Mr. Russell to Mr. Munroe. LONDON, 22d February, 1812. SIR--I have the honor to hand you enclosed, a copy of a letter to me, from the Earl of Liverpool, relating to a person by the name of Bowman, said to be a British subject, and forcibly detained on board the United States' ship Hornet, together with copies of the deposition of Elizabeth. Eleanor Bowman, which accompanied it, and of my reply. I have the honor to be, &c. The Hon. James Munroe, &c. &c. JONA. RUSSELL. The Earl of Liverpool to Mr. Russell. Foreign Office, 20th February, 1812. SIR-I have the honor to transmit to you the copy of an affidavit, sworn at Portsmouth, by Elizabeth Eleanor Bowman, stating herself to be the wife of William Bowman, one of his majesty's subjects, now detained against his will on board the United States' sloop Hornet, at present in Cowes' road. You cannot but be aware, of the urgent necessity of putting the facts, alleged in this document, into an immediate train cf investigation; and I am to request that you will communicate, without loss of time, with the commanding officer of the Hornet, in order that he may afford you all the information in his power, and that the vessel may not put to sea before the result of the inquiry shall be ascertained, in a manner satisfactory to yourself and to this government. Youmust likewise be aware, that this government has no power to prevent the issuing of a writ of habeas corpus by the friends of Bowman; and that, in that case, it would be impossible to impede or delay its execution, and the consequent removal of this question out of the hands of the two governments, into those of the legal force and authorities of this country. Anxious to prevent any such proceeding, the inconveniences of which, even if they did not involve the possibility of a forcible execution of the legal process, might yet be considerable, I request your immediate attention to this communication, and I confidently hope that you will, by affording the means of an amicable investigation, supersede the necessity, in which the friends of Bowman may otherwise feel themselves, of taking the course to which I have before alluded. County of Southampton, LIVERPOOL. ELIZABETH E. BOWMAN, of Kingston, near Portsmouth, in The said county, maketh oath, that she was married to William Bowman, late of Portsmouth, shipwright, about six years ago; that he was employed in the dock-yard there, which he quitted about three years ago, and sailed from hence in the Edward Fork, a transport, which was wrecked on the Island of Cuba. That she was informed by her husband that he got from Cuba to New-York, in an American ship, and about the fourth of June last, having got in liquor, he found himself in the American rendezvous there, and that he was compelled, against his inclination, to go on board the Hornet, an American sloop of war, being conducted on board her by a file of soldiers; that the Hornet having arrived lately at Cowes, she received a letter from her husband, requesting her to come on board to see him; that she accordingly went on board her, but was kept along-side the sloop about half an hour before the officer would admit her on board; that the permission to remain on board was for half an hour, but the officers would not afterwards permit her to quit the ship until the following Friday. That her husband told her that the officer threatened to punish him for having informed her where he was; and he also told her there were a great many English on board, several of whom would be glad to quit her; also, that some men on board much wished her away from this country, but that she does not know the names of any of the parties. That the said William Bowman, who passed on board the Hornet by the name of William Elby, is now detained on board her against his will, and is very anx ious to quit the American sloop Hornet, and to return to his native country. The mark of ELIZABETH E. BOWMAN. Sworn at Portsmouth, in the said county, on the 25th day of January, 1812, before me: the same having been first read, and she having set her mark thereto in my presence. (Signed) E. H. AMAND, One of his majesty's justices of the peace for the county of Southampton Mr. Russll to the Earl of Liverpool. LONDON, 21st FEB. 1812. MY LORD-I have the honor to inform your lordship that the United States' sloop Hornet left Cowes on the 13th of this month. The statement of this fact, does away, I presume, the necessity of a more particular reply to your lordship's note of yesterday, concerning William Bowman, a seaman on board that ship. I have the honor, &c. &c. (Signed) The most noble the Earl of Liverpool. JONA. RUSSELL. Extract of a letter from Mr. Russell to Mr. Munroe, dated LONDON, MARCH 4, 1812. "Many American veffels, which had for a confiderable time been