Newfpapers of the 
 lOrh, 1 Ith and 12th of Nov. which appeared in the National Intelli- 
 gencer of the 18lh Dec. the day upon which the Embargo Meffage was 
 lent to Congrefs. The Britifh government had taken care that they 
 Ihould not be autnentically known before their time — for the very 
 fame newfpapers which gave this inofScial notice of thefe orders, 
 announced alfo the departure of Mr. Rofe, upon a fpecial miffion to 
 the United States. And we now know that of thefe alldevouring 
 h\flruments of rapine, Mr, Rofe was not even informed. His mif- 
 fion was profeffedly a miifion of conciliation and reparation for a 
 flagrant — enormous — acknowledged outrage. But he was not fent 
 ■with thefe orders of council in his hands. His text, was the difa- 
 vowal of Admiral Berkeley's conduft — The Commentary vras to 
 be difcovered on another page of the Britifh minifterial policy — On 
 the face of Mr. Pvofe's inftrudions, thefe orders of Council were as 
 invifible, as they are on that of Mr. Pickering's letter. 
 
s 
 
 Tiiey were not merelf without official auihenticlry. Rumouri 
 Lad for ff^veral weeks been in ciiculation, derived (rem Engiilli 
 prints, and fome piivate correipontlences, ihaifuch orders v. we to 
 iffu:' ; and no incon/iJerable pains were taken here to difcredit the 
 fact Affarances were given that there was realon to be'ieve 
 no luch ordtrs to be contem.jlaied Suipicion was hilled by de- 
 clarations equi^ah-nt nearly to a poh ive denial ; and thcfe opiateS 
 were continued tor we^'ks after the Embarg) was laiu, u til Mr. 
 Erfkine received inlhudlions lf> make ihe i fficial communtcation of 
 the orders themfelves, in their ptoper (hape, to our g'>vcrnnitnt. 
 
 \et, although thu authun icattd, and even although thus in 
 fome fort denied, the prooabitity of the oircumftances under which 
 they were announced, and the fweeping tendency of their efFedls, 
 form^'d to mv underll^ndlnl.' a powerful motive, and together wi " 
 the papers fent by the Prefiient, and his exprefs recomniendv-i'o 
 a d'C'iive one. for aflenting to the hmbargo. As a precaution i 
 meafiu-e, I believed it would relcue an immenfe properry from d 
 predarion, if the orders fhould prove auihentic It the alarm w: "' 
 grouiidlefs. it naill very f H)n be difproved, and the Embargo migl '^ 
 be remove, with the danger ^ 
 
 The omiffion of all notice of thefe fadls in the preffing enquirii 
 ** why the Embargo w..s laid " is the more furprifing, becaufe the'-' 
 are of all the ficls, the moft material, upon a fair and impartial e: ' 
 amination of the expediency of that Adt, when it pafled — \nd b 
 caufe thefe orders, together \ ith the lubfequent " retaliating d( 
 crees of France and Spain, have furviilhed the only reafons upo 
 which I have ac^uieiced in its continu mce to this day If dul 
 weighed they will fave us the trouble of reforting to jealoufies c 
 fecret corruption, and the imaginary teirors of Napoleon forth 
 real caufe of the Embargo. Thefe are fidions of foreign inventio 
 — The French Emperor had not declared that he would have n 
 neutrals — He had not required tJiat our ports fhould be fhut again: 
 Bririfh Commerce; but thf- orders of Council, if fubmitted t( 
 would have degraded us to the condition of Colonies. If refiltec 
 would have fattened the wolves of plunder with our fpoils Th 
 Embargo was the only Iheker from the Tempcfl; — the laft refuge c 
 our violated Peace. 
 
 I have mdeed been myfelf of opinion that the Embargo, muft i;i 
 its nature be a temporary expedient, and that preparations mani- 
 feftinga determination of refinance againtl thefe outrageous viola- 
 tions of our neutral rights ought at 'eaft to have been made a fub- 
 jed of feriou deliberation in Congrefs I have believed and do 
 (till believe that our internal i-efources are compe ent to the eHiab* 
 lifhment and maini.iinance of a naval force public and private, if 
 not fully adeq;iateto the protedion and defence of our commerce, 
 at leall: fufHci-nt to induce a rernarfrom tliele holtilities and to de- 
 ter from a renewal of '; < m, by either of the waring parties ; and i 
 that a fyftem to thac eff ct ign; be formed, ultimately far more 
 economical and certair, y m >re eneryetir 'han a three years Em- 
 bargo. Very foon after the clofure of our ports, 1 did fubmit to 
 
the confideration ©f the SeriaW, a propofition for the appointment 
 of ii conimiLtee io inUiLu'e an enquiry to this end Bu my ^eioiu- 
 tion met no ehcoiiragernent Atlempls r;f a iimiiai nature have 
 been made in the Houfe of RL-pre.eiuitives, bui have been equally 
 difcountenanced, and irom tlieie aete minations by decided nnj' r- 
 kies oi both houies, 1 am not iuffirientl) confident in ht- lu-.-. ri iiLy 
 of my own vvifdom to appeal, by a topical ijppticHtion to ti • cim- 
 genial feelings ol any one- — noc evtn of my own native fcditni of 
 the Unum 
 
 The Embargo, however, is a re'lri^blon always under our rwn 
 controuL ii was a meafure Hhogethei (>f dt-fcnice, and expei^niut 
 -—If it was injudiciouily or over halh'ly hjic, it has been every day 
 fince its adopti'-n open to a rtpt al ; if it Ihould prove inefFedual for 
 the purpo.'es which it wa.^ meant to fecure, a fmi;k' day wil luffice 
 to u.ib tr the doors. Still believing it a mcafure juitified by tlie 
 C'Ti umitances of the time, I am n ady to admii thai thofe who 
 thought o.:hervviie may liave had a wilisr foTefit;ht of events, ard a 
 finu tier judgrrsent ol tlif then txr^ing ftaie of things than the ma- 
 jOTJiy of the National Letnllaiure, and he Prelidiht It hat been 
 app oved by fevt-rai of the State Legifla urcs, and among the reft 
 by our own Yet of all its elFeift we are llul unable to judge with 
 Cer-uinty It will ftUl abide the teft of futurity. Ifliall^dd that 
 tliere Were orher motives which had their operation in contrib-i'mg 
 to ':he paifageof the ad, unnotice ■ by Mr Pickering, and wnich 
 h-xvl',^ now ceafed will alfo be left unnoticed by me The oiders 
 of Council of the 1 1th Mov ftill fubfiil in all their force ; and are 
 now confirmed, wirh the addition of taxation, by i&. 'A Parliament. 
 
