In 1807, the cause of complaint was still less substantial than in either of the other instances.

Not to tire the reader with proofs of the public clamors for war at this period, I deem it abundantly sufficient to refer him to the twentieth chapter of this work, wherein he will find evi dence to satisfy the most incredulous.

I must be pardoned for declaring, that any man who was a partisan of war in the above cases, and reprobates the recent war as unjust and unnecessary, betrays a most awful degree of inconsistency. And yet it is an indisputable fact, that the most violent, the most clamorous, the most jacobinical, and the most seditious, among the late Friends of Peace," were among the most strenuous advocates for, and "Friends of War," on the former occasions.

The Boston Centinel, after the declaration of hostilities, regarded war as the most frightful of all possible evils. But this was not always its view of the subject. Within a fortnight after laying the embargo, that measure was pronounced more formidable than war itself.

"The embargo, which the government has just laid, is of a new and alarming' nature. War, great as the evil is has less terror and will produce less misery than an embargo on such principles "-Boston Centinel, Jan. 2, 1808.

CHAPTER XLIV.

Inquiry into the justice of the war. Awful accusations against the government. President's message. Report of committee of congress. British depredations. Trade of the United States annihilated with 50,000,000 of the inhabitants of Europe.

THOSE who were unacquainted with the causes that led to the late war, might, from the publications that appeared against it, believe that the United States were wholly the aggressors— that England had been a tame and submissive sufferer of depredation, outrage, and insult-and that our rulers had been wantonly led, by inordinate and accursed ambition, to engage in a ruinous and destructive war, in order to enrich themselvessquander away the public treasure-and impoverish the nation. They were, it would appear, actuated by as unholy motives as ever impelled Attila, Genghis Khan, or Bonaparte, to perpe-~ trate outrage and cruelty to the utmost extent of their power.

These allegations were made in the strongest language in the public papers in London. The prince regent appealed to the world that Great Britain had not been the aggressor in the war. And the lords of the admiralty asserted that war was declared "after all the grievances of this country had been removed.".

The federal papers re-echoed and magnified the accusations of the British writers; and succeeded so far as to inflame a large portion of the public with the most frantic exasperation against the rulers of their choice, whom they suspected of having abused their confidence.

Governors of states in their addresses, as well as senates and houses of representatives in their replies, took the same ground and assumed guilt, and profligacy, and corruption, as the parents of the declaration of war.

The house of representatives of Massachusetts, regardless of the holy rule, "judge not, lest you be judged,” in the most unqualified manner, with an utter destitution of the least semblance of charity, asserts, that

"The real cause of the war must be traced to the first systematical abandonment of the policy of Washington and the friends and framers of the constitution; to implacable animosity against those men, and their universal exclusion from all concern in the government of the country; to the influence of worthless foreigners over the press, and the deliberations of the government in all its branches; to a jealousy of the commercial states * fear of their power, contempt of their pursuits, and ignorance of their true character and importance; to the cupidity of certain states for the wilderness reserved for the miserable aborigines; to a violent passion for conquest," &c.

With equal candor, the senate of that state, not to be outdone by the other legislative branch, declares, that

The war was founded in falsehood, declared without ne cessity, and its real object was extent of territory by unjust conquests, and to aid the late tyrant of Eu rope in his view of aggrandisement."

In these awful accusations, there is no allowance for human imperfection-for error in judgment-for difference of opinion. They are preferred in the strongest form which our language admits, and involve the highest possible degree of turpitude.

If these allegations be true, the president who recommended war, and the legislature of the United States which declared it, have betrayed their trust, and are base, abandoned, and wicked. If they be false, the legislature of Massachusetts are base, abandoned and wicked. There is no alternative. One or other description of persons must sink in the estimation of cotempora ries and posterity.

* The absurdity and total want of foundation of these allegations I shall fully establish in a subsequent chapter.

Let us examine the case. Let us investigate the truth. If our rulers be thus base-thus abandoned-thus wicked-thus corrupt-let them be devoted to the detestation they have so richly earned. But if the allegations be false-if the war were just-if the nation drank the chalice of outrage, insult, injury, and depredation, to the last dregs, before she had recourse to arms, let us, at every hazard, cling to our rulers-to our form of government to the national honor-to the national interest.

The conduct of Great Britain to this country for a series of years, had been a constant succession of insult, aggression, and depredation. Our harbors had been insulted and outraged--our commerce had been most wantonly spoilated our citizens had been enslaved, scourged, and slaughtered, fighting the battles of those who held them in cruel bondage. We had, ia a word, experienced numberless and most wanton injuries and outrages of various kinds. But the prominent causes of the war, assigned by the president in that message which recommended, and by the committee in the report which contained, a declaration of war, were impressment and the orders in council. I shall proceed to the examination of both topics. But I previously quote the words of the message and of the report. On the subject of impressment, the president. states,

"The practice is so far from affecting British subjects alone, that, under the pretext of searching for these, THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS, under the safeguard of public law, and their national flag, have been torn from their country, and from every thing dear to them; have been dragged on board ships of war of a foreign nation; and exposed. under the severities of their diseipline, to be exiled to the most distant and deadly climes; to risk their lives in the battles of their oppressors, and to be the melancholy instruments of taking away those of their own brethren."

