COBBETT'S WEEKLY POLITICAL REGISTER. VOL. XXIII. No. 3.] LONDON, SATURDAY, JANUARY 16, 1813. [Price 1s. 65] [66 -The before our eyes; we know well what we SUMMARY OF POLITICS. are at war for: we know, and must bear in AMERICAN STATES.-My two last Num- mind, that we are at war for the purpose bers were devoted principally to the task of of enforcing our practice of stopping Ameendeavouring to convince the Prince Regent rican vessels upon the high seas, and taking and the public, that it was neither danger-out of them all such persons as our naval ous nor dishonourable to yield to the terms officers may deem to be British seamen.upon which we might have had, and may This is now become the clearly defined subyet have, peace with America; and, to my ject of the war with America.great mortification, though, I must confess," DECLARATION," which will be found not much to my surprise, I now see, from below," inserted at full length, does not the contents of the last Gazette, wherein is contain any new matter: it is a summary His Royal Highness's "Declaration," that of what our ministers have before alleged all my endeavours have been of no avail, and asserted in their correspondence with and that war, long, expensive and sanguin the American Government and its divers' ary war, will now take place with an ene- agents. But, there are some few passages my, who, above all others, is capable of of it which require to be particularly noinflicting deep wounds upon this already- ticed. -The question relating to the Or-' crippled, or, at least, exhausted nation. ders in Council has been before so amply discussed, in my several Letters and articles upon the subject, that I will not encumber my present remarks with any thing relating thereunto; but, will confine myself to what relates to the impressment of persons out of American ships on the high seas. From the first publication of the Letters which passed between Lord Wellesley and Mr. Pinckney, soon after the French had announced their intention to repeal the Berlin and Milan Decrees; from the very day of that publication, which took place soon after I was imprisoned in Newgate for -Upon this point the "DECLARATION" two years (with a fine to THE KING, says: "His Royal Highness can never adwhich I have since paid, of a thousand "mit, that in the exercise of the undoubted pounds) for having written and published" and hitherto undisputed right of search-` upon the subject of flogging certain English "ing neutral merchant vessels in time of militia-men, at the town of Ely, in Eng- war, the impressment of British seamen,' land, who had been first reduced to sub-" when found therein, can be deemed any mission by German Troops; froth the very violation of a neutral flag. Neither can day of that publication I began to fear the" he admit, that the taking such seamen present sad result of the dispute which had" from on board such vessels, can be conthen assumed a new and more serious cha- "sidered by any neutral State as a hostile racter than it had ever before worn. With "measure, or a justifiable cause of war.—1 that fear in my mind, I bent all my feeble There is no right more clearly establish-' powers towards preventing such result. I" ed, than the right which a Sovereign has have failed: opinions and counsels the di-"to the allegiance of his subjects, more' rect opposite of mine have prevailed; and especially in time of war. Their allegitime will show who was right and who ance is no optional duty, which they can wrong. Upon former occasions the real" decline, and resume at pleasure. It is a grounds of war have, but too often, been" call which they are bound to obey: it lost sight of in the multitude and confusion began with their birth, and can only terof subsequent events; the Government has "minate with their existence.-If a simihad the address to inlist the passions of" larity of language and manners may men on its side, and the voice of reason has" make the exercise of this right more lia-i been stifled. But, here, as I was from "ble to partial mistakes, and occasional' the first resolved it should be, there is a abuse, when practised towards the vessels clear, a distinct, an undisguisable ground" of the United States, the same circum C "stances make it also a right, with the ex- | may judge to be British seamen. But, this right; this right of SEARCH ING neutral ships; what has it to do with the impressment of persons on board of such ships? That is what the Americans object to, and are at war against. They are not at war against our right of search, even in our own interpretation of that right. What they object to is, the stopping of their vessels on the high seas, and taking people out of them by force; a practice which, I repeat it, is sanctioned by no principle or maxim of any writer on public law, nor by any usage heretofore known in the world. The "DECLARATION" does not assert, as Lord Castlereagh did, in his letter to Mr. Russell, that this practice is sanctioned by any former usage; but, it declares the right from the right of search. It says, that, in exercising "the right of search," that is to say, the right to search for articles contraband of war, and for enemy's goods, we have a right to impress British seamen, if we find them. So that, this is the new shape of the defence of the practice: we do not now assert that we have a right to stop American vessels upon the high seas for the purpose of impressing our seamen; but, having stopped them for the purpose of exercising our old "right of search," we have a right to avail ourselves of the opportunity to take out persons whom our own officers, at their discretion, -This is not even plausible, in my opinion; for, on board of ship; they must not act; they well known, that the neighbouring State has invariably possessed the undisputed right of giving them protection, and of infisting them in its service?Why, therefore, should we deem it a crime in America, whose abundance of lands and provisions, whose high price of labour, and whose happiness to the lower orders of mankind, hold out their arms to the whole world? -And here I cannot help introducing a remark upon the proposition, made by Lord Castlereagh to Mr. Russell, that the American Government should stipulate to deliver up all British seamen in the service of Americans. Mr. Russell is said to have expressed himself as having been shocked at this proposition, which has afforded an abundant theme of abuse of him by