 -V- they ftand in front of the real caules i( v the Embargo, lu ihey 
 are entitled to the fam. pn^-eminence in enumeraiing the cauies of 
 hoftiiity, which the Britiih Mini Iters are accumulating upon our 
 forbearance. They ftrike at the root of our i' dependence hey 
 affume the principle that vie Ihall have no commerce m time of 
 war, but with her dominions, and as tributaries to her Ths. er- 
 clufive confinement of commerce to the mother country, i^ the gr at 
 principle of the modern coionial fyftem ; and (hould we by a d-re- 
 lidion of our rights at this momentous iiride f encroachmenr hir- 
 rend:.-r our conimercial freedom without a ftruggle, Biiiair, has but 
 a fmgle itep more to take, and Ihe brings u^ back lo the ftamp aft 
 and the tea tax. 
 
 Yet thefe orders — "bus fatal to the liberti'^s for which the heroes 
 oFour revolution toiled and bled — thus ftudiouflv conceal-'d mtil 
 the moment when they btn-ft upon our heads — thus ifTued at the 
 very imtant when a miffion of atonement was profelfedlv lent — 
 in thefe orders wp are to lee nothing but a «* retaliating order upon 
 Fraiice" — in thefe orders, we muft not find fo much as a caule — 
 nay not fo much as a pretence, for complaint againft Britain 
 
 r 1 my mind, fir. in compariion witli thofe orders, the three 
 caufes to which Mr Pi :kering explicitly limits cur ground<^ ior a 
 rupture wish England, might^ indeed be juftly denominatco pre- 
 A^ues-^in comparilon with them, former aggreffipns jdnk into in- 
 
w 
 
 £e;rjificaRce. To argue upon the fubjed' cf our dilputes "with Bn- 
 tain, or upon the Embargo, and keep them out ot fight, is like 
 layinf:^ your finger over the unii before a leries of noughts, and then 
 arithmetically proving that they are all nothing. 
 
 It is not however in a mere omiflion, nor yet in the hiftory of 
 the Embargo, that the inaccuracies of the ftatement I am exaniin- 
 insj have given me the moft ferious concern—it is in the view taken 
 of the qucltions in controverfy between us and Britain The wif- 
 dom of the Eaibargo is a queltion of great, but tranfient magni- 
 tude, and omiffiou facrinces no national right. Mr. Pickering's 
 object was to dilmade the nation from a war with England, into- 
 which he fufpefted the adminiilration was plunging us, under 
 French compulfion. Eut the tendency of his pamphlet is to re- 
 concile the nation, or at leaft the commercial States, to the fervi- 
 tude of Britilh protection, and war with all the. reft of Europe. — ■ 
 Hence England is reprefented as contending for the common lib- 
 erties of mankind, and our only fafe-guard againft the ambition 
 and ininflice of France. Hence all our fenfibiiities are invoked 
 in her favour, and all our antipathies againft her antagonift. — 
 Hence too all the fubjfds of differences between us and Britain 
 are alledged to be on our part mere pretences, of which the right is 
 unequivocally pronounced to be en her fide. Proceeding from a 
 Senator of the United States, fpecially charged as a member of 
 the executive with the maintenance of the nation's rights, againft 
 foreign powers, and at a moment extremely critical of pending ne- 
 gotiation upon all the points thus delineated, this formal abandon' 
 ment of the American caufe, this fummons of unconditional fur- 
 render to the pretenfions of our antagonift, is in my mind highly 
 alarming. It becomes therefore a duty to which every other con- 
 fideration muft yield to point out the errors of this reprefentation. 
 Before we ftrike the ftandard of the nation, let us at leaft examine 
 the purport of the fummons. 
 
 And fir ft, with refpedl to the impreffment of our feamen. We 
 are told that " the taking of Britilh feamen found on board our 
 rnerch jnt vefFels, by Briiifh fhips of war, is agreeable to a rights 
 claimed and exercifed for ages." It is obvious that this claim and 
 exercife of age-;, could nor. apply to us, as an independent people. 
 If the right was claimed and exercifed while our veifels were navi- 
 gating under the Britiih flag, it could not authorize the fame 
 «;Iaiui wlicu their ov/ners have become the citizens of a fovereign 
 ftatc. As a relic of colonial fervitude, whatever may be the claim 
 of Great Britain, it fnrely can be no ground for contending that 
 it is entitled to cur fubmiffion. 
 
 It it bo meant that the right has been claimed and exercifed fcr 
 agofr over the merchant veifels of other nation.*:, I apprehend it is a 
 mifhilie. — The cafe never occurred with fufllcient frequency to 
 conftitute even a pradice, much lefs a right. If it had been either, 
 it would have been noticed by fome of the writers on the laws of 
 nations. The liuth is, the qucftion aroie out of American Inde- 
 pendence — from the fever;'.nco of one nation into two. It was nc- 
 
11 
 
 er made a qucflion betu'CL-n any other nations. There is therefoi«> 
 no right of prefcriplion. 
 
 But, it leems, it has alfo been claimed and exerdjlJ, duiire the 
 whole of the three adminiftrations nf our national governnu iit. — 
 And is it meant to be afTerted that this cUim and exL-rcife coi.itiluLn 
 aright? If it is, I appeal to the uniforiTi, uncealuig and uige'ji 
 lemonftrances of the thn e adminifl;ration:> — i appeal not cnly to the 
 warm feelings, but cool juftice of the American People — nay, I ap- 
 peal to the found fenfe and honorable fentiment cf the Eritiili na- 
 tion itfelf, which, however it may liave fubmitted at home to this, 
 pradice, never would tolerate its function by law, againli the aflbr- 
 tion. If it is not, Iiow can it be alllimed that it is 011 our part a 
 mere pretence ? 
 
 But the firft merchant of the United States, in aiifwer to Mr. 
 Pickering's late enquiries has informed him that unce ih^* affair iS 
 the Chelapeake there has been no caufe of complaint — that he could 
 not find a ilngle inftance, where they had taken one man out of a 
 merchant veifel. Who is it, that enjoys the dignity of firil mer- 
 chant of the United States we are not informed. But if he had ap- 
 plied to many merchants in Bofton as refpedable as any in the Uni- 
 ted States, they could have told him of a valuable vellel and cargo, 
 totally loR upon the coalt of England, late in Auguft lall, andfoleiy 
 in confequence of having had two of htr men, native Americans, 
 taken from her by impreilment, two months after the affair or the 
 Chefapeake. 
 