And the committee, on the same topic, state,

"We will now proceed to other wrongs which have been more severely feltAmong these is THE IMPRESSMENT OF OUR SEAMEN, a practice which has been unceasingly maintained by Great Britain in the wars to which she has been a party since our revolution. Your committee cannot convey in adequate terms the deep sense which they entertain of the injustice and oppression of this proceeding Under the pretext of impressing British seamen, our fellow citizens are seized in British ports, on the high seas, and in every other quarter to which the British power extends; are taken on board British men of war, and compelled to serve there as British subjects. In this mode our citizens are wantonly snatched from their country and their families; deprived of their liberty; doomed to an ignominious and slavish bondage; compelled to fight the battles of of a foreign country and often to perish in them Our flag has given them no protection; has been unceasingly violated, and our vessels exposed to danger by the loss of the men taken from them. Your committee need not remark, that while the practice is continued, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE UNITED STATES TO CONSIDER THEMSELVES AN INDEPENDENT NATION. Every new case is a proof of their degradation. Its continuance is the more unjustifiable because the United States have repeatedly proposed to the British government an ar

rangement which would secure to it the control of its own people. An exemption of the citizens of the United States from this degrading oppression, and their flag from violation, is all that they have sought.”

On the orders in council, the president observes,

"Under pretended blockades, without the presence of an adequate force, and sometimes without the practicability of applying one, OUR COMMERCE HAS BEEN PLUNDERED IN EVERY SEA. The great staples of our country have been cut off from their legitimate markets; and a destructive blow aimed at our agricultural and maritime interests. In aggravation of these predatory measures, they have been considered as in force from the date of their notificaa retrospective effect being thus added, as has been done in other important cases, to the unlawfulness of the course pursued And to render the outrage the more signal, these mock blockades have been reiterated and enforced in the face of official communications from the British government, declaring, as the true definitions of a legal blockade, "that particular ports must be actually invested; and previous warning given to vessels bound to them, not to enter."

tion;

"Not content with these occasional expedients for laying waste our neutral trade, the cabinet of Great Britain resorted, at length, to the sweeping system of blockades, under the name of orders in council, which has been moulded and managed, as might best suit its political views, its commercial jealousies, or the avidity of British cruisers "

And the committee states,

By the orders in council of the 11th of November, 1807,

The British government declared direct and positive war against the United States The dominion of the ocean was completely usurped by it; all commerce forbidden, and every flag driven from it, or subjected to capture and condemnation, which did not subserve the policy of the British government by paying it a tribute and sailing under its sanction. From this period the United States have incurred the heaviest losses and most mortifying humiliations. They have borne the calamities of war without retorting them on its authors."

I shall discuss each item separately.

1. Orders in Council.

To repel the charge of the war being "founded in falsehood," so far as respects this item, it would be sufficient to establish their existence on the day war was declared. 'This is obvious. For if they existed, then the war could not be “founded in falsehood." But I shall not rest satisfied with this alone.

War was declared at Washington on the 18th of June, 1812. The repeal, as it is called, of the orders in council, took place on the 23d of that month in London. It is clear, therefore, that the charge of falsehood here is utterly unfounded.

By an official statement presented to congress by the secretary of state on the 6th of July, 1812, it appears that the British captures, prior to the orders in council, were 528, and subsequent thereto 389.

It is difficult for me to form an estimate of the value of these vessels. I am no merchant, and have no adequate data to

guide me. I have inquired of mercantile characters, and have been told, that from the great value of the cottons, tobaccoes, &c. of the outward cargoes to France, and the silks, brandies, &c. of the homeward cargoes, 30 or 40,000 dollars would be a fair average. But I will suppose $ 25,000 for vessel and cargo, which I presume is not extravagant. This extends to the enormous amount of $ 13,200,000, depredated previous to the orders in council; and

$9,725,000 during the existence of those orders; for the latter of which there was not the least chance of redress.

The sum of which our fellow-citizens were despoiled, by no means constitutes the whole of the grievance. The enormous limitation and restriction of the trade of a sovereign and independent nation, was at least of equal magnitude in point of outrage, with the pecuniary loss; for it is a sacred and indisputable truth, that from Nov. 11, 1807, till the day war was declared, American ships, owned by American merchants, navigated by American seamen, and laden with American productions, were liable to seizure and condemnation bound to France, Holland, or the northern part of Italy.

if

I implore the reader, by all that is candid, to consider this single sentence. Let him read it once more carefully. It is a fair statement of the relative situation of the two countries.

The commerce of the United States with nearly one third of the population of Europe was subject to condemnation! Let him lay his hand on his heart, and answer the question, was not this adequate cause for war? Was not this a greater grievance than the sixpenny tax on tea, which led to the American revolution? Have not more than nine-tenths of all the wars that have ever existed, been declared for less causes? We were forbidden by Great Britain, under penalty of confiscation, to carry on trade with above fifty millions of the inhabitants of Europe. And yet we are gravely told, "the war was founded in falsehood!!!" Wonderful, wonderful delusion!!

At that period England herself carried on with France and her dependencies, under licenses, the very trade which she rendered illegal when carried on by the United States!!! And several American vessels, bound for France, and taken by British cruisers, were actually, without breaking bulk, taken into French ports by the captors, or those who purchased from them!!!

Having presented to the reader a short specimen of the denunciations of the war, I lay before him some opinions of a di rectly contrary tendency,