wind-bound in the ports of this country, were at length releafed on the 29th ultimo, by an easterly wind, and took their de parture for the United States. By fome of thofe veffels, particu. larly the Friends,' you will have received many letters from me; and you will have learnt, as nearly as it was in my power to inform you, what in your letter of the 18th of January, you defire to know-namely, "the precife fituation of our affairs with England." "Since my letters of the 19th and 22d ultimo, which, I truft, will have extinguifhed all expectation of any change here, the motion of Lord Lanfdowne, on the 28th of February, and that of Mr. Brougham, yefterday, have been feverally debated in the refpective houfes of parliament. I attended the difcuffions on both, and if any thing was wanting to prove the inflexible deter mination of the prefent miniftry to perfevere in the orders in council without modification or relaxation, the declarations of the leading members of adminiftration on thefe occafions, muft place it beyond the poffibility of doubt. In both houses thefe leaders exprefs a difpofition to forbear to canvafs, in the present flate of our relations, the conduct of the United States towards England, as it could not be done without reproaching her in a manner to increase the actual irritation, and to do away what, Lord Bathurst stated to be the feeble hopes of preventing war. "In the Houfe of Commons, Mr. Rofe virtually confeffed, that the orders in council were maintained to promote the trade of England at the expenfe of neutrals, and as a measure of com. mercial rivalry with the United States. When Mr. Canning inveighed against this new (he muft have meant newly acknowled) ground of defending thefe orders, and contended that they could be juftified only on the principle of retaliation on which they were avowedly inftituted, and that they were intended to produce the effects of an actual blockade, and liable to all the incidents of fuch blockade-that is, that they were meant only to diftrefs the enemy-and that Great Britain had no right to defeat this operation by an intercourfe with that enemy which the denied to neutrals, Mr. Percival replied, "that the orders were ftill fupported on the principle of retaliation, but that this very principle involved the license trade; for as France, by her decrees, had faid, that no nation fhould trade with her which traded with England, England retorted, that no country fhould trade with France but through England. He afferted, that neither the partial nor even the total repeal of the Berlin and Milan decrees, as they related to America, or to any other nation, or all other nations, could form any claim on the British government, while the continental system, fo called, continued in operation. He denied that this fyftem, or any part of the Berlin and Milan decrees were merely municipal. They had not been adopted in time of peace with a view to internal regulation, but in a time of war with a hoftile purpose towards England. Every claufe and particle of them were to be confidered of a nature entirely belligerent, and as fuch requiring refiftance, and authorifing retaliation on the part of Great Britain. It was idle and abfurd to fuppofe that Great Britain was bound, in acting on the principle of retaliation in thefe times, to return exactly, and in form, like for like, and to choose the object and fashion, the mode of executing it, precifely by the meafures of the enemy. In adopt. ing these measures, France had broken through all the restraints impofed by the law of nations, and trodden under foot the great conventional code received by the civilized world, as prefcribing rules for its conduct in war as well as in peace. In this ftate of things England was not bound any longer to fhackle herfelf with this code, and by fo doing, become the unrefifting victim of the violence of her enemy, but fhe was herself releafed from the law of nations and left at liberty to refort to any means within her power to injure and diftrefs that enemy, and to bring it back to an obfervance of the jus gentium which it had fo egregiously and wantonly violated. Nor was England to be restricted 1 any more in the extent than in the form of retaliation; but she had a right, both as to the quantity and manner, to inflict upon the enemy, ali the evil in her power, until this enemy shou'd retrace its steps, and renounce, not only verbally but practically, its decrees, its continenta! system, and every other of its belligerent measures incompatible with the old acknowledged laws of nations. Whatever neutrals might sufferfrom the retaliatory measures of England, was purely incidental, and as no injustice was intended to them, they had a right to complain of none. And he rejoiced to observe that no charge of