 On the 1 5th of October the King of England iffued his prcchi- 
 mation, cojnmandJn^ his naval oflicers, to irnprefs his fubjods Irom 
 merchant veffels. This proclamation is reprefented as merely 
 ** requiring the return of his fubjeds; the feamen cfptcially, trom 
 foreign countries," and then " it is a-n acknowledged principle that 
 every nation has a right to the fervice of it?) fubjecis in time or 
 war." Is this, fir, a corred ftatement either of the ProciHni;.'.iion, 
 or of the queftion it involves in winch our right is concerned ? TiiC 
 king of England's right to tlie fervice of his fubjecis in time of war 
 is nothing to us. The qneftion is, whether he has a light to fr»izti 
 them forcibly on board of our vellels while under conlra^fc offer- 
 vice to our citizens, within our jurifdidion upon the high feas ; — 
 And whether he has a right exprefbly to command iiis naval officers 
 fo to fcize them — Is this an acknowledgf^d principle r certainly 
 not. V. hy tlion is this pioclamation def.ribed as fr.iindcd upon 
 uncontefted principle ? and why is tlie command, fojultiy cff-'n- 
 five to us, and fo mifchievous as it might then have been made-, 
 altogether omitted r' 
 
 But it is not the taking of Britifh fubjccts fi om our veiTel:', it is 
 the taking under colouroftliat pretence, our ov/n, native i'.iuefican 
 citizens, which conftitutes the moft galling aegravalion or this 
 mercilefs practice. Vet even this, wc are told is but a pretence — 
 ior three reafons. 
 
 I. Becaufe the number of citizens thus tuken, hfwall. 
 
1:2 
 
 2. Becaufe it arifes only from the irnpoffibilit7 of difllnguifhing' 
 Eng'ifhmen iioni .mti.cans 
 
 .'i B^cauiV, lach impivifed American citizens are delivered up, 
 on duly autheniicateo pi not. 
 
 I Small and great in point of numbers are relative terms To 
 fuppofe that tJje native Americ: lib io\m a fmall proportion ol he 
 wijoJe number ijiiprefTcd is a nuil.ike — the reverie is the faft — 
 i-xami'.e ihe official returns f'om thr Department of tjtaie Ths.y 
 give the name: of between four and five thouiana n)en imprf (led 
 finoe the commcncen::rnt of the pit-feut war. Of which nun^ber, 
 JO. ohl- firdi part were Brit'ih mbjt els — Fhe number of natur'ih -cd 
 Americans could not amount lo one tenth — 1 hazard little in lay- 
 in.: tiia' more than three fourths were naiive -\mericans It it be 
 laid that fome of iheic men, though appearing on the face of the 
 reianis, Americans, were reall) Britdh fubjedls, and bad traudu- 
 lenr.ly prncured their proteftion- ; i repiy that this number must be 
 fir exceeded by the cafes of citizens impreifed, which never reach 
 the di^pir; meut of date. The <merican Conful in London eiH- 
 m te ihi number of impieffments during the war at nea»Jy three 
 tim- tiie amouni o\ the names returned If the nature of the of- 
 fence be confidert-d in its true colours, to a people having a jult i- nfe 
 of perfonal liberty and fecurity, it is in every fmgle inftance, of a 
 ma.ignity not interior to that of MU DliR The very <~ame aft, 
 when comnntedby the recuiting office)- of one nation within the 
 teiritnries of another, is by the univi rf il law and ufage of nations 
 puriifhcd vith diMth Suppofe the crime in every inilance, a^ by 
 its confequences it has been in many, deliberate murder Would 
 it anfwer or filence the voice of our complaints to be told thai the 
 number was fma'il ? 
 
 2 The impoffibiiity of diilinguifhing Enylifh fr im American 
 feamen is not the only, nor even "he moft Irtqutnt occafion • f Im- 
 pvciTment: Look again into the return- from the Departmeni of 
 Si.i'e — you Will fee that tlie officers take our men wi hcut pretend- 
 ing ■ ■ enquire wliere they were oorn ; lb;netimes from thi wanton- 
 n'.' s i>f power When they manifeh the mod tender regari for the 
 neutral rights (^^f America, they lament that the) luantxha men — 
 T)i • n-gret tht neceffity, but they tnujl huve their complimert. 
 Vk'!i q w "■ complain of thefe enormities, wt are anfwered that the 
 a6l of fuch < fficers were unauthorized ; that the comn.tanders of 
 m 1. of war, are an unruly fet of men, for whofe violence their own 
 gOvPrnment canno: always be anlwerable ; that enquiry ihali be 
 m . . -^A Conn Mtrtiai is fometiraes mentioned — and the iffuc of 
 Wnitby's Cou t Martial has taught us, what relief is to be expected 
 fi'iin that There are even example*- I am told, when fuch offi- 
 Cfrs hav(' been pur upon the yellow lift. But this is a rare excep- 
 tior. — The oidinary iifue hen the aft is dilavowed-, is the promo- 
 tion of the aftnr. 
 
 *; The imp. ifed native A.merican citizens however, upon ^a^f 
 ati.'hentica'ed f>r.':f a.rc delivered up Indeed! how unreafonable 
 then were compiaint ! how efFeftual a remedy for the wrong ! aj> 
 
