isters at London and Paris were instructed
to explain to the respective Governments there our disposition to
exercise the authority in such manner as would withdraw the pretext on
of which the aggressions were originally founded and open the way for
a renewal of that commercial intercourse which it was alleged on all
sides had been reluctantly obstructed. As each of those Governments had
pledged its readiness to concur in renouncing a measure which reached
its adversary through the incontestable rights of neutrals only, and as
the measure had been assumed by each as a retaliation for an asserted
acquiescence in the aggressions of the other, it was reasonably expected
that the occasion would have been seized by both for evincing the
sincerity of their professions, and for restoring to the commerce of the
United States its legitimate freedom. The instructions to our ministers
with respect to the different belligerents were necessarily modified
with a reference to their different circumstances, and to the condition
annexed by law to the Executive power of suspension, requiring a decree
of security to our commerce which would not result from a repeal of the
decrees of France. Instead of a pledge, therefore, of a suspension of
the embargo as to her in case of such a repeal, it was presumed that
a sufficient inducement might be found in other considerations, and
particularly in the change produced by a compliance with our just
demands by one belligerent and a refusal by the other in the relations
between the other and the United States. To Great Britain, whose power
on the ocean is so ascendant, it was deemed not inconsistent with that
condition to state explicitly that on her rescinding her orders in
relation to the United States their trade would be opened with her, and
remain shut to her enemy in case of his failure to rescind his decrees
also. From France no answer has been received, nor any indication that
the requisite change in her decrees is contemplated. The favorable
reception of the proposition to Great Britain was the less to be
doubted, as her orders of council had not only been referred for
their vindication to an acquiescence on the part of the United States
no longer to be pretended, but as the arrangement proposed, whilst
it resisted the illegal decrees of France, involved, moreover,
substantially the precise advantages professedly aimed at by the
British orders. The arrangement has nevertheless been rejected.