Virginia Argus

From the BOSTON PATRIOT.

The federalists make a dreadful clamor against the non-intercourse law as though it was the first law of the kind ever passed by the general government—when the fact is, a similar law was in operation against France. in '98, '99. At that time, not a word was said by the federalists against it -they not only highly approved it. but urged the government to open hostilities against the French nation. But now, forsooth! as the non-intercourse law is in operation against their good friends the British, it is an unjust and tyrannical law, and ought not, they say, to be submitted to. Our government must not resent the insults and aggressions of the British !! let them murder and impress our seamen, violate the solemn engagement of her minister, and send another to insult our government-refuse to repeal her orders in council. All these accumulated aggressions, the British partisans say, are "no essential injuries," are no cause for a non-intercourse -no, it will not do, in any shape to resist England! we must suffer that haughty nation to trample upon our rights, and by no means to resent it--if we do, it will be a gratification to Bonaparte!! So then, we must not assert or maintain our rights and privileges, as an independent nation against Britain, because in so doing, we may possibly please Napoleon !! "Tell it not in Gath; publish it not in the streets of Askelon:" that the men, who hold this language, call themselves exclusive Americans and declaim loudly against foreign partialities!! They even call themselves the disciples of Washington!! when at the same time, their good friends in Great Britain, recognize them as "British advocates in America." We cannot conceive it possible, that these "wolves in sheep's clothing" can much longer deceive the people. Their hypocrisy, absurdity and inconsistency is now apparent to every observing American; and they have given such incontestible proofs of their hatred to the government of this country, and their attachment to the corrupt government of England, that there can be no doubt. (even if they were not so appropriately designated by their good friends on the other side the water, as "the advocates of their cause") that they had sworn allegiance to the 'best of kings.'