American vefiel bound to an European port, has two, three or foUi* 
 nirnvt^ \meticans, imprelTtd by a Britifh man of war, bound to the 
 Eci;!. or vVeft indus When the American Captam arrives at his 
 poj . ot deitination. he makes his protelt, and fends it to the Heareft 
 -rt m -i ican Miaifter or Conful When he returns home, he tranf- 
 mis the duplicate ol his pr>)teil to the Secretary of State, In pro- 
 cel\ f lime, the names of the imprt-fTed men, and of the (liip nito 
 which iht'Y have been imprelfed, are received by th* agent in Lon- 
 don lie iii.ikeshis demand that the men may be delivered up — 
 The Lord.-, of the Admiralty, after a realbnable time for snquiry 
 ai d a ivifenient. leturn for anfvver, that the Ihip is on a foreign Ita- 
 tion, and their Lordlhips can therefore take no further ftep in the 
 m.iLici — Or, that ti:e ihip has been taken, and that the men have 
 bet- n reci^ived in exchange for French p ifoners — Or, that the men 
 had no proted r-ni. (the impreffing officers have often taken them 
 from the men) — Or, that the men were probab/y Britifh fuhjecls — 
 Or 'hat they have entered, and taken the Bounty ; (to which the 
 offi'.ers know hr-w to reduce them) — Or, that they have been mar- 
 ri -d, or fettied in England. In all thefe cafes, without further 
 €■ remony, ths-ir difcharge is refufed. Sometimes, their Lordlhips, 
 in a vein of humour, inform the agent that the man has been dif- 
 ch agod .s unfervkeable Sometimes, in a fterner tone, they fay he 
 VfA^ an impojier Or perhaps by way of confolation to his relatives 
 and tncndb, they r» port that he has fallen in battle, againft nations 
 in amity with his country Sometimes they only return that tliere 
 is no jiich mar on huard the faip ; and what has become of him, tho 
 agonies oi a wiie and children in his native land may be left to con- 
 jecture. When all theie and mduy other fuch apologies for refufal 
 iaii, the native .American is dilcharged — and when by the chanta- 
 ble aid of hi.s government he has found his way home, he comes to 
 be inform d, 'hat all is as it fhould be— -that the number of his fel- 
 lovi' fulTerers i fmall— that it was impoffible to diftinguifh him from 
 an Englifhman — and that he v/as delivered up, on duly authmticated 
 proof. 
 
 Enou!j;h of this difgufting fubjed — I cannot flop to calculate 
 hew many of thefe wretched viftims are natives of MafTachufetts, 
 an J hov/ many are natives of Virginia — I cannot ftop to falve tliat 
 knorty qucftinn of national jujiiprudence whether fome of them 
 might not pofhbly be flavis, and therefore not citizens of the United 
 Staces — 1 cannot ftay to account for the wonder, why, poor, and 
 ignorant and friendlef- as moil of them are, the voice of their com 
 plainrs is lo feldom heard m the great navigating flates. I admit 
 that we have endured this cruel indignity, through all the adminif- 
 tradoiis of the general government I acknowledge that Brlcam 
 claim*, the right of feizing her fubjt ds, in our merchant veffels, and 
 that even if we could acknowledge it, the line of difcrimiiiation 
 would be difficult to draw. We are not in a condition to maintain 
 right, by war, and as the Britifh government have been more than 
 once on the point of giving i^ up of cheir own accord, I would ftill 
 hope for the day when returning juftice (hall induce them to aban- 
 
14. 
 
 <Ion it, without compuliion. Her fubje*5i:s we do not want. The 
 degree of protetSion which we are bound to extend to them, cannot 
 equal the claim of our own citizens. I would fublcribe to any 
 compromife of this conteft, confiftent with the rights of fovereignty, 
 the duties of humanity, and the principles of reciprocity: but to 
 the right of forcing even her own fubjefts out of our merchant vef- 
 fels on the high feas, 1 never can affont. 
 
 The fecond point upon which Mr. Pickering defends the pre- 
 tenfions of Great Britain, is her denial to neutral nations of the 
 right of profecuang with her enemies and their colonies, any com- 
 merce from which they are excluded in time of peace. His ftate- 
 ment of this cafe adopts the Britifh doclrine, as found. The right, 
 as on the queftion of impreffment, fo on this, it furrenders at dif- 
 cretion — and it is equally defedive in point of fact. 
 
 In the firft place, the claim of Great Britain, is not to " a rig:ht 
 of impofmg on this neutral commerce fume Rmits and rcjiraints'"—" 
 but of interdifting it altogether, at her pleafure, of interdicting it 
 without a moment's notice to neutrals, after folemn decifions of her 
 courts of admiralty, and formal acknowledgments of her minifters, 
 that it is a lawful trade — And, on fuch a fudden, unnotified inter- 
 didion of pouncing upon all neutral commerce navigating upon 
 the faith of her decifions and acknowledgments, and of gorging with 
 confifcation the greedinefs of her cruizers — This is the right claim- 
 ed by Britain — This is the power fhe has exercifed — What Mr. 
 Pickering calls " limits and rellraints," Ihe calls relaxations of her 
 right. 
 
 It is but little more than two years, fince this queftion was agi- 
 tated both in England and America, with as much zeal, energy 
 and ability, as ever was difplayed upon any queftion of national 
 Law. The Britifh fide was fupported by Sir "William Scott, Mr. 
 Ward, and the author of War in Difguife. But even in Britain 
 their do«5lrine was refuted to demonftration by the Edinburg re- 
 viewers. In America, the rights of our country were maintained 
 by numerous writers profoundly fkilled in the fcience of national 
 a'ld maritime Law. The anf^ver to War in Difguife was afcribed 
 to a Gentleman* whofe talents are uaiverfally acknowledged, and 
 who by his oSicial fituations had been required thoroughly to in- 
 veftigate every queftion of conflift between neutral and belligerent 
 rights v/hlch has occurred in the hiftory of modern War. Mr. 
 Gore and Mr. Pinckney, our two commiflloners at London, under 
 Mr Jay's Treaty, the former, in a train of cool and conclufive ar- 
 gument addrefled to Mr. Madifon, the latter in a memorial of fpu-- 
 ited eloquence from the Merchants of Baltimore, fupported the 
 fame caufe ,• memorials, drawn by lawyers of diftinguifhed emi- 
 nence, by Merchants of the highefl charafrer, and by tlatefmen of 
 long experience in our national councils came from Salem, from 
 Bofl;on,from New. Haven, from New- York, and from Philadelphia 
 together with remonftrances to the fame efFed from Newbury port, 
 Newport, Norfolk and Gharleftcn. This accumulated mafs of le- 
 gal learning, of commercial informatioa and of national fentimeni 
 * Mr. Madifon, 
 
1^ 
 
 TTom almofl every inhabited fpot upon our fliores, and from one e.r^' 
 tremity of" the union to the other, confiimed by the unanfwered and 
 unanfwerable memorial of Mr. Munroe to the Britifh minilier, and 
 by the elaborate refearch and irrefiftible reafoning of the examina' 
 tton of the Britifli docftrine, was alfo made afubjedi of full, and de- 
 liberate difcuffion in the Senate of the United States. A commit- 
 tee of leven members of that body, after three weeks of arduous in« 
 ■veftigation, reported three Refolutions, the firlt of which was iu 
 thefe words " Refolved that the capture and condemnation, under 
 the orders of the Britifh government, and adjudications of their 
 courts of admiralty of American veffels and their cargoes, on the 
 pretext of their being employed in a trade with the enemies of 
 Great Britain, prohibited In time of peace, is an unprovoked ag- 
 greflion upon the property of the citizens of thefe United States, a 
 violation of their neutral rights, and an encroachment upontheir nation- 
 til Indtpenc'ence." 
 