our hireling writers. But, I have no scruple to say, that I firmly believe, that it is a proposition that never was before made to any independent State; even to the most -Captain Dacres, in accounting for the petty State of Germany. There was a loss of his Frigate, expressly states, that plan, some years ago, in agitation amongst he had many Americans on board, whom he the States of Europe, for putting in force a permitted to be spectators, from a reluctance mutual surrender of each other's subjects, to compel them to fight against their counwhereupon the Abbé Raynal remarks, that, try. And, can the reader believe, that this if it had gone into effect, each of the seve- was the only instance in which native Ameral States might have taken the motto of ricans were unwillingly serving on board of Danté over the entrance to his infernal re- British ships of war? What, then, again gions: "He who enters bere leaves even I ask, must be the state of those Amerihope behind." He represents it as the cans? And, what are we to think of those utmost stretch of tyranny; a point, he says, writers, who abuse Mr. Russell for proposwhich the world ought to perish rather ing to us their surrender as a step prelimithan reach. And, therefore, though Lord nary to any further arrangement? -The Castlereagh's proposition did not go this Declaration complains, that America deJength; though it was confined to British manded the abandonment of the practice of seamen, we have no reason to abuse Mr.impressment as a preliminary to her passRussell for his expression.- It will be ing a law to prevent British seamen from said, may be, that Mr. Russell was order- being received on board her ships. ed to stipulate for the surrender, on our hireling writers have treated this demand part, of all American seamen. Aye; but as something too insolent to be for a mothe difference is, that Mr. Russell proposed ment listened to. The "DECLARATION the surrender of those only who had been does not treat it in this lofty style; but it impressed by us; whereas we wanted to speaks of it in pretty strong terms, as thus: stipulate for the surrender of those British seamen who had gone into America of their own free will. We wanted to have surrendered to us, men who were employed" in American merchant ships; they wanted us to surrender men, whom we had seized" in their ships and forced into our men of But, is it possible, that any one can find any thing to object to in a request, that, as a preliminary, we should give up the Americans, whom we had impressed into our service? What is the state of those men, now on board of our ships of war? What is their state? Has the reader reflected upon this? They must be useless" 66 war. The "The proposal of an armistice, and of "a simultaneous repeal of the restrictive "measures on both sides, subsequently made by the commanding officer of His Majesty's naval forces on the American coast, were received in the same hostile "spirit by the Government of the United "States. The suspension of the practice "of impressment was insisted upon in the "correspondence which passed on that oc"casion, as a necessary' preliminary to a " cessation of hostilities. Negociation, it was stated, might take place without any "suspension of the exercise of this right, and also without any armistice being con against the injuries she has received from France, the " DECLARATION," this " me"morable document," as the Courier calls it, concludes thus:-" This disposi tion of the Government of the United "States-this complete subserviency to the "towards Great Britain-are evident in "almost every page of the official corres"pondence of the American with the "French Government. Against this "course of conduct, the real cause of the present war, the Prince Regent solemn"ly protests. Whilst contending against "France, in defence not only of the liber"ties of Great Britain, BUT OF THE "cluded: but Great Britain was required previously to agree, without any know"ledge of the adequacy of the system which could be substituted, to negociate upon the basis of accepting the legislative regulations of a foreign State, as the sole equivalent for the exercise of a right," Ruler of France-this hostile temper "which she has felt to be essential to the support of her maritime power.". Well, and what then? "A right" it is called again; but, if America denied it to be a right, as she has uniformly done, what wonder was there that she made the proposition? Great Britain might "feel," though I should have chosen the word "deem," as smacking less of the boarding-school Miss's style; Great Britain might "feel," if feel" WORLD, His Royal Highness was enshe must, that the practice complained of "titled to look for a far different result. was essential to the support of her mari- "From their common origin-from their time power; but, did it hence follow, that common interest from their professed -America, and that impressed Americans," principles of freedom and independence, should like the practice the better for that? "the United States were the last power, We have so long called ourselves the deli- in which Great Britain could have exverers of the world, that we, at last, have "pected to find a willing instrument, and fallen into the habit of squaring up all our "abettor of French tyranny.Disapideas to that appellation; and seem sur- "pointed in this just expectation, the prised that there should be any nation in the "Prince Regent will still pursue the poworld inclined to wish for the diminution "licy which the British Government has of our power.The Americans, however," so long, and invariably maintained, in clearly appear to see the thing in a different" repelling injustice, and in supporting light. They, in their home-spun way, call "the general rights of nations; and, unus any thing but deliverers; and, it must "der the favour of PROVIDENCE, rebe confessed, that, whatever may be our "lying "lying on the justice of his cause, and the general propensity, we do not seem to have tried loyalty and firmness of the British been in haste to deliver impressed Ameri" Nation, His Royal Highness confidently That one nation ought not "looks forward to a successful issue to the to yield a right, depending for compensation contest, in which he has thus been com solely upon the legislative provisions of a pelled most reluctantly to engage." foreign State, is very true; but, if the right The last paragraph is in the old style, and be doubtful; if