It is a long time since the actual government of Great Britain proclaimed perpetual war; a frightful project, which the most unbridled ambition would not have dared to form, and which a presumptuous boasting could only have avowed; a frightful project which might, however, be realized, if France could hope for nothing but engagements without guarantee, of an uncertain length, and even more disastrous than war. Peace, sire, which your majesty, in the midst of your great power, has so often offered to your enemies, will crown your glorious labours, if England, excluded with perseverance from the continent, and separated from all the states whose independence she has violated, consents at length to enter upon the principles which form the basis of European society, to acknowledge the laws of nations, and the rights consecrated by the treaty of Utrecht. In the mean time, the French people must remain in arms: honour commands it; the interests, the rights, the independence of the nations engaged in the same cause, and an oracle still more certain, which has often been pronounced by your majesty, makes it an imperious and sacred law. Mr. Monroe to Mr. Foster. Department of State, June SIR, 3, 1812. In the letter of May 30th, which I had the honour to receive from you on the 1st instant, I perceive a difference in a particular passage of it, from a passage on the same subject, in the despatch from lord Castlereagh to you, which you were so good as to communicate to me entire, as appears from the tenour of the letter to have been intended by your government. The passage in your letter to which I allude is as follows: "America, as the case now stands, has not a pretence for claiming from Great Britain a repeal of her orders in council. She must recollect that the British government never for a moment countenanced the idea that the repeal of those orders could depend upon any partial or conditional repeal of the decrees of France. What she always avowed, was, her readiness to rescind her orders in council as soon as France rescinded, absolutely and unconditionally, her decrees. She could not enter into any other engagement without the grossest injustice to her allies, as well as to neutral nations in general; much less could she do so if any special exception was to be granted by France upon conditions utterly subversive of the most important and indisputable maritime rights of the British empire." According to the tenour of the despatch of lord Castlereagh to you, my recollection is, that in stating the condition on which the orders in council were to be repealed, in relation to the United States, it was specified that the decrees of Berlin and Milan must not be repealed singly and specially in relation to the United States, but be repealed also as to all other neutral nations, and that in no less extent of a repeal of the decrees had the British government ever pledged itself to repeal the orders in council. However susceptible the passage in your letter may be of a construction reconcileable with the import of the despatch from lord Castlereagh, yet as a similar phraseology of your government on other occasions has had a construction less extensive; and as it is important, in every respect, that there should be no misunderstanding, or possibility of errour, you will excuse me for requesting that you will have the goodness to inform me whether, in any circumstance, my recollection of the import of this passage in lord Castlereagh's despatch is inaccurate. I have the honour to be, &c. AUG. J. FOSTER, &c. &c. JAMES MONROE. Mr. Foster to Mr. Monroe. Washington, June 3, 1812. SIR, I HAVE received your letter of to day, requesting an explanation relative to the supposed meaning of a passage in a despatch from lord Castlereagh to me, that I had the honour to communicate to you confidentially, and I beg leave to state to you, that while I conceive it to be very difficult to give an explanation upon a single point in a note of considerable length, without referring to the whole context, and also believe it to be altogether irregular to enter into a discussion respecting a communication so entirely informal, yet I have no hesitation in assuring you that my note of May 30 contains the whole substance of the despatch alluded to. In the correspondence that will probably take place between us in consequence of the new ground upon which the duke of Bassano's report has placed the question at issue between our two countries, I shall be extremely happy to enter at full length upon any topick which you may wish particularly to discuss. I have the honour to be, &c. AUG. J. FOSTER. (Signed) Mr. Monroe to Mr. Foster. Department of State, June 4, 1812. 1 SIR, I HAVE had the honour to receive your letter of yesterday, in reply to mine of the same date. As the despatch of lord Castlereagh was communicated by you to me, in my official character, to be shown to the President, and was shown to him accordingly; and as the despatch itself expressly authorized such a communication to this government, I cannot conceive in what sense such a proceeding could be considered confidential, or how it could be understood, that the executive was to receive one communication for itself, and transmit to Congress another, liable, in the opinion of the executive, to a different or doubtful construction. I cannot but persuade myself, sir, that on a reconsideration of the subject, you will perceive that there can be no impropriety in a compliance with the request contained in my letter of yesterday. Should I be mistaken in this expectation, I flatter myself that you will see the propriety of freeing your own communication from all ambiguity and liability to misconstruction. With a view to this, permit me to inquire whether the passage in your letter, stating the condition on which your government always avowed its readiness to rescind the orders in council, namely, as soon as France rescinded, absolutely and unconditionally, her decrees, includes in its meaning, that the decrees must be rescinded in relation to other neutral nations, as well as to the United States, previous to a repeal of the orders in council in relation to the United States? I have the honour to be, &c. &c. (Signed) AUG. J. FOSTER, &c. &c. &c. JAMES MONROE. MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO CONGRESS. JUNE 8, 1812. I LAY before Congress copies of letters which have passed between the Secretary of State and the envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of Great Britain. JAMES MADISON. Mr. Foster to Mr. Monroe. Washington, June 1, 1812. SIR, I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ult. in reply to my note of April 15, relating to a seaman who had been encouraged to desert from his majesty's schooner Gleaner, by certain of the inhabitants of the city of Annapolis, and containing an offer, which I shall always be very happy to repeat, of using my best exertions to procure the discharge of such seamen as have been impressed on board his majesty's ships and can be legally claimed by the government of the United States. The circumstances which attended the instance mentioned in my former letter of April 5th, when several seamen of the same vessel (the Gleaner) were, under the very eyes * VOL. V. 24 of their officer, and in a manner exceedingly insulting to his feelings, assailed by the endeavours of the same people to engage them to desert, is not adverted to in your letter; but I suppose I am to conclude, from the tenor of it, that no remedy can be applied in such cases by the constituted authorities of the country, which is very much to be regretted, as it leaves the commanders of ships of war who may have despatches to convey on shore in American ports continually exposed to have their boat's crews seduced from them with impunity, and tends to show, more than ever, the disagreeable necessity under which they are of endeavouring to recover them from on board of the merchant ships, in which such seamen afterwards engage themselves. I do not pretend, sir, to justify the captain of the British ship of war who refused to deliver the American deserter, mentioned in your letter, not knowing the circumstances under which he acted. It will no doubt however occur to you, that if you could state a single instance where crowds have collected round an American officer on his landing in England, with a view to insult him and entice his men to abandon him, as is too often the practice in the United States, such an instance would be more directly in point. I have now, sir, the honour to lay before you, by order of his royal highness the prince regent, the enclosed papers (Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,) relating to English seamen who have been detained, against their will, on board of certain ships of war of the United States, which have of late visited Great Britain; and to express his royal highness's sincere belief, that these several sources of complaint have originated without the concurrence or participation of a state with which he is so anxious to preserve an amicable intercourse, as well as his conviction that the government of America has only to be informed of the fact to take prompt and satisfactory measures for the correction of the practice. The American government will perceive, from this friendly communication, that it is not on this side of the |