such injustice had that night been brought forward in the house. As England was contending for the detence of her maritime rights and for the preservation of her naticaal existence, which essentially depended on the maintenance d those rights, she could not be expected, in the prosecution of this great and primary interest, to arrest or vary her course, to listen to the preten sions of neutral nations, or to remove the evils, however they might be regretted, which the imperious policy, of the times indirectly and usin tentionally extended to them.” "As the newspapers of this morning give but a very imperfect-report of this speech of Mr. Percival, I have thought it to be my duty to present you with a more particular account of the doctrines which were maintained in it, and which so vitally affect the rights and interests of the United States. "I no longer entertain a hope that we can honorably avoid war.” Extract of a letter from Mr. Russell to the Secretary of State. "I had the honor to address you on the 4th inst. giving a brief account of the debate in the house of commons on the preceding evening; since then no change in relation to us has taken place here." Extract of a letter from Mr. Russell to the Secretary of State. LONDON, 28th MARCH, 1812. "Since I had the honor to address youa few days since. nothing has occurred here to induce a hope of any change in our favor." Extract of a letter from Mr. Russell to the Secretary of State. LONDON, 9th APRIL, 1812. "Since my last respects to you nothing of importance to us has occurred here." CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER. No. 38] TWELFTH CONGRESS.... FIRST SESSION. SECRET JOURNAL. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MONDAY, JUNE 1. [1811-12. A CONFIDENTIAL message in writing was received from the President of the United States by Mr. Coles, his Secretary, which he delivered in at the Speaker's table. The House was then cleared of all persons except the Members, Clerk, Sergeant at arins and Doorkeeper, and the doors were closed, and the said message was read. [Here follows the Message of the President, as published in the Congressional Reporter, No. 36.] A motion was then made by Mr. Randolph that the said message be referred to the commit ee of the whole House, on the state of the Union." And the question thereon being taken, it was determined in the negative, Yeas 37, Navs 82. Ón motion of Mr. D. R. Williams " Ordered, That the said message be refered to the committee on that part of the President's message which relates to our foreign relations. And then the House adjourned, until tomorrow morning at 11 o'clock. The House met, and On motion of Mr. Harper, TUESDAY, JUNE 2. Adjourned until to-morrow morning, 11 o'clock. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3. Mr. Calhoun, from the committee on foreign relations to whom was referred the message of the President of the United States, of the 1st inst. made a report stating a large the causes and reasons of a war with Great Britain, which being read, M.. Quincy moved that the doors be now opened, that the injunction of secrecy on the said message be removed, that the same be promulgated, and that the subsequent proceedings thereupon, be had with open doors. And the question thereupon being taken, It was determined in the negative-Yeas 46-Nays 76. YEAS-Messrs. Baker, Bleecker, Boyd, Breckenridge, Brigham, Champion Chittenden, Cooke, Davenport, Ely, Emott, Fitch, Gold, Goldsborough, Hawes, Hufty, Jackson, Key, Law, Lewis, Macon, M'Bryde, Milnor, Mosely, Newbold, Pearson, Pakin, Potter, Quincy, Randolph, Reed, Richardson, Rodman; Ridgely, Stanford, Stewart, Sturges, Sullivan, Taggart, Tallmadge, Tracy, Van Cortlandt Wheaton, White, Williams, Wilson-46. NAYS Messrs. Alston, Anderson, Archer, Bard, Bartlett, Bassett, Bibb, Blackledge, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, Cheves, Cochran, Clopton, Condit, Crawford, Davis, Dawson, Desha, Dinsmore, Earle, Findley, Fisk, Gholson, Goodwyn, Green, Grundy, B. Hall, O, Hall, Harper, Hyneman, Johnson, Kent, King, Lacock, Lefevre, Little, Lowndes, Lyle, Maxwell, Moore, M'Coy, M'Kee, M'Kim, Metcalf, Mitchill, Morgan, Morrow, Nelson, New, Newton; Ormsby, Pickens, Piper, Pleasants, Pond, Ringgold, Rhea, Roane, Roberts, Sage, Sammons, Seaver, Sevier, Seybert, Shaw, G. Smith, J. Smith, Strong, Taliaferro, Troup, Turner, Whitehill, Winn, Wright-76, A motion was then made by Mr. Randolph, that the proceedings upon the said message of the President be had and conducted with open doors. And the question being taken, It was determined in the negative-Yeas 45-Nays 77. YEAS-Messrs, Baker, Bartlett, Bleecker, Boyd, Breckenridge, Brigham, Champion, Chittenden, Cooke, Davenport, Ely, Emott, Fitch, Geld, Goldsborough, No. 38. |