 On the J3lh of February, 1806, the queftion upon the adoption, 
 of this Reiblutlon, was taken in the Senate. The yeas and nay.i 
 were required ; but not a Iblitary 7;<j;' was heard in aniwer. it was 
 adopted by the unanimous voice of all the Senators prefent. They 
 were twenty-eight ir^,number, and among them ftands recorded the 
 name of Mr. Pickering. 
 
 Let us remember that this was a queftion moft peculiarly and 
 immediately commercial, and not agricultural intereft ; that it arofe 
 from a call, loud, energetic and unanimous, from all the merchants 
 of the United States upon Congrefs, for the national interpofition j 
 that many of the memorials invoked all the energy of tlie Legiila- 
 ture, and pledged the lives and properties of the memorialifts in 
 fupport of any meafures which Congrefs might deem neceffary to 
 vindicate thofe rights. Negotiation was particularly recommend- 
 ed from Bofton, and elfewhere — negotiation was adopted — nego- 
 tiation has failed — and now Mr. Pickerinij tells us that Great 
 Britain has claimed and maintained her right ! He argues that her 
 claim is juft — and Is not fparing of cenfure upon thofe who Hill con- 
 fider it as a ferious caufe of com.plaint 
 
 But there was one point ct view in which the BrItifli do(5trine on 
 this queftion was the.) only confidered incidentally in the United 
 States — becaufe it was not deemed material for the difcuffion oi our 
 rights. We examined it chiefly as affeifllng the principles as be- 
 tween a belligerent and a neutral power. But in fadt it was an in- 
 fringement of tlie rights of War, as well as the rights of Peace. It 
 was an unjuftifiable enlargement of the fphere of hoftile operations. 
 The enemies of Great Britain had by tlie univerfal law of Nations 
 aright to the benefits of neutral comm.erce within their dominions 
 (fubjedl to the exceptions o{ actual blockade and contraband) as 
 ■well as neutral nations had a right to trade with them. The ex- 
 clufion from that commerce by this new principle of warfare which 
 Britain, In defiance of all immemorial national ufages, undertook 
 by her fingle authority to eftablifti, but too naturally led her ene- 
 mies to refort to new and extraordinary principles, by which i». 
 
their turn thev niight retaliate this injury upon her. The pretence 
 upon which Britain in the firil inrtance had .■ittemp'^ed lo cr,l;U'. her 
 injuftice, was a miferable Jia'wn — It was an argument :igainll: f.idt. 
 Herreafoning was, that a neutral veffei by mere adniiffio,i m time 
 of war, into Ports from which it iiiould have been excluded in cinse 
 of peace, became thereby deprived of its national ch irafter, and 
 ipfo fadto was transformed in^o enemy's property 
 
 Such was the bafis upon which arole the {<\i famed rn e of war 
 of 1756 — Such was the foundation upon which Y>v\VA\n claimed and 
 maintained this fuppofed liglit of adding this new inltrunienc <-\ cief 
 olation to the horrors of war — it was diftrefliiig to her enem) — 
 yes ! had fhe adopted the pradice of deahng with them in poiton — 
 Had Mr. Fox acc-pted the fervici s of ihe man who offtied to lid 
 him of the French Emperor by aifailination, and had tht: attempt 
 fucceeded, it would have been lels dillr ffing to France than chis 
 rule of the war of 1756 ; and not more unjullitiable iMr Fox had 
 coo fair a mind for either, but his comprthcnfive and liberal Ipirit 
 ■was difcarded, with the Cabinet which he had formed 
 
 It has been tne Sruggle of reafon and humanity, and above all of 
 chriftianity for two thoufand years to mitigate the vigours rf that 
 fcourge of human kind, war. It is now the lb ugglf ot Bii'ain to 
 aggravate them Her rule of the war of ] 7^6. m i:flf and in its 
 effeds, was one of the deadlieft poifons, in which it was poffible for 
 her to tinge the weapons of her hoiiility 
 
 In itfelf and in its cfFe(5ls» I fay — For the i" rench decrees of Ber- 
 lin and of Milan, the Spanifh and Dutch decrees < f the /am: or the 
 like tenor, and her own orders of January and November — thefe 
 alternations of licenfed pillage, this eager rompt-ti Km between her 
 and her enemies for th« honor of giving the laii ftroke to the vi'ab 
 of maritime neutrality, all are jufily attributable- to her affumption 
 and exercife of this fingle principle The rule of 'he War of 1756 
 was the root, from which all the reft are but fuckers, ftili at every 
 Ihoot growing ranker in luxuriance 
 
 In the laft decrees of Fmnce and Spain, her own ingenious fic- 
 tion is adopted ; and under tkem, everv neutral veiffl that liibmits 
 to Englilh I'earch, has been carried into an Enghlli port, or paid a 
 tax to the Enp-lifh Government is declared denationalized that is to 
 \^ have loft her national charafler, and to have become Ei'gidh \ tcp- 
 erty. This is cruel in executim : abfurd in argument !.'o refute 
 it were folly, for to the underftanding of a child i' refites I'elf. 
 But it is the nafoning of Britiih Jurifts It i^ the fimpie applica- 
 tion to the circumftances and powers ot'France, of the rule of •■ ar 
 of 1756, 
 
 I am not the apologift of France and Spain ; I have no national 
 partialities; no national attachments t,ut to my own countiy I 
 liiall never undertake to ju'lify or palliate the inhilt> or injuri*^- of 
 any foreign power to that country which is dearer to me than ^ife. 
 If tJie voice of reafon and of juftice could be hea'd by Fra <fr nud 
 Spain, they would fay — you have done wrong to mak- dio i' jtf- 
 tlceof your enemy towards neutrals the meafure ot your own. If 
 
17 
 
 file chafUfes with whips, do not you chaftife with fcorpioris^i-iVv he- 
 ther France would lifteh to this language, I know not. The moft 
 enormous infraiStons ot our sights hitherto cortmitted by her, have 
 bem more in menace than ifl accompHfliment. The alarm has 
 been j lift ly great ; the anticipation threatening; but the amount 
 of Actual injury fm all. But to Britain, what can we fay? If we 
 attempt to raife our Voltes, hel- Minifter has declared to Mr. Pinck- 
 nty that fhe will not hear. The only reafon ftie afllgns for her 
 i-ecent orders of council is, thit France proceeds on the fame prin- 
 ciples It is only by the light ef blazing temples, and amid thft 
 groans df women and children perifhing in the ruins of the fanctu- 
 a) ies of dohieftic habitation at Copenhagen, that 'U'e cah exped our 
 remonflrances againftthls colirfe of proceeding will be heard. 
 
 Let us cOrne to the third and laft of the caufes of complaint* 
 whi h are reprefented as fo frivolous and fo unfounded — **■ the un- 
 foirohite affair of the Chefapeake.'* The orders of Admiral 
 Berkeley, Under which this outrage was committed, have- been dif- 
 avowed by his Government, General profeffions of a Wilhngnef* 
 to make reparation for it, have been lavilhed in profufion ; and wfe 
 are now inilriidted to take thefe profeffions for endeavours ; to be- 
 lieve them fincere, becaufe his Britannic Majefty fent us a fpecial 
 envoy i and to caft the odiUm of defeating thefe endeavours upon 
 bur oWn governrhent 
 
 1 have already told yoii, that T am not one of thofe who deeiil 
 fufpicidn and diftruft, in the higheft order of political virtues.— 
 Bi.i'elefs fafpicion is, in my eftimation, a vice, as pernicious in the 
 in magement of public affairs, as it is fatal to the happinefs of a 
 domeUic lif^. When, therefore, the Britifh Minifters have declar- 
 ed their difpofition to make ample reparation for an injiiry of a 
 moft attrocidus charadler, committed by an officer of high rank, 
 and, as they fay, utterly without authority, I fhould moft readily 
 believe them, were their prof^flions not pofitively contradi(Jled by 
 fads of more powerful eloquence than V/ords 
 
 Have fuch fads oc urred ? I will not again allude to the cif- 
 cumftances of Mr Rofe's departure upon hi; miftion at fuch a pre- 
 cife point of time, that his Commiffion and the orders of Council 
 of 11 th November, might have been figned With the fame penful 
 of mk The fubjefts were not immediately conneded with each 
 other, and his Majefty did not chufe to affociate diftind topics of 
 negotiation. The attack upoli the Chefapeake was difaVowed ; 
 and ample reparation was Withheld only, becaufe With the demand 
 for fatisfad ion Upon that injury, ihe American Government had 
 coupled a demand for the ceffation of others ; alike in kind, but of 
 minor aggravation. But had reparation really been intended, 
 would it not have been offered, not in vague and general terms* 
 but in precife and fpecific propofals ? Were any fuch made ? None. 
 But it is faid Mr. Monroe was reftrided from negotiating upon 
 this fubjed apaft ; and therefore Mr. Rofe was to be fent to Wafh- 
 ington ; charged with this hngle objed ; and without authority to 
 treat upon or even to difcufs any other. Mr. Refe apives— -Thft 
 
IS 
 
 American Government readily determine to treat upon the Chef- 
 apeake afairy feparately from all others ; but before Mr. Rofe 
 fets his foot on fhore, in purfuance of a pretenfion made before by- 
 Mr. Canning, he connedts with the negotiation, a fubjeft far more 
 diftinft from the butchery of the Chefapeake, than the general im- 
 preisment of our feamen, I mean the JProclamation, interdicting to 
 Britifli ftiips of war, the entrance of our harbours. 
 
 The great obflacle which has always interfered in the adjuftment 
 of our differences with Britain, has been that fhe would not acqui- 
 efce in the only principle upon which fair negotiation between in- 
 dependent nations can be conduced, the principle of reciprocity, 
 that fhe refufes the application to us of the claim which fhe afferts 
 for herfelf. The forcible taking of men from an American vefTel, 
 was an eflential part of the outrage upon the Chefapeake. It was 
 the oftenfible purpofefor which that ad of war unproclaimed was 
 committed. The Prefident's Proclamation was a fubfequent adl, 
 and was avowedly founded upon many fimilar aggrefllons, of 
 which that was only the moft aggravated. 
 
 If then Britain could with any colour of reafon claim that the 
 general queflion of irapreffment fhould be laid but of the cafe al- 
 together, fhe ought upon the principle of reciprocity to have laid 
 equally out of the cafe, the proclamation, a meafure fo eafily fepa- 
 rable from it, and in its nature merely defenfive. 
 When therefore fhe made the repeal of the Proclamation an indif- 
 ,penfible preliminary to all difcuffion upon the nature and extent ®£ 
 that reparation which fhe had offered, fhe refufed to treat with us 
 upon the footing of an independent power. She ir/ifted upon an 
 ad of felf-degradation on our part, before fhe wouM even tell us, 
 what redrefs fhe would condefcend to grant for a great and ac- 
 knowledged wrong. This was a condition which fhe could not 
 but know to be inadmiffible, and is of itfelf proof nearly conclufive 
 that her Cabinet never intended to make for that wrong any repa- 
 ration at all. 
 
 But this is not all — It cannot be forgotten that when that atro- 
 cious deed was committed, amidft tlie general burfl of indignation 
 which refounded from every part of the Union, there were among 
 us a fmall number of perfons, who upon the opinion that Berkeley's 
 orders were authorifed by his government, undertook to juftify 
 them in their fullcfl extent — Thefe ideas probably firft propagated 
 by Britifii official charaders in this country, were perfifted in un- 
 til the difavowal of the Britifh Government took away the necef- 
 flty for perfevering in them, and gave notice where the next pofi- 
 tion was to.be taken This patriotic reafoning however had been 
 fo fatisfadory at Halifax, that complimentary letters were received 
 from Admiral Berkeley himfelf highly approving the fpirit in 
 which they were inculcated, and remarking how eafily Peace be- 
 tween the United States and Britain might be preferved, if that 
 zneafurt of our national rights could be made the prevailing ftand- 
 aid of the country. 
 When the news arrived in England, although the general fentt- 
 
ment of the nation was not prepared for the formal avowal and 
 juftification of this unparalleled aggreffion, yet there were not want 
 ing perfons there, ready to claim and maintain the right of feurching 
 national fhipsfor deferters — It was faid at the time, but for this we 
 muft of courfe reft upon the credit of unofficial authoiity, to have 
 been made a ferious queftion in the Cabinet Council ; nor was its 
 determination there afcribed to the eloquence of the gentleman 
 who became the official organ of its communication — Add to this a 
 circumftance, which without claiming the irrefragable credence of a 
 diplomatic note, has yet its weight upon the common fenfe of man- 
 kind ; that in all the daily newfpapers known to be in the minif- 
 terial intercft, Berkeley was juftified and applauded in every varie- 
 ty of form that publication could affume, excepting only that of of- 
 ficial Proclamation. — The only part of his orders there difapprov- 
 ed was the reciprocal offer which he made of fubmitting his own 
 fhips to be fearched in return — that was very uneqiiivocally dif- 
 claimed — The ruffian right of fuperior force, was the folid baf^ 
 upon which the claim was aflerted, and fo familiar was this ar- 
 gument grown to the cafuifts of Britifh national Jurifprudence, 
 that the right of a Britifh man of war to fearch an American frig- 
 ate, was to them a felf evident proof againft the right of the .%- 
 meriean frigate to fearch the Britifh man of war. The fame tone 
 has been conftantly kept up, until our accounts of lateft date ; and 
 have been recently further invigorated by a very explicit call for 
 war with the United States, wkich they contend would be of no 
 poffible injury to Britain, and which they urge upon the miniftry 
 as affording diem an excellent opportunity to accomplifh a difinein- 
 bermeiit oj^this union — Thefe fentiments have ever been avowed iit 
 Parliament, where tlie nobleman who moved the addrefs of the 
 houfe of Lords in anfwer to the king's fpeech, declared that the 
 right of fearching national fhips, ought to be maintained againil the 
 Americans, and difclaimed only with refpeft to European fovc- 
 reigns. 
 
 In the mean time Admiral Berkley, by a court martial of his 
 own fubordinate officers, hung one of the men taken from the 
 Chefapeake, and called his name Jenkin Ratford. — There was, ac- 
 cording to the anAver fo frequently given by the Lords of the Ad- 
 miralty, upon applications for the difcharge of impreiTed Ameri- 
 cans, no {uch men on hoard the fbip. The man thus executed had 
 been taken from the Chefapeake by the name of Wilfon. It is faid 
 that on his trial he was identified by one or two witnefies who 
 knew him, and that before he was turned off he confefled his name 
 to be Ratford and that he was born in England — But it has alfo 
 been faid that Ratford is now living in Pennfylvania — and after 
 the charafter which the difavowal of admirai Berkley's own gov- 
 ernment has given to his couduft, what confidence can be claimed 
 or due to the proceeding of a court martial of his associates held 
 to fanclion his proceedings. The three other men had not even 
 been demanded in his orders ; they were taken by the fole author- 
 ity of the Britifli fearching lieutenant, after the furrender of the 
 
Cherapeake. There xras not the fliadow of a pretence befere thee 
 court martial that they were Britiih fubjefts, or born in any of the 
 Britifh dominions Yet by this court martial they were fetennce4 
 to Jujfer death. They were reprieved from execution, only upon 
 condition of renouncipg their riehts as Americans by voluntary fer- 
 vice in the king's (hips, They have never been reftored. To com- 
 plete the cataftrophe with which this bloody tragedy was conclud- 
 ed, Admiral Berkley himfelf in fanctioning the doom of theie men, 
 thus obtained, thus tried, and thu» fentenced, read them a grave 
 moral ledlure on the enormity of their crime, in its tendency to 
 pt ovoke a vyar between the United States and Great Britain. 
 
 Yet amidft all this parade of difavowal by his government -a- 
 mldft all thefe profefllons ofreadinefstq make reparation, not a fm- 
 srie mark of tlie flighted difapprobation appaars ever to have beea 
 snanifeiled to that officer- His inilruftiohs \yere executed upon the 
 <Chefapeak]e in June. Rumours of Jiis recall have been circulated 
 herC"-Bat on leaving the ftation at Ha ifax in December, he re- 
 ceived a complimentary addrefs from the colonial affembly, and 
 aflured them in anfwer, that he had no official information of his 
 recall. From thence he went to the Weft-Indies ; and on leaving 
 Barmnda for England in February was addrefled again by that 
 colonial government, in terms of high panegyric upon his energy, 
 >vjth manifeft allafion to l^is atchievinent upon the Chefapeake. 
 
 Under all thefe circumftanciei, without applying any of the max- 
 ims of a fijfplcious policy to the Brttifli profefllons, Imay ftill be 
 permitted to believe that their miniftry never ferioufly intended to 
 make us honorable reparation, or indeed any reparation at all for 
 thai' ' unfortunate affair." 
 
 It is impofHblje for any man, to form an accurate Idea of the Bri- 
 lifh policy toward? the United States, without taking into confide- 
 raiion the ftate of parties in that government; and the views, char- 
 a<5leis and opinions of the individuals at their helm of State. A 
 iibeyal and a Jioftile policy towards America, are among the ftrong- 
 efl marks of diilindjoi) between the political fyftems of the rival 
 Aatefmen of that kingdom. The liberal party are reconciled to 
 our Indicpendence : and though extremely tenacious of every right 
 of their own country^ are fyftematically difp©fed to preferye /fi/cc 
 ^yith the United States, Their opponents harbour fentiments of 
 .ivery different defcription. Their fyflem is coercion—Their object 
 ch$ recovery of their iofl dominion jn North America. This party 
 now (lands high m pov/er- -Althpiigh Admiral Berkeley may nev- 
 er have received written orders from them for hi,s enterprjze upon 
 the Chefapeake, yet in giving his inftruftions to the fquadron at 
 ?\orfolk, he knew full well under Vv-hat adminiftration he was a(?l« 
 :ng. Every meafure of tliat adminiftration towards us fince that 
 {inje has been directed to the fame purpofe. To break down the 
 fpirit of our national independence. Their purpofe, as far as it can 
 be collecfed from their ads, is to force us into war with them or 
 -.vitli their enemies ; to leave us only the bitter alternative of thc^jr 
 yjcngcancc or their protefflion. 
 
21 
 
 Boih thefe parties are no doubt willing, that we ftuDuld join them 
 in the war of their nation againft France and her allies — The late 
 adminiftration would have drawn as into it by treaty, the prefent are 
 attempting it by compulfion. The former would have admitted 
 us as allies, the latter will have us no otherwife than as colonifts — 
 On the late debates in Parliament, the lord chancellor freely avow- 
 ed that the orders of Council of 1 1th November, were intended to 
 make America at lajl lenfible of the policy of joining England 
 againft France. 
 
