Alexandria Daily Gazette, Commercial & Political

ALEXANDRIA.
SATURDAY MORNING, August 22.

"TO SHEW
THE VERY AGE AND BODY OF THE TIME
HIS FORM AND PRESSURE."

To the President of the United States, the sentiments hereinafter expressed are respectfully offered for his consideration, by a citizen who wishes only to promote the public good.

It is an object of general solicitude and of daily enquiry, whether the President will issue his proclamation of the fact, that the British edicts have been revoked, which first occasioned the non-intercourse law, and next our declaration of war. The evidence of the revocation is the act of state by the Prince Regent, bearing date 23d June, 1812, at London five days after the declaration of war at Washington, the terms of which act of state are comprehensive, explicit, and well calculated to mitigate the rigours of the British edict subsequent to its date.

The revocation I hold to be complete, and if it had been made and communicated to Congress before their declaration of war, its effects would have been certain in postponing that calamity.

What is the duty of the President in respect to proclaiming the fact of this revocation, becomes a question of the greatest magnitude, because it concerns the restoration of peace.

The shipments which have taken place in Britain of goods belonging to American citizens, upon the faith of the revocation, are immense, and their safety depends on a proclamation; for this is the only evidence which by law can save them from forfeiture after their arrival in our ports. Congress, in the fulness of their confidence in the President, vested him alone with the power of proving that fact. All the testimony of living witnesses and of authenticated documents, cannot avail to prove the fact, unless it also be proved by a proclamation of the President.

Though the proclamation is indispensable to the security of these shipments, and therefore very interesting to our citizens, it is of more importance to America in regard to a speedy and honorable termination of the war.

The act of revocation, on the part of Great-Britain, of those edicts which produced the war, has opened a door to conciliation; and it having preceded their knowledge of our declaration of war, there can be no imputation to their government that it was produced by a fear of the consequences of war, but it ought to be imputed to a disposition on their part to be on friendly terms with the United States.

If the proclamation issues, the door to peace will be kept open, because the British edicts, forming the principal cause of the war, will be thereby removed.

Upon the proclamation being issued, depend the British edicts against neutrals, and our non-intercourse law against Great-Britain. By the proclamation, both may be extinguished, and without the proclamation both will subsist. In so early a stage of the war, before its calamities have been felt, it is earnestly to be desired, that the door to peace be kept open.

This first step on the part of Great-Britain having been taken towards conciliation, the next step ought to be taken by the United States, and ought to lead to peace.

This step may be the proclamation of the fact of the revocation of the British edicts.

The immediate consequence will be the cessation of the non-intercourse law and of all its heavy penalties. The war will still continue, and every citizen will be bound to demean and conduct himself in all respects as good and loyal citizens. A negotiation for peace may be commenced on either side with honor, and may be concluded on honorable and satisfactory terms to both parties. The revocation of the orders in council leaves nothing of consequence to be adjusted in a treaty of peace, but the impressment of seamen. On this point an agreement can be made, and according to recent indications from the British cabinet, may be expected to be made in conformity to the American opinions of right. On other topics there is little difference between the two nations. A fair and unexpected opportunity offers at this juncture to close the war almost before it is begun, and to close it on as good terms as could be obtained after the war, however long and however successful. The opportunity will be lost unless embraced by the proclamation.

If a doubt is excited concerning the power of the President to issue the proclamation, let the statute of Congress decide it. The original non-intercourse law of March 1809, did expire, and was afterwards revived against Great-Britain by a statute of March 1811, subject as it was originally to the contingency of ceasing upon a revocation of the obnoxious edicts, to be declared by proclamation whenever the revocation should take place.

A state of war may exist between the two countries, with or without the operation of this statute of non-intercourse. In a state of war British fabrics may be imported by neutrals into America in neutral ships from Britain or its dependencies; and they may be imported by American citizens from neutral countries. Neither of these things can be done while the non-intercourse law is in force. Apprized of all this a proposition was made, after the declaration of war, to repeal absolutely the non-intercourse law, which was over-ruled by the majority in Congress who preferred leaving the law subject to the contingency of revocation of the British orders in council, and subject to the proclamation of the President, declaring the fact, if it should happen. The minority and majority in Congress agreed on this point, that the act declaring war did not annul or extinguish the non-intercourse law as to Great-Britain, and the same was merely left unrepealed and unaltered. It became a subject of deliberation & debate, but the law was not changed.

From the language of the National Intelligencer, it is apparent that all opposition to the measures of government even in thought, must be suppressed. Another essay has appeared in that paper, of a character similar to the furious philippic which we noticed on Wednesday. It is impossible to read these essays, and think of the author's name without the strongest impressions of perjury and murder. He will understand this allusion. Well does it become such a character, familiar with every vice; to proscribe the freemen of America for the expression of their opinions.

We could wish that twelve hundred dollars per annum of the public money could be expended in a more suitable manner than in the employment of unprincipled hirelings to defame the best men in the country.

The aim of this writer appears to be, to invite the deluded wretches in Baltimore to further outrages. He says that the Federalists "are at this moment treading close on the path of treason; not that legal treason that exposes their necks to the halter, but that political treason that justly exposes them to general reprobation." If this be not encouragement to the Mob, we should like to know in what way they can be encouraged. It is not surpassed by a certain mayor's harangue to them, while committing their lawless depredations. It was couched in these terms- "Gentlemen, Gentlemen, do desist, Gentlemen; do!"

After a decent shower of abuse of the federalists, for professing to venerate the constitution, this writer adds: And now these very Federalists, apostatising from their creed are busily occupied, by night and by day, in sowing the seeds of disaffection, in paralizing the energies of their government, in uttering the most atrocious libels, which they know to be false, for the basest or most ignoble ends.

Such a rigmarole deserves little comment: Every honest man, yes, every honest man, who possesses three grains of understanding, well knows, that Federal opposition is not directed against the form of our government, but against the deadly system pursued by those who now administer it: a system, which we much fear, will, if persisted in, ultimately destroy the constitution, as it has already done the peace and prosperity of our common country.