it be unsupported by any will hardly fail to remind Mr. Madison of law, principle, maxim, or custom, then the the documents of this kind, issued about case is different; and then, indeed, the offer six-and-thirty years ago. However, the of a legislative provision is a proof of a sin- style is none the worse for being old; cere desire to accommodate.. -If my view though one cannot but recollect the occaof the matter be right, and I verily believe sion upon which it was formerly used.it is, this is the light in which that offer I regret, however, to find, in this solemn ought to be viewed; and I most deeply document, a distinct charge against the lament that it was not thus viewed American Government of "subserviency to by the ministers. These lamenta-"the Ruler of France;" because, after a tions, however, are now useless. The very attentive perusal of all the correspondsound of war is gone forth: statement and ence between the American and French reasoning are exhausted: the sword is to Governments, I do not find any thing, decide whether England is, or is not, to which, in my opinion, justifies the charge. impress, at the discretion of her naval The truth is, that "the Ruler of France" officers, persons on board American mér-gave way in the most material point to the chant ships on the high seas. -There is remonstrances of America; and, I have one passage more in the " DECLARATION,' never yet read a Message of Mr. Madison, upon which I cannot refrain from submit- at the opening of a Session of Congress, in ing a remark or two. After stating, that which he did not complain of the conduct Aaierica has made only feeble remonstrances of France. The Americans abhor an al can seamen. 66 remember that it was urged with great force in favour of American submission to be taxed by an English parliament; but, as the result showed, with as little effect as it possibly can be upon this occasion. -There is one thing in this " calling liance with France; and, if they form such an alliance, it will have been occasioned by this war with us.This charge of subserviency to Buonaparte has a thousand times been preferred against Mr. Madison, but never, that I have seen, once proved. It is, indeed, the charge which cousin," as the saying is, that I do not we have been in the habit of preferring against all those powers, who have been at war with us Spain, Holland, Prussia, Denmark, Sweden, and, though last not least, Russia, as will be seen by a reference to Mr. Canning's answer to the propositions from Tilsit. "Subserviency to the Ruler of France!" We stop the American Merchantmen upon the high seas; we take out many of their own native seamen; we force them on board of our men of war; we send them away to the East Indies, the West Indies, or the Mediterranean; we expose them to all the hardships of such a life and all the dangers of battle, in a war in which they have no concern all this we do, for we do not deny it; and, when, after MANY YEARS of remonstrances, the American Government arms and sends forth its soldiers and sailors to compel us to desist, we accuse that Government of "subser66 viency to the Ruler of France," who, whatever else he may have done, has not, that I have ever heard, given the Americans reason to complain of impressments from on board their ships. Many unjust acts he appears to have committed towards the Americans; but he has wisely abstain ed from impressments, which, as I have all along said, was the only ground upon which the people of America could have been prevailed upon to enter heartily into a war with any power: it is a popular ground: the war is in the cause of the people accordingly, we find the motto to the war is: "Liberly of the seas and sea"men's rights."-I, therefore, regret exceedingly, that the "DECLARATION" styles America" a willing instrument and abellor of French tyranny." It is a heavy charge; it is one that will stick close to the memory of those who support the war; it will tend to inflame, rather than allay, the angry passions; and, of course, it will tend to kill all hopes of a speedy reconciliation.- -As to what the DECLARATION" is pleased to say about the "common origin" of the two nations, if of any weight, it might be urged, I suppose, with full as much propriety by the Americans against our impressments, as it is now urged against their resistance. I much like, The calling cousin always proceeds from us. The Americans never remind us, that we are of the same origin with them. This is a bad sign on our side. It is we, and not they, who tell the world of the relationship. In short, it is well enough for a news-paper to remind them of their origin; but, I would not have done it in a solemn Declaration: especially when I was accusing them of being the willing instrument and abettor of our enemy. "Common interest." That, indeed, was a point to dwell on; but, then, it was necessary to produce something, at least, in support of the proposition. The Americans will query the fact; and, indeed, they will flatly. deny it. They will say, for they have said, that it is not for their interest, that we should have more power than we now have over the sea; and, that they have much more to dread from a great naval power, than from an overgrown power on the Continent of Europe. They are in no fear of the Emperor Napoleon, whose fleets they are now a match for; but, they are in some fear of us; and, therefore, they do not wish to see us stronger.- -It is in vain to tell them, that we are fighting in defence of the "liberties of the world." They understand this matter full as well as we do, and, perhaps, a little better. I should like to see this proposition attempt ed to be proved, I should like to hear my Lord Castlereagh, beginning with the Declaration against the Republicans of France, continue on the history of our hostilities to the present day, taking in those of India by way of episode, and concluding with the war for the right of impressment, make it out, how we have been and are defending the liberties of the world. I dare say that his Lordship could make it out clearly enough. I do not pretend to question the fact or his ability; but, it would be at once instructive and entertaining to hear how he would do it,"From their professed principles of free"dom." From these the "DECLARA"TION" says, that His Royal Highness expected the United States would have been the last power to become a willing instrument of French tyranny. Very true: |