 This too. Sir, is the fubftantial argument of Mr Pickering's let- 
 ter.— The fufpicions of a dejign in our own adminiftration to plunge 
 us into a war v^'ith Britain, 1 never have fhared. Our adminiftra- 
 tion have every intereft and every motive that can influence the 
 condud of man to deter them from any fuch purpofe. Nor have 
 I feen any thing in their meafures bearing the flighteft indication 
 of it. Eut between a defign of war with England, and a furren- 
 der of our national freedom for the fake of war with the reft of Eu- 
 rope, there is a material difference. This is the policy now in fub- 
 ftance recommended to ys, and for which the interpofltion of the 
 commercial States is called. "For this, not only are all the outrages 
 of Britain to be forgotten, but the very affertion of our rights is to 
 be branded with odium-— Imprefment — Neutral trade — BrUtJii Taxa- 
 tion — Every thing that can diftinguifh a ftate of national Freedom 
 from a ftate of national vafTalage, is to h& furrendered at difcretion. 
 In the face of every fadl we are told to believe every profelCon.— 
 In the midft of every indignity, we are pointed to Britifh protedlion 
 as our only fhleld againft the univerfal conqueror Every phan- 
 tom of jealoufy and fear evoked — The image of France with a 
 fcourge in her hand is imprefled into thefervice, to lafh us into the 
 refuge of obedience to Britain — infinuations are even made that if 
 Britain " with her thoufand fhips of war," has not deftroye dour 
 commerce, it has been owing to her indulgence, and we are almoft 
 threatened in her name with the " deft-u(5tion of our faireft cities." 
 
 Not one aft of hoftility to Britain has been committed by us, fiie 
 has not a pretence of that kind to allege — But if (he will wage war 
 upon us, are we to do nothing in our own defence ? If (he ilTues or- 
 ders of univerfal plunder upon our commerce, are we not to with- 
 hold it from her grafp i Is American pillage one of thofe rights 
 which Ihe has clainied and exercifed until we are foreclofed from 
 any attempt tp obftrudl its collection ? For what purpofe are we re- 
 quired to make this facrifice of every thing that can give value to 
 the name offreemeu; this abandonment of the very right of felf- 
 prefervation ? Is it to avoid a war I — Alas ! Sir, it does not offer 
 even this plaufible plea of pufillanimity — For, as fubmiffion would 
 make us to all fubftantial purpofes Britifh colonies, her enemies 
 would unqueftionably treat us as fuch, and after degrading our- 
 felves into voluntary fervitude to efcape a war with her, we fhould 
 incur inevitable war with all her enemies, and be doomed to fLar<; 
 ^he deteftines of her conflict with a world in arms. 
 
22 
 
 Between this unqualified fubmiffion, and offenfive refiflKnce 
 agalnft the war upon maritime neutrality waged by the coucurrjlng 
 decrees of all the great belligerent powers, the Embargo was adopt- 
 ed, and has been hitherto continued. So far was it from being 
 diiSlated by France, that it was calculated to withdraw, and has 
 withdrawn from within her reach all the means of compulfion 
 which her fubfequent decrees would have but in her polfeffion. It 
 has added to the motives botli of France and England for pre- 
 fervlng peace with us, und has diminiihed their inducements to war. 
 
 It has leffened their capacities of infliding injury upon us, and 
 given us some preparation for refillance to them— It has takea 
 from their voilenee the lure of intereft — It has dafhed the philter 
 of pillage from the lips of rapine. That it is diftreffing to our- 
 felves — that it calls for the fortitude of a people, determined to 
 to maintain their rights, is not to be denied. But the only alter- 
 native was between that and war. Wether it vail yet fave us from 
 rhat calamity, cannot be determined, but if not, will prepare us for 
 the further ftruggle to which we may be called, Its double tende- 
 ncy of promoting peace and preparing for war, in its operation 
 upon both the belligerent rivals, is the great advantage, which 
 3more than outweigh all its evils. 
 
 If any ftatefman can point out another alternative, lam ready 
 to dear him, and for any practicable expediant to lend him every 
 poflible affiftance. But let not that expedient be, fubmiffion to 
 trade under Britifh licences, and Britifli taxation. We are told 
 that even under thefe reftrldlrns we may yet trade to tlie Britifh 
 dominions, to Africa and China, and with the colonies of France, 
 Spain, and Holland. I afk not how much of this trade would be 
 left, when our intercourfe with the whole continent of Europe being 
 cut ofiF would leave us no means of purchafe, and no market for 
 iale ? I afk not, what trade we could enjoy with the colonies with 
 which we fliould be at war ? I ask not how long Britain would 
 leave open to us avenues of trade, which even in thefe very orders 
 ef Council, Ihe boafts of leaving open as a fpecial Indulgence ? 
 If we yield the principle, we abandon all pretence to national fov- 
 erlgnty. To yearn for the fi-agments of trade which might be left, 
 would be to pine for the crumbs of commercial fervitude. The 
 boon, which we fhould humilitate ourfelves to accept from Britifh 
 bounty, would foon be withdrawn. Submifllon never yet fat 
 boundaries to encroachment. From pleading for half the empirer, 
 we fliould Cink Into fuppllcants for life — We fhould fupplicate in 
 vain. If we muft fall, let us fall, freemen---If we muft perifh let it 
 be in defence of our RIGHTS. 
 
 To conclude. Sir, I am notfenfible of any neccfTity for the extra- 
 ordinary interference of the commercial States, to controul the 
 genaral councils of the nation. If any interference could, at this 
 critical extremity of our affairs have a kindly efreft upon our com- 
 mon welfare, it would be interference to promote union, and not a 
 divifion — to urge mutual confidence, and not imiverfal diflrufl— to 
 flrenethen the arm; and not to relax the finews of the nation. OuT 
 
25 
 
 .iuffering and our dangers, though differhig perhaps in degree, are 
 universal in extent. As their caufeaare juftly chargeable, fo their 
 removal is dependent not upon ourfelves, but upon others. But 
 while the fpirit of Independence fhall continue to beat in unifon with 
 the pulfes of the nation, no danger will be truly formidable. Our 
 duties are, to prepare with concerted energy, for thofe which threaten 
 us, to meet them without difmay, and to rely for their ilfue upon 
 Heaven. 
 
 I am, with great refped and attachment. 
 
 Dear Sir, your friend and humble fervant, 
 
 JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 
 Hon. Harrlfon Gray Otis, 
 
J-