The Patowmac Guardian, And Berkeley Advertiser

March 27.

Mr. S. Smith's observations, on Mr. Dayton's resolution to sequester British debts, as a security for the depredations committed on American property, by the subjects of Great-Britain, contrary to the laws of nations.

It must be in the recollection of every gentleman within these walls, that I have uniformly, during this session, advocated those measures which would probably have a tendency to avert the horrors of war. From this system I did not depart when I submitted the plan of a general embargo: I did it under the fullest persuasion that its ultimate effect would be the preservation of peace, and of the residue of our maritime property. I am an advocate for the resolution in question, because it is the dictate of policy, and because it is sanctioned by the laws of nations. From the singular and mournful condition of our citizens, occasioned by the wanton depredations of Great-Britain, we are constrained to resort to this expedient, as a mean to induce this arrogant nation to restore to us what justice and the usage of nations require: it is our only alternative. The sense of fear, and the sense of interest, have a powerful operation upon nations, as well as upon individuals. Great-Britain may, perhaps, conceive that she has not much to apprehend from our military force: but she can easily perceive that we have it in our power, to affect her interest, deeply and extensively: and the dread of the exercise of this power, to the fullest extent, will, I am satisfied, induce Great-Britain to make the restoration contemplated by this resolution. Under the swindling orders of the King of Great-Britain, our citizens have been robbed of about three millions of dollars under this resolution, about twenty millions of dollars, the property of British subjects, will be arrested in this country: and be assured that the consideration of so large a balance, against them, will wonderfully contribute to a reformation of their manners.

What is the object of this resolution? not to confer any favour or advantage on the British debtors, because to them it is utterly immaterial whether they make their payments to A or to B: to whom it is rather injurious, as it will, in a high degree, affect the credit of American merchants. Its only intention is to obtain an ultimate security to your own citizens for the valuable property that has been wantonly taken from them by Great-Britain, contrary to the principles and usage of all other nations; and this is to be effected in seizing, by way of reprisal the property of this predatory nation, and in retaining the same as a pledge until the requisite restoration be made.

To evince the political propriety of this resolution, and to show that it is founded in justice, and in the laws of nations, Mr. Smith referred to the celebrated Vattel, and among other sections read the following:

“We have observed above, that the wealth of the citizens form a part of the total wealth of a nation; that between state and state, whatever is the members, is considered as belonging to the body, and is answerable for the debts of the body; whence it follows, that in reprisals, they seize the goods of the subject, in the same manner as those of the state, or the sovereign. Every thing that belongs to the nation is subject to reprisals, as soon as it can be seized, provided it be not a deposit trusted to the public faith. This depositum is found in hands, only in consequence of that confidence which the proprietor has put in our good faith; and it ought to be respected, even in case of open war. Thus, it is usual to behave in France, England, or elsewhere, with respect to money which foreigners have placed in the public funds.

He who makes use of reprisals against a nation, on the goods of its members indiscriminately, cannot be taxed with seizing the wealth of an innocent person for the debt of another: for in this case the sovereign is to recompense those of his subjects on whom the reprisals fall? this is a debt of the state or nation of which each citizen ought only to support his quota.” Vattel, B. 2. C. 18. S. 344. 345.

These principles of the laws of nations ought to form the only Rule of our conduct: it will then obtain the approbation of all mankind. The enlightened part of the people of England, themselves, cannot but reprobate this unexampled depredation upon our property; and of course, cannot condemn the expedient we have resorted to in order to obtain restoration. Let an envoy extraordinary be sent to the court of St. James's, for the purpose of explaining the motives from which we have acted, and the objects we have in contemplation, with powers to effect a restitution by Negotiation. If peace should unhappily not be the result of all these arrangements, then let us be prepared for war: and let these preparatory measures be prosecuted, from this moment, with spirit and industry. If we are able
in a state of infancy to check the insolence of this haughty nation, what have we to apprehend in the vigor of manhood? in our citizens of every description, I perceive an animated, glowing ardor to avenge the unprovoked insults of their country: in our youth is to be perceived an anxious impatience to prove themselves not less worthy of defending their country, than those who had the good fortune of being born a few years before them. Being well convinced that a decisive firm conduct on our part, will be the most conducive to the preservation of the blessings of peace, I shall vote for this resolution, upon the same principle, I voted for the fortifying of our ports, for the erecting of new arsenals and for providing arms and ammunition, for the completing of the men for the regular army, for the building of the frigates, and, in fine, for being in every respect completely ready for war: and in these principles I have been confirmed by the observation of our illustrious President, 'that the way to insure peace, is to